[bitcharmer]

> Boeing-designed and -assembled airframes have resumed a track record of safety that eclipses that of any other transportation industry.

Could you please share some data to back this claim? For example comparison of the number of technical incidents per airframe in use for Boeing vs Airbus?

[stouset]

Sure.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_accidents_and_in...

You'll note the last time a major carrier in the U.S. experienced a fatality due to an engineering, manufacturing, and/or design error attributable to Boeing was in 1996, when a spark in the center fuel tank in a 747 caused it to explode midair.

Before that, 1994. Then 1991, 1989, and 1988.

We did also see one fatality aboard a 737-700 in 2018, but this was due to an issue with the CFM engine and which isn't attributable to Boeing.

Given this, it's pretty obvious on face value that—however you slice it—flying on a Boeing airframe on a major U.S. carrier is safer than every other form of transportation, including literally just walking. Driving, buses, trains, trams, bicycling, scootering, ziplining, whatever. They're all less safe.

[bitcharmer]

Can't say if you missed this on purpose or by omission but there's a few more after 1994.

From your own source:

The aircraft experienced a contained engine failure with debris penetrating the fuselage; one passenger was partially ejected from the aircraft and later died of her injuries.

This is horrific. Boeing, of course and happened in 2018

[stouset]

I literally addressed this:

> We did also see one fatality aboard a 737-700 in 2018, but this was due to an issue with the CFM engine and which isn't attributable to Boeing.

There is essentially no aviation industry expert who will place this failure at the feet of Boeing and not CFM. That said, the fact that engines are designed to completely contain debris from a failure is wild and speaks to the incredible standard of safety we hold aviation to.