ORIGINAL: wingster
"I disagree, the relative failure rate among various manufactures is an indication of the reliability. However the data would be more reliable if the sample size was larger."
______________________________________________
We don't know if "aircraft losses" are due to radio failures or a long list of other causes including: pilot error, battery problems, "dumb thumbs", poor equipment installation, airframe failure....etc. I saw a crash caused by the pilot forgetting to turn on the receiver. I saw another crash caused by the pilot forgetting to plug-in his aileron servo when he mounted the wing. I saw another crash caused when the pilot made a field repair with 5-minute epoxy. He put epoxy on a cracked rudder and didn't notice it dripped down onto the elevator hingeline and glued his elevator in neutral. I saw a guy fly his model
into his own car. (right into the open tailgate of his station wagon) I saw a hawk attack a sailplane and tear off half the stabilizer-elevator. I've seen structural failures including wings breaking from G-loading, and firewalls that pulled completely loose from the plane in the air. Quite a sight to see the engine, nosewheel and still connected fuel tank flying through the air all by themselves.
I'm not sure I've ever seen an "aircraft loss" that was solely caused by a manufacturer's defective radio. (I'm NOT saying it never happens.) The radios now on the market are amazingly reliable, IF they are properly installed and maintained. The number of true "radio failures" is miniscule compared to crashes caused by human error.
Regards
JC
"I've got 3-green"