Scientists have named the safest places in the cabin

The plane is considered one of the safest modes of transport. But nevertheless, there are always risks – and scientists tried to find out which places in airliners are the most dangerous and which are the safest. It turned out that the latter are the least popular seats in the cabin.

The chance of dying in a plane crash is about one in 11 million, but the chances of survival depend on the choice of seat, writes the British edition of the Daily Mail.

An aviation expert reports a 44 percent fatality rate for passengers sitting in aisle seats in the middle of an aircraft, compared to 28 percent in the center rear seats.

Central Queensland University professor Doug Drury said that since the aisle seats are not buffered on one side, the passenger is more likely to be injured in a collision.

Travelers who have not been able to get into the safest seats may have better luck if they find themselves in the seats in the middle and near the window in the middle of the aircraft.

However, the chances of dying in a plane crash depend less on where you sit and more on the circumstances surrounding the crash, writes the Daily Mail.

Professor Drury, who shared this information, assures travelers that “air travel is the safest mode of transport.”

However, it happens, alas, that planes crash, so the expert shared the best and worst places to land on an aircraft.

The professor said that in 1989, United Airlines Flight 323 crashed in Sioux City, Iowa. In the crash, 184 of the 269 passengers survived – most of those who were seated behind first class, closer to the front of the aircraft.

A 35-year TIME investigation found that seating in the rear third of the aircraft had a fatality rate of 32 percent, compared with 39 percent in the middle third and 38 percent in the front third.

According to a study by the University of Greenwich, plane crash survivors sitting next to an emergency exit have a faster exit route from the plane, making them more likely to walk away from the incident.

The researchers found that seating within five rows of an exit gave more than an equal chance of escaping in the event of a fire. However, when sitting six or more rows away from an exit, “the chances of dying far outweigh the chances of surviving.”

According to the Daily Mail, the study shows that whether the seat is in the aisle or not, the difference is only “negligible”.

The scientists checked the reports of 2,000 survivors of 105 plane crashes around the world.

When it comes to surviving a fire, those who sat in the aisle had a “slightly” higher chance of surviving – 65 percent – than those who sat by the window (58 percent).

Passengers at the front of the plane had a 65 percent chance of escaping, while those at the back only had a 53 percent chance.

Robert Gifford, director of the Parliamentary Transport Safety Advisory Council, said: “Your chances of survival should not be based on your ability to pay for an emergency exit seat or book one online.”

The study looked at a variety of aviation accidents, including on-board fires and air crashes.

One was the 1985 Manchester Airport fire that killed 55 people aboard a British Airtours 737, caused by an engine explosion.

The resulting fire broke out on one side of the aircraft, blocking several exits. The study found that passengers who died, on average, sat more than twice as far from a usable exit as those who survived.

All planes must pass a test to be cleared of passengers in 90 seconds. During the tests, flight attendants helped passengers get out. But the report says that the experimental situations do not take into account the “social bonds” between passengers – for example, adults tend to help children escape. And the exits may be unusable or blocked, and one of the flight attendants may die during the accident. The passengers in the study were more likely to follow the flight attendants’ instructions during the test than in an emergency. “In real-life emergencies, where passengers may have a choice of escape routes, they may end up ignoring crew commands and trying to use the nearest exit,” a 2008 study says.