Data Showing Navy's Poor Aviation Safety Record Disappears From Website

If the Navy wants people to trust that it's taking steps to be better, less transparency isn't going to help.



U.S. Navy aviation mishaps have risen 82 percent over the last 5 years. Meanwhile, the Navy is withdrawing aviation safety data that once were available to the public.

As recently as January 22, the Naval Safety Center website included "detailed summaries of accidents, data on accidents by aircraft types, the comparative information provided by annual safety data, and other safety reports and studies," The Atlantic reports. By March 18, that information was gone.

The site now informs visitors that "for further statistical information" they need a Department of Defense Common Access Card, which is only available to members of the military, Pentagon employees, and government contractors.

In an email to The Atlantic, Naval Safety Center public affairs officer April Phillips claimed that the change was made for security purposes. "When you aggregate so much information in one place," she wrote, "bits and pieces of that can be compiled by those who wish us harm to make inferences and gain intel."

Reached for comment by Reason, Phillips explains that the public can still access a decade's worth of statistics on Class A mishaps, which "are the most serious in terms of loss of life and resources." But data on Class B, C, and D mishaps sometimes include "initial reporting errors," she adds.

"While we are firm believers in transparency, we also believe the public deserves accuracy. For this reason, we removed those pages and asked the public and the media to contact us directly with data inquiries," Phillips says. "Not only does this allow us to ensure they receive accurate information, we are also able to provide far more specific information than a statistical summary webpage provides."

But this is just one of "a series of removals of information from the public domain," Steven Aftergood, director of the Federation of American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy, tells The Atlantic. The Military Times reported in April that the Defense Department's quarterly report of U.S. troops deployed overseas was missing information on the number of service members in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. The Pentagon has also had a difficult time keeping troop statistics posted online consistent with official statements.

The Naval Safety Center's recent decision to remove aviation safety data is particularly concerning. The entire military has seen a rise in aviation accidents, but the Navy has been hit particularly hard. There were 1,132 Navy aviation mishaps from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2017, according to data obtained by the Military Times via Freedom of Information Act requests.

The Navy says it's trying to improve safety, which is certainly a good thing. But concealing information related to its failures isn't the right move. As Aftergood tells The Atlantic:

There is no security reason for limiting public access to statistical summaries of safety mishaps. On the contrary, public disclosure of such information can help to improve safety and security by motivating officials to adopt remedial measures.

If the Navy wants people to trust that it's taking steps to be better, less transparency won't help.

NEXT: Fearmongering Article Falsely Claims 'Halloween Is Christmas for Sex Offenders'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I specifically remember hearing Trump and his kind blaming the accidents on Obama for not increasing military spending.

    1. You remember much that didn’t happen.

  2. These things never happened when Lt. Cmdr. Harmon Jagg was on the job.

    1. Or John McCain!

  3. I think that before we expect the Navy to stop crashing their aircraft, we might want to ask them to work on not crashing their ships.

    Baby steps people.

  4. “When you aggregate so much information in one place,” she wrote, “bits and pieces of that can be compiled by those who wish us harm to make inferences and gain intel.”

    This. There is no reason to make it easy for the Chinese or Russians to get this information and sift through it to figure out what is going on with our jets.

    1. I get the argument for government transparency, but making this particular story its poster boy looks like a huge reach.

  5. Another U.S. soldier was killed in the middle east and more were wounded in what the media says is an inside attack. A member of the Afghan military or police was who killed and wounded those two soldiers. Stating the obvious, it’s incredibly difficult to protect against an attack from your friends.That was the sixth U.S. soldier killed in Afghanistan in 2018. What did they die for? The national-security state delivers the same bs that it has used always. That like all the others, he died protecting us. At his wake there will undoubtedly be people who say that the soldier died protecting our freedom.

  6. I essentially started three weeks past and that i makes $385 benefit $135 to $a hundred and fifty consistently simply by working at the internet from domestic. I made ina long term! “a great deal obliged to you for giving American explicit this remarkable opportunity to earn more money from domestic. This in addition coins has adjusted my lifestyles in such quite a few manners by which, supply you!”. go to this website online domestic media tech tab for extra element thank you .

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.