Interesting that they seem to be confirming previous analysis that shows that the rear of the plane is indeed the safest part of the plane.
> flying in first class would have been fatal. Passengers in the middle of the cabin might have suffered concussions and broken ankles, while those in the rear could have walked away
> the trend was clear: The rear cabin (seats located behind the trailing edge of the wing) had the highest average survival rate at 69 percent. The overwing section had a 56 percent survival rate, as did the coach section ahead of the wing. First/business-class sections (or in all-coach planes, the front 15 percent) had an average survival rate of just 49 percent.
Except that article you link does a terrible job of presenting this. They look only at a small sample (20 accidents), made up only of accidents which had both fatalities and survivors.
When what you want for a real risk assessment is to consider first the accident rate among commercial flights, then the percentage of accidents which have fatalities (and also the rate at which those accidents have any survivors).
> flying in first class would have been fatal. Passengers in the middle of the cabin might have suffered concussions and broken ankles, while those in the rear could have walked away
which agrees with this analysis http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/aviation/safety/4... which says
> the trend was clear: The rear cabin (seats located behind the trailing edge of the wing) had the highest average survival rate at 69 percent. The overwing section had a 56 percent survival rate, as did the coach section ahead of the wing. First/business-class sections (or in all-coach planes, the front 15 percent) had an average survival rate of just 49 percent.