U.S. Navy Safety Command Statistical and Analysis Report on Similar Accidents (Fiscal Year -)
Based on a decade of official data, this study provides an in-depth trend assessment and risk profile of accidents and casualty rates in key areas such as naval aviation, vessels, shore services, and private vehicles.
Detail
Published
19/01/2026
Key Chapter Title List
- Aviation Class A Mishap
- Flight Class A Mishap (Manned Aircraft Only)
- Flight-Related (FREL) Class A Mishap (Manned Aircraft Only)
- Aviation Ground (AGM) Class A Mishap (Manned Aircraft Only)
- Ship Class A Mishap
- Surface Ship Class A Mishap
- Submarine Class A Mishap
- Military Sealift Command (MSC) Ship Class A Mishap
- Diving/CNIC/NSW/NECC/Other Class A Mishap
- Ashore Class A Mishap
- Physical Training Fatality
- Motor Vehicle (MV) Class A Mishap
- Tactical Vehicle (TACVEH) Class A Mishap
- Commercial Vehicle (COMMVEH) Class A Mishap
- On-Duty Class A Mishap
- On-Duty Fatality
- Private Motor Vehicle (PMV) Class A Mishap
- Private Motor Vehicle (PMV) Fatality
- Automobile (PMV-4) Fatality
Document Introduction
This report is a comprehensive safety posture assessment based on official data from the U.S. Navy Safety Command. It systematically compiles the number and incidence rates of Class A mishaps (typically major incidents resulting in fatalities, permanent disability, or property damage exceeding a specific threshold) across key U.S. Navy operational and service domains over the ten-year period from Fiscal Year 2016 to 2025 (FY16-FY25). The report aims to reveal safety risk trends in different areas, identify potential systemic vulnerabilities through long-term data comparison, and provide data-driven decision-making support for high-level safety policy formulation and resource allocation.
The main structure of the report revolves around four core risk areas: aviation safety, maritime operations safety, ashore service safety, and private motor vehicle safety. Each area provides detailed annual mishap counts, mishap rates (typically based on per 100,000 flight hours or per 100 ships/per 10,000 person-years), and comparisons with data from the same period in the previous fiscal year and the ten-year average. Key charts display trend lines from FY16 to FY26 (some data up to January 14, 2026), with statistical confidence intervals (UCI/LCI) annotated to enhance the rigor of data analysis.
In the aviation safety section, the report distinguishes between overall mishaps for manned and unmanned aircraft, further subdivided into flight mishaps, flight-related mishaps, and aviation ground mishaps. Data shows that the manned aircraft Flight Class A mishap rate for FY25 was 1.46 (per 100,000 flight hours), slightly higher than the ten-year average of 1.00. The maritime operations safety section includes independent data for surface ships, submarines, and Military Sealift Command (MSC) ships. Notably, the FY25 surface ship mishap rate (2.03) was significantly higher than its ten-year average (1.35).
Ashore service and private motor vehicle safety are another focus of the report. The ashore Class A mishap rate reached 7.80 in FY25, higher than the ten-year average of 6.84. Particularly prominent is the risk associated with Private Motor Vehicles (PMV). FY25 saw 45 PMV fatalities with a fatality rate of 12.99, several times higher than the on-duty fatality rate, constituting the most significant source of personnel loss in non-combat environments. The report further analyzes PMV mishaps by subdividing them into automobile (PMV-4), motorcycle (PMV-2), and other (PMV-0) categories.
The value of this report lies in the authority of its data, the granularity of its classification, and the long-term perspective of its analysis. Through ten years of continuous data, decision-makers and safety analysts can look beyond fluctuations in any single year to discern the true trends and periodic challenges in safety performance across domains. It provides a valuable benchmark reference for implementing targeted risk mitigation measures, optimizing training and maintenance cycles, and evaluating the effectiveness of safety reforms.