mapleg

^+1

14940674

I disagree. We are honoring a specific, notable accomplishment. We can do this without diminishing the significance of the deaths in accidents outside the US, or on regionals. The title should be changed for accuracy, but the subject is certainly worth discussing.

closetasfan

Kudos to all major US airlines. I think that's a terrific achievement. May there be another 10 years. Hope safety of all air travel around the world can also improve as well.

I certainly think its worth celebrating

nerd

Why do we make this exemption for regionals? 50 dead Continental passengers is still 50 dead pax, flying on a major U.S. airline, regardless of who Continental hired to fly their plane.

Wally Bird

Actually I think we're agreeing; I only questioned the title not the content.

The vehemence of some replies suggests my point was well made.

Out.

Cattle Airlines

This is good news. The next step is to have 10 years of no crashes, not even the commuter airlines. Also no crashes on foreign metal.

14940674

We make the distinction because, before 2001, mainline airlines couldn't maintain a perfect safety streak either. They had major accidents every few years. The fact that we have been able to change this fact is excellent, and worth celebrating on its own.

DenverBrian

United Airlines had a significant 20-year milestone in 2011 - no accident fatalities since the Colorado Springs crash March 3, 1991.

alanh

However, the overall trend is down and there are indications that it is due to systemic changes. TCAS and EGPWS have made mid-air collisions and controlled flight into terrain crashes much less common, as an example. Wind shear and microbursts are much better understood too.

On the other hand, it seems like the cause of the more recent crashes are too broad to categorize as systemic issues. This is good in that we're not seeing planes crash for the same reason over and over, but bad in that since every crash is for different reasons, it may not be possible to plug all of the one-in-a-billion holes.

I do agree that it does need a global perspective, and the crashes from other western European carriers could have easily happened to US carriers.

China Clipper

However, many people are especially leery about flying right after a major disaster, while I figure (however fallaciously) that another big one right away is less probable.

Agree that the thread title should be changed. As it stands it's somewhere between solipsistic and jingoistic.

GateHold

I am the thread-starter and author of the article linked to.


For ME, of all people, to be accused of "US parochialism" and "jingoism," and told to "broaden my horizons," is more than a little bizarre.

Obviously, to make such an accusation, you are not AT ALL familiar with my work in general. I invite you to read more of my articles and essays, and then make that judgment.

Broaden my horizons? With all respect, I have spent the past nine years writing about aviation accidents both in the US and abroad, and have REPEATEDLY gone out of my way to vouch for the safety standards of commercial aviation abroad, debunking many stubborn myths. Here is just one for example...

http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/...skthepilot226/

It's funny because at Salon, where my column runs, I have been accused of exactly the opposite -- of being too lenient in my analyses of carriers OUTSIDE the US.

As for the title of the post, there is limited space in which to make one's point, and this PARTICULAR essay was indeed about a record-breaking streak here in the United States.


Patrick Smith

www.askthepilot.com

GateHold

Regarding the Colgan, Comair, and other regional carrier accidents...

That people don't understand which companies are actually operating their code-share regional flights, and that airlines obfuscate these arrangements, is another issue altogether -- and one that I've written several articles about.

And I suspect many people did not read the actual article linked to in this thread, because I acknowledge these crashes, all of which I've written about at some length in my columns.

There * is * something very important and meaningful in the fact that the majors, by themselves, have avoided any catastrophes. That's not to diminish the seriousness of those accidents that * did * occur.


Patrick Smith

closetasfan

Patrick

I enjoy your ask your pilot articles. I appreciate your contributions to this thread. Although not universal, to be able to say in the US, no major carriers have suffered a fatality to an accident, to me, is a tremendous accomplishment and should be commended.

My condolences to all those lost in air accidents abroad and in regionals in the last 10 years and also in any accidents that occurred in the past.

I do think the US majors, and those involved in aviation safety, should be proud though. A few close calls, a lot of lives saved.

PotomacApproach

which everyone knows is nonsense

there's a reason you can't turn a cell phone on taxi out to runway, but can on taxi back after landing - the airlines don't want to get sued if you're distracted during the safety demo

pinworm

Isn't a dead child from a runaway Southwest plane a crash fatality? Or is that child's death less significant because he was not a passenger on the plane, only a passenger in the car that got hit by the plane?

Isn't a plane crashing the in the Hudson river a "major crash" even if nobody died?