Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Do you feel safe flying United?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 12, 2024, 3:29 pm
  #46  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New York, NY
Programs: UA, AA, DL, Hertz, Avis, National, Hyatt, Hilton, SPG, Marriott
Posts: 9,454
Originally Posted by limey1K
Sitting on a 738 waiting to push and the pilot just made an announcement that he needs “every person sitting next to a window to make sure the shades are fully open. This is a safety requirement and flight attendants will be walking through the cabin to ensure that everyone was listening”.

Definitely feeling safer.
Not so (unless at an exit), but I wish it were... if for no other reason to ensure I have a view out the window when I'm on the aisle!
SPN Lifer and uanj like this.
EWR764 is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 4:55 pm
  #47  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pasadena, California
Programs: UA 1K, 1MM
Posts: 10,412
Originally Posted by JimInOhio
If rare events show a true pattern of happening in clusters then they are not random. Anyone with a background in statistics, specifically the Poisson Distribution, knows this.
This is exactly right.

Originally Posted by halls120
See post #38. lots of issues in the aviation world recently, but few received much if any coverage because it didn't involve a 737 or UA.
And this is where we need to draw a line between incidents and the reporting of those incidents. I don't think it's at all a stretch to say that the former is random (and not clustered over the long term), while there is every reason to believe that the latter is not random at all. IOW, I think you're both right.
ZenFlyer and JimInOhio like this.
iapetus is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 5:42 pm
  #48  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,706
Originally Posted by notquiteaff
Zero concerns about flying in UA. As far as I recall, the last major accident with multiple fatalities by any major US commercial airline was the Colgan Air crash in Buffalo in 2009.
And the last United crash with fatalities was 1991 - 33 years ago.

United is an incredibly safe airline in a vast array of very safe airlines.

(Pedant alert: You can't count 9/11 for these purposes.)
notquiteaff likes this.
DenverBrian is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 5:48 pm
  #49  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,319
Originally Posted by DenverBrian
And the last United crash with fatalities was 1991 - 33 years ago.

United is an incredibly safe airline in a vast array of very safe airlines.

(Pedant alert: You can't count 9/11 for these purposes.)
Agree - unfortunately UEX has more recent examples...
bmwe92fan is online now  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 6:16 pm
  #50  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Programs: SQ, QF, UA, CO, DL
Posts: 2,890
Originally Posted by txp
Hello, fellow travelers,

I'm reaching out for insights on United Airlines' safety, hoping to ease some recent concerns of mine. My message is grounded in genuine curiosity and a desire for reassurance rather than criticism.

A bit about my flying history to give context: My aviation journey began in the early 1980s on a trans-Atlantic flight operated by a DC-10, an aircraft whose safety record left much to be desired. Those days, the anxiety of flying was palpable for me, influenced heavily by the aviation disasters of the time. Over the years, my confidence in air travel grew thanks to improving safety records across the industry. By the 2010s, my fears had all but vanished, supported by statistics showing a significant decline in aviation fatalities.

However, recent incidents involving United Airlines have reignited my apprehension. With five occurrences in just under two weeks, I can't help but ponder if these are mere coincidences or if they suggest deeper issues within the airline, such as cultural, maintenance, or leadership challenges.

I understand that, statistically, air travel remains extremely safe, especially in North America, the EU, and similar regions. Yet, the frequency of these recent events has led to a resurgence of my 1980s flying anxieties, specifically when considering flying with United.

I'm eager to hear your thoughts and experiences. Is my unease unfounded? Your perspectives would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights.
Thanks for starting this thread, you are not alone in how your views have been shaped by media coverage of the recent incidents. And thanks to everyone else for sharing their thoughts.

Just checking in to see if you have other questions or if there is some angle we have not explored for you. Hope it helped in some way.
SPN Lifer and eightblack like this.
uanj is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 6:37 pm
  #51  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,706
Originally Posted by bmwe92fan
Agree - unfortunately UEX has more recent examples...
No fatalities since 1996 from what I see.
DenverBrian is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 6:45 pm
  #52  
txp
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,292
Originally Posted by uanj
Thanks for starting this thread, you are not alone in how your views have been shaped by media coverage of the recent incidents. And thanks to everyone else for sharing their thoughts.

Just checking in to see if you have other questions or if there is some angle we have not explored for you. Hope it helped in some way.
Thank you for your kind words and thank everyone for the professional manner with which you approached my question. My family and I have over a dozen UA flights scheduled during the next three months, so I am understandably anxious and confused about the current news.

Collectively, you have made a very compelling case that the current occurrences are not a reflection of a systematic problem within UA (poor maintenance or poor management). So, I am willing to accept that the rather unusual frequency of recent incidents is purely coincidental, especially when considering that the media is more likely to report minor incidents than it was decades ago. In statistical terms, I would call this a two-standard deviation event. It's rare that it happens without cause, but it's possible.

In conclusion, I will be making no changes to my travel plans at the moment.

However, in the spirit of Bayes' theorem, I may revise my views if and when additional incidents occur with an unusually high frequency. Let's hope, for the sake of everyone here, that we will never have to reopen this thread in the future.

Best wishes to all!
airoli, uanj, iapetus and 1 others like this.
txp is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 6:46 pm
  #53  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,319
Originally Posted by DenverBrian
No fatalities since 1996 from what I see.
I used to live in upstate NY -- I remember this well:

UEX (CO) Buffalo Crash Yes it was Continental at the time -- but my original point is that UA gets painted negatively with all of the UEX subs....
bmwe92fan is online now  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 7:12 pm
  #54  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Programs: UA MM
Posts: 4,130
Originally Posted by DenverBrian
No fatalities since 1996 from what I see.
Colgan tragedy was 2009.
JimInOhio is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 7:31 pm
  #55  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: NYC, LON
Programs: *
Posts: 2,774
Originally Posted by txp

However, in the spirit of Bayes' theorem, I may revise my views if and when additional incidents occur with an unusually high frequency.
By Bayes theorem there should be no need to revise your views even with additional 'incidents'. You pretest expectation of an air disaster is (or should be) so infinitesimally low that no incidents should change that.

In my mind these events reinforce the safety of US air travel as the system behaved the way it should have by maintaining the safe passage of passengers and crew despite any incidents; to me they actually demonstrate how safe air travel has become.
physioprof likes this.

Last edited by ani90; Mar 12, 2024 at 8:59 pm
ani90 is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 8:29 pm
  #56  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,174
1000%. It is a factor in me preferentially booking UA metal as much as possible.
zeus2120 likes this.
uastarflyer is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 8:40 pm
  #57  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saipan, MP 96950 USA (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands = the CNMI)
Programs: UA Silver, Hilton Silver. Life: UA .57 MM, United & Admirals Clubs (spousal), Marriott Platinum
Posts: 15,058
Originally Posted by adventures_await (Post # 8)
My brother works for United in their SFO maintenance depot. He assures me that they follow all maintenance, documentation and safety inspections to FAA requirements. The loss of the tire at SFO is a screw up and the landing gear shop will investigate and make sure this doesn't happen again. The engine fire appears to be caused by the engine ingesting some bubble wrap, which is a FOD issue not an engine maintenance issue. . . .
FOD = foreign object damage
FOD = foreign object debris

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_object_damage
adventures_await likes this.
SPN Lifer is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 9:31 pm
  #58  
txp
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Texas
Programs: UA, AA, DL, BA, Marriott, Hilton, Accor, Hyatt
Posts: 1,292
Originally Posted by ani90
By Bayes theorem there should be no need to revise your views even with additional 'incidents'. You pretest expectation of an air disaster is (or should be) so infinitesimally low that no incidents should change that.

In my mind these events reinforce the safety of US air travel as the system behaved the way it should have by maintaining the safe passage of passengers and crew despite any incidents; to me they actually demonstrate how safe air travel has become.
The type of occurrence that would make me update my beliefs against the "UA is safe hypothesis" would be, God forbid, a tragedy like AF447, or even a scary event like AC143, which, thank God. did not cause any fatalities. The blame in both events falls squarely on their respective airlines. In the first instance, the junior AF pilots did not know how to fly without the autopilot, while the senior AF pilot was recovering from too much partying in Rio. In the latter instance, the maintenance crew in Montreal confused metric system measures with imperial measures and did not add sufficient fuel to the aircraft. It is only the courage of the pilots that prevented another tragedy from happening. It took me a long time to return to AF and, respectively AC, after these failures.
txp is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 9:36 pm
  #59  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Los Angeles, California
Programs: United, American, Delta, Hyatt, Hilton, Hertz, Marriott
Posts: 14,807
I definitely feel safe; however, here’s a question for all: would you select seat 30A or 20F in a MAX9?
ContinentalFan is offline  
Old Mar 12, 2024, 9:42 pm
  #60  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Programs: Sometimes known as [ARG:6 UNDEFINED]
Posts: 26,706
Originally Posted by JimInOhio
Colgan tragedy was 2009.
Not United or United Express at the time.
DenverBrian is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.