Is Flying Still Safe? Examining Recent Accidents and FAA Concerns
The holiday season, often a time for joyful reunions and travel adventures, has been marred by a series of unsettling aviation incidents. Since Christmas Day, four commercial jets have crashed, resulting in the tragic loss of nearly 300 lives and leaving countless others injured. Graphic images of these events, including a fiery explosion over the Potomac River following a helicopter collision with a plane and a Delta flight overturned on a Toronto runway, have understandably instilled a sense of unease in prospective travelers. Compounding these anxieties is a US National Transportation Safety Board report indicating over a hundred aviation accidents in 2025 alone.
In the face of these alarming events, a crucial question arises: is it still safe to fly? Aviation experts, while acknowledging the gravity of the recent incidents, maintain that air travel remains remarkably safe. They point to statistical data highlighting that flying is safer now than at any time since the 1960s, thanks to significant advancements in aircraft manufacturing, sophisticated weather imaging technologies, and stringent safety regulations.
To illustrate this point, experts say that an individual could fly twice a day for approximately 2,500 years before facing a significant risk of being involved in a fatal aviation accident. Darryl Campbell, an aviation reporter for The Verge, emphasizes that while driving might offer the illusion of control, road trips are statistically far more dangerous than air travel. Campbell notes that the probability of experiencing a fatal car crash in one’s lifetime is approximately 1 in 100, a substantial 1 percent chance.
Campbell explains that the recent surge in high-profile aviation accidents, coupled with the dramatic portrayal of plane crashes in movies and television, contributes to a heightened perception of risk. This perceived danger, he argues, is often disproportionate to the actual statistical likelihood of an accident. Campbell highlighted that passengers are not in control, and they are trusting in a complex system, therefore it is easy to fear bumps.
However, experts acknowledge that even though the current system has been proven to be safe and efficient, there is always room for improvement. To further explore the current state of aviation safety, John Cox, a seasoned pilot with 55 years of experience and now an aviation safety consultant, joined Sean Rameswaram on the podcast "Today, Explained." Their conversation delved into the potential ramifications of recent job cuts at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on overall aviation safety.
In light of Americans’ growing concerns about air travel safety, the conversation turned to the DOGE’s decision to eliminate roughly 400 positions within the FAA. Cox clarified that these cuts primarily affected maintenance personnel responsible for radio and radar equipment. He emphasized that the US air traffic control system relies on older infrastructure that necessitates regular maintenance. Cox expressed concern that these staff reductions could lead to equipment failures, potentially limiting air traffic controllers’ ability to manage flight volumes efficiently.
Sean Duffy, the Transportation secretary, has stated that none of the eliminated positions were critical to safety. Cox agreed that pilot, flight attendant, and dispatcher positions were not affected. He also confirmed that the air traffic controller positions themselves had not been impacted.
However, he clarified the distinction between safety-critical positions and the maintenance roles responsible for the equipment used by air traffic controllers. While the latter may not be classified as "safety-critical" in the strictest sense, Cox cautioned that potential capacity cutbacks resulting from equipment failures could ultimately reduce flight options and potentially increase prices.
The conversation then shifted to the long-standing issue of staffing shortages in air traffic control towers. According to the FAA, there is a deficit of approximately 2,000 air traffic controllers. Cox attributed this shortage to several factors, including challenges in recruiting qualified candidates and a rigorous training process with a high attrition rate. He stated that roughly 50 percent of candidates fail to complete training, given how demanding and intense the training process can be.
Once training is successfully completed, full performance-level controllers still face demanding work schedules, often working six days a week and struggling to secure vacation time. Cox argued that these challenging work conditions make it more difficult to attract and retain the most qualified individuals.
Cox emphasized the importance of consistent congressional funding for the FAA. He suggested that removing political considerations and providing a steady, reliable funding source would address many of the agency’s long-standing problems. Such funding would facilitate improved recruitment and training of air traffic controllers, as well as allow for essential equipment upgrades.
While the recent aviation accidents have understandably raised concerns about air travel safety, experts emphasize that air travel remains statistically safer than other forms of transportation. However, the potential consequences of staffing shortages at the FAA could lead to serious issues in the long run.
