TOO MANY PLANES IN THE AIR?

February 18, 2025

FOUR AIR ACCIDENTS IN ONE MONTH 

In the early part of the last century, when I was a very young boy, living in a densely populated area of Brooklyn, NY, my father, who was working in our cramped back yard called me to come out to him.

“Look, look up there!”  He called excitedly, pointing into the patch of blue sky overhead. “It’s a plane!”

 I ran to his side, craning my neck to look up to where he pointed. There, a tiny silvery aircraft  glistened in the sky. The faint drone of its passage seemed far behind its image as as it crossed above the square patch of sky visible from our backyard.

Today, the passage above must be difficult to believe. Aircraft are so common, no one pays any attention to them (except for the often full sky-cover of jet-aircraft-generated “contrails” that often make their passage so obvious.)

That was long long ago!

Airspace is crowded these days. World wide, air traffic specialists claim there are between 80,000 and 130,000 aircraft in the air at any one time!. The FAA claims that in the USA at any given time, there are about 5,400 aircraft flying in the lower 48 airspace. The FAA estimates there are on average about 45,000 flights per day. 

Yesterday, February 17, 2025,  a Delta Air Lines CRJ 900, flying from Minneapolis to Toronto crashed, while attempting to land at Toronto Pearson Airport, Canada in blowing snow with 30mph winds gusts. 

This short haul aircraft (CRJ 900 Bombardier) in the same “family” of jets originally produced by Canadair Inc. as the CRJ 700 involved in mid-air collision with a US military Black Hawk helicopter on 29 January 2025 over Reagan International which caused the death of 67 crew and passengers on both aircraft. 

The Delta CRJ900 with 80 crew and passengers flying from Wichita Kansas was attempting to land at Toronto in strong winds and wind-whipped blowing snow. The runway was cleared of snow and the air control tower gave the aircraft permission to land. Their final communication was a warning of gusty cross winds up to 30-40 mph. 

The pilot began its descent attempting  a “crabbing” maneuver, a common pilot strategy to ease the aircraft down and avoid difficulty pilot control in strong crosswinds. In this maneuver the plane approaches the centerline of the runway at near right angles, then with the nose of the plane directed partly into the wind while the aircraft itself is directed over the center-line of the runway, so the aircraft fuselage and the centerline of the runway are not aligned—it is “crabbing” forward,  as it continues its descent. 

As the CRJ900 began its decent onto the runway it approach speed was too fast and its angle of approach was “level” or parallel to the ground. Delta CRJ 900 was approaching too fast (well above the generally desireable 150 mph).  

Furthermore at this point the pilot should have begun to “nose up” or “flare” the approach of the aircraft as it approaches touchdown. Flaring as the pilot causes the aircraft to lose lift so that the plane slowly descends. Close to the ground its belly and wings create a compressed air cushion with the tarmac, and as the plane slows down its rear two wheels should  hit  the ground first. 

Since there was no flare the aircraft made a hard landing. The aircraft rather than slowing maintained its forward speed and like a skipping rock throxwns over the surface of a lake skipped of bounded as it touched down. The right (starboard) landing gear wheel stuck the tarmac very hard and may have caused it to collapse. The collapse of the rear tricycle landing gear caused the starboard wing to strike the ground. 

At the high speed the aircraft was moving, contact of the wind tip with the ground ripped the wing off, compromising the wind fuel tanks, which leaked fuel. Friction caused by grinding of the airframe against the concrete generated sparks which set the fuel leaking from the partly detached wing tanks. They exploded into a fireball. But since the plane’s fuselage with crew and passengers continued its speedy course down the snowy runway, the fireball and.burning wing were fortuitously left behind. 

As a result of the ground frriction resuling from the loss of its starboard wing, the speeding fuselage began to rotate colockwise to its right, forcing its portside (left) wing into the direction in which the fuselage was moving at high speed. As a result of air flow, friction with the ground and other factors,  the port side wing and tail detached. 

The now cigar-shaped cylindrical  remnant of the fuselage sliding down the snow blown runway finally slowed, rolled over-like a rolling pin—and came to a stop in a upside-down position. Its roof on the snowy ground while its belly faced the still overcast snow filled gray sky. 

In the interior the passengers were mostly hanging from their seats —as someone described —like bats in a cave. To escape they had to release their seat belts and fall head first down into the “overhead” luggage compartments which had instantly become the “floor” of the plane.  Many had difficulty and were hurt falling. A small child was greviously injured perhaps it was not strapped to a seat by being held by its parent during the crash.  Eighty passengers (80) on board survived. Seventeen (17) were injured, 3 were hospitalized in critical condition. 

If all that has been reported so far is accurate, it does appear that this near -air tragedy—was a case of pilot error. A tragedy was averted by circumstances..the snow may have reduced the possibility of fire(?), the plane design helped reduce fatalities, and the crew and first responders performed their tasks well and efficiently.  This could have been a horrible and tragic loss of life..but miraculously—so far-ther were no fatalities.  

 Early in February an Alaska commuter plane with ten passenger on a flight from Minneapolis to Nome Alaska, did not make its schedule landing in Nome. After several days of searching the crash site was sited  somewhere in Alaska, there were no survivors fatalities.

A Philadelphia Medical transport plane with a pilot, former patient and family on a return flight to Mexico crashed for no known reason in that city soon after takeoff. There were no survivors and one fatality on the ground.

Washington DC Reagan Washington National Mid Air Collision Army Blackhawk helicopter collides with passenger jet attempting to land a Reagan International. There were a total of sixty-seven (67) fatalities. Three crew member in the helicopter and 64 in passenger and crew in the Bombadier CRJ 700 aircraft.

Prior to that a military jet crashed in Arizona.         

After four air tragedies in a month, after a long period of almost no serious accidents or fatalities— political leaders and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) were quick to reassure air flying community  that air travel is still safe.  They note that the chances of fatality during a flight is 1in13.7 million miles flown. 

While 283 million privately owned vehicles in the USA each are reported to drive about 13,000 miles per year, and generate 41,000 traffic deaths in a year on average. 

If there are 283 million private and commercial vehicles on the road each traveling about 14,000 miles per year (14,000 miles x 283 million vehicles = 3.96 e12 ) or 3.96e12 vehicle miles per year,, or 3,960,000,000,000 vehicle-miles per year. Each year there are 41,000 vehicle related fatalities (41,000/3,960,000,000,000 or 41/3,960,000,000 = 1 to 96 500,000 vehicle miles driven. Or 1 to 97,000,000 miles driven.

1 in @14 million for air travel

1 in @97 million for vehicular, ground travel 

97/14 = 6.7 or 14 x 6.7= @97

According to these premises and figures ground travel is just about seven (7) times “safer” or 7 times less likely to end in a fatality than flying

Or flying is 7 times more likely to result in a fatality than (if possible) vehicular ground travel.   

Of course some travel can only be accomplished by air craft, and examining  length of time of travel may also result in different figures and outcomes.

One must ask however, in light of recent air tragedies, are there too many planes in the air? Should we insist on higher standards for air traffic controllers, pilots and copilots, and ancillary staff responsible for safe air travel.

Air travel staff appointments should be based on ability, experience and knowledge. Diversity, Inclusion and Equity (DEI) is a “luxury” we can no longer afford. Selecting for anything other than merit is a sure way to decrease standards of performance, efficiency and safety…and increase likelihood for fatalities. Recent cases in Washington, DC (67 fatalities) and in Toronto, Canada (no fatalities) are the canary in the coal mine warning to the flying public.