Every day more than 100,000 commercial flights and, despite the multiple active conflicts in several regions, aviation continues to be one of the means of transportation safer never created. In fact, the probability of suffering a serious accident is less than one in several millions of flights.
And yet, today more than ever there arises the same question.
The question and the surprising answer. The military escalation in the Middle East has generated the same immediate concern among thousands of travelers: whether it is safe to fly between Europe and Asia in a context where the sky is saturated with drones, missiles and air defenses.
However, despite the spectacular nature of the scenario and the feeling of constant risk, the real answer is much simpler than it seems, almost a direct application of the Ockham’s razor: because if flights continue to operate, it is because the direct risk to commercial aircraft is extremely low and carefully managed.
A more complex sky, not a more dangerous one. There is no doubt, the war has forced completely redraw flight maps, closing large corridors over the Gulf and diverting traffic to longer, more congested routes, especially over Egypt or the Caucasus.
This has multiplied the load of controllers and crews, who operate under reinforced protocols and advance planning, although it does not imply uncontrolled chaos, but rather a highly regulated system that adapts in real time to maintain separation and safety between aircraft.
The risk is not where you think. Although drone and missile attacks have reached infrastructure such as airports and urban areasexperts agree that planes in flight are targets extremely difficult to impact.
The reasons are varied, but mainly due to its size, speed and the active routes avoid areas direct threat. Because in reality, the most relevant danger lies ashore (airport facilities or falling debris after interceptions), which explains why airport closures and massive cancellations respond more to prevention than to direct impacts on aircraft.
Lessons learned. civil aviation drags precedents that have deeply marked their protocols, such as the demolition from flight MH17 in 2014 or similar incidents where anti-aircraft systems mistook civil aircraft for threats.
Precisely for this reason, today the operating principle is quite clear: if there is the slightest risk of confusion or intersection with military activity, the airspace closes directly or redirects itself, avoiding repeating past mistakes.
The war exists, but the planes do not fly within it. It is the principle that governs everything in commercial aviation. Airlines, far from improvising, operate with intelligence systems, risk analysis and coordination with military authorities that determine what routes are safe at every moment.
This means, for example, detours, more fuel consumption and delays, but it also ensures that active flights remain within of “safety bubbles” away from direct conflict, even in high intensity scenarios.
The real impact for the traveler. For passengers, the most tangible consequences are not so much safety as disruption that it represents: We’re talking about massive cancellations, longer routes, rising fuel prices and a constant feeling of uncertainty.
Added to this is the psychological impact of seeing missiles intercepted or airports temporarily closed, which amplifies risk perceptionalthough the real probability of an incident in flight remains very very low.
You feel more than you suffer in the air. Taken together, the current scenario combines a highly visible war with an air system that continues to function thanks to multiple prevention and control layers. The paradox in this sense is clear, because there has never been so much military activity in the skies of the region and, yet, there have never been applied so many mechanisms to keep civil aviation out of it.
For this reason, and because it continues to be the safest way to travel, the answer to the great doubt of travelers is not in the intensity of the conflict, nor even in combat drones, nor ballistic missiles, but in the most basic logic: Commercial airplanes simply don’t fly where the war is.
Image | PexelsArmed Forces
In Xataka | Global air traffic has a problem: Ukraine and Iran have created a funnel that is driving up prices
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings