Does flying only get safer after something almost goes wrong?

• Recent near-collisions and fatal accidents have raised questions about aviation safety.
• An analysis of federal data shows a 61% increase in near-mid-air collisions since 2019.
• Experts say the aviation industry often reacts to incidents rather than proactively adopting new safety technology.

Two Southwest Airlines jets passed within 500 vertical feet of each other over Nashville on April 18. A couple of days later, over at John F. Kennedy International Airport, two commercial flights also narrowly avoided a collision. 

That’s not to mention the two high-profile crashes in recent years: the fatal collision between an American Airlines jet and an Army helicopter in 2025, and the recent fatal ground collision at LaGuardia International Airport in New York. Perhaps because of their rarity, aviation incidents (or near accidents) tend to generate headlines and hand-wringing. 

But for many travelers, such incidents raise an important question: are these avoided collisions a good sign that the aviation safety system is working, or warning beacons that another fatal disaster is looming on the horizon? 

An analysis of federal data by AviatorDB, an aviation registry tracking company, shows a 61% increase in near-mid-air collisions since 2019.

Experts say the spike isn’t entirely surprising, but added it’s important for regulators to take it seriously. 

“Compared to 10, 20 years ago, we have many more aircraft in the sky,” Laurie Garrow, a civil engineering professor specializing in aviation at Georgia Tech, told USA TODAY. “The more planes ... you have, the more opportunities there are for needing conflict resolution.” 

Mary Schiavo, the Department of Transportation’s former inspector general, said that collisions avoided at the last minute are better than the alternative, but still not an optimal outcome. 

“We continue to have these problems where you have to have go-arounds, which means they’ve put too many planes too close together,” she said. “I still see it as a warning sign because we have had so very many. The fact that we’re having them after we’ve had two major collisions, those are warning signs and that’s what the statistics are for.” 

How incidents improve aviation safety 

Schiavo said that the aviation industry is good at learning from past incidents, but that’s not always enough. 

“To wait until there are deaths when you see all these bad statistics is just ridiculous,” she said. 

The recent fatal accident at LaGuardia International Airport in New York highlighted how reactionary the aviation safety system can be. Schiavo said that for a long time, regulators have touted technology that can warn pilots and ground vehicle operators alike when they’re on a collision course. During the LaGuardia accident, an Air Canada regional jet struck a fire truck that was crossing the runway where the flight was landing, killing both pilots. 

Federal Aviation Administration regulations and the airport’s own guidelines hadn’t required the truck to have equipment that would have alerted air traffic controllers to its presence on the runway, although the FAA said it issued an alert encouraging the use of transponders on all airport vehicles last year.

“You can bet that LaGuardia will be making mandatory, the FAA will make it mandatory, that they put transponders on all the firetrucks, but it shouldn’t take two young pilots dying to make that happen. That mindset has to change,” Schiavo said. 

The FAA also said it notified operators of available federal funds to help with transponder installation in last year's alert.

Garrow agreed that proactively requiring the adoption of new technology is a key step to improving aviation safety. 

“Investment in new technologies, making sure communication protocols, as well as new technology, are in place. I would love to see investments in that to help bring those technologies up to speed and make them more common,” she said. 

Schiavo, the National Transportation Safety Board and others have also warned that the FAA doesn’t always analyze accident data in a timely manner. 

In its final report on the fatal midair collision between an Army Black Hawk helicopter and an American Airlines regional jet, the NTSB cited “the absence of effective data sharing and analysis among the FAA, aircraft operators, and other relevant organizations” as a major contributing factor. 

The FAA told USA TODAY in a statement that it is making progress on upgrading and improving the aviation safety system:

In the last year, the FAA took two critical steps to further improve the safety of the flying public throughout the National Airspace System (NAS): we expanded the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to analyze safety data, and we created an integrated Safety Management office. We’re also delivering a brand-new air traffic control system to the American flying public and that includes installing more airport surface surveillance systems, which enable air traffic controllers to track and identify aircraft and vehicles on runways and taxiways in all weather conditions.

The NTSB pointed to past comments by Jennifer Homendy, its chair. Homendy has previously criticized the FAA and legislators for failing to act on the agency’s recommendations.  

According to the FAA, it's use of AI in data analysis is helping improve safety across the national aviation system.

The agency has used AI in recent months to help identify trouble spots where helicopters and airplanes are likely to come into conflict. During the government shutdown in October 2025, the FAA also used AI to help implement traffic control initiatives.

"We used AI to rapidly scan a very large volume of safety reports for indicators of system stress associated with shutdown conditions," A statement from the FAA said. "This identified a set of reports pointing to elevated risk, including increased traffic-management and weather-avoidance reroutes, additional surface congestion at multiple airports, and frequency congestion consistent with combined air traffic control positions under reduced staffing."

The result was that the agency was able to ease the workload of air traffic controllers at a particularly stressful time, improving safety and efficiency.

What counts as safety in aviation? 

A lack of fatalities is a good baseline, but Schiavo said that can’t be the only metric by which aviation safety is measured. But, she said, there’s also no agreed-upon definition of what qualifies as safety in flying. 

“All we can say is that in general, evaluated on a per mile of transportation basis, a hundred miles in a car versus a hundred miles in an airplane, the airplane wins, but can we say, ‘is it safe?’ the FAA has never defined that,” Schiavo said. “(The FAA’s) line is: ‘flying is safe when we say it’s safe,’ but we know they don’t look at the data and we know they don’t require the equipment and we know they haven’t filled the positions to analyze that data.” 

The NTSB criticized the FAA in the wake of the DCA crash for not allocating its staff in a way that could have helped notice the dangers and possibly avoid the collision. 

Garrow said that aviation is the safest mode of transportation, but she understands why the traveling public has questions after high-profile incidents. 

"I empathize with individuals that are more nervous about flying when these things happen, I think it's a common reaction,” she said. “There are always ways to improve the safety of aviation.” 

Proposals 

One of the NTSB’s major recommendations after the crash at DCA was that aircraft be required to use a system that broadcasts their location in national airspace, known as ADS-B. Congress has not yet passed legislation that would make this change, although competing versions of aviation safety bills are being considered in both the House and the Senate. 

The investigation into the LaGuardia crash is still in its early stages, but it’s likely that the NTSB will recommend the adoption of other warning systems in its final report as a result of that accident. 

Still, Schiavo and Garrow both said that the aviation system would be safer overall if steps like those were taken proactively, rather than only in the aftermath of major incidents. 

“It’s possible to do that. That’s what’s so irritating. We have the equipment. It can be mandated, but it’s not,” Schiavo said. 

This story was updated to add new information.

Zach Wichter is a travel reporter and writes the Cruising Altitude column for USA TODAY. He is based in New York, and you can reach him at [email protected].