I know this is an odd question but has been on my mind for years.
In my early teens I was afraid of flying on DC-9's. In my mind they were seemed, at least to me, to be prone to midair collisions.
TWA over Urbana, Alleghenies over New Fairland, Iberia over France, Airwest over Duarte, Aeromexico over Cerritos, Spanish Airlines over Majorca, Inex- Adria over Zagreb, and possibly others I missed. A few of the disasters had eerie similarities such a a small plane hitting the tail of the jeliner and separating the horizontal stabilizer, or striking the front and severing the cockpit from the fuselage. This is not to mention ground collisions such as the D.C.-9 hitting a Convair 880 on a runway/taxiway.
For some reason this put a fear of flying D.C.-9's to the point where on a trip to Hawaii when I was about 12 I urged my parent to switch our Hawaiian D.C.-9 flight to an Aloha 737 to no avail, and had a uneventful flight.
Curious if anyone else has has similar irrational fears of a particular aircraft.
Thanks.

Never an aircraft as if maintained any age aircraft is very safe. However, there were a few airlines I avoided due to severe safety concerns. An example would be Aeroflot 30 odd years ago. Incredibly accident prone with huge numbers of fatalities and safety issues. However they are not an issue for me now.

Anything with a propeller makes me nervous.

I'm not REALLY afraid of any aircraft type.
I do have a slight distaste for the 737-900ER, but that's because most of my United flights were on that bird.

Not really, - nothing for more than a few weeks. The 787 during the groundings, the Alaska MD80s after their crash, but eventually that irrational fear just wanes and once the irresponsible media reports disappear and the actual cause of crash is put in in a report
I just hope if I am to go in a plane related incident that it isn't on a boring type like an A320 or a mainstream airline like United or British Airways and flying to a generic uninteresting airport. I want to go out in style, on an old or uncommon jet for a lessor known airline between interesting airports going to a place I love or have dreamed of going.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not REALLY afraid of any aircraft type.
I do have a slight distaste for the 737-900ER, but that's because most of my United flights were on that bird.

Just curious, what made you feel that way? Was it just United's horrible seats or you were afraid of their maintenance/other?

For me, I was never afraid of any particular aircraft. Only time I've ever really been nervous on a plane was a United 777 flight from DEN to LHR, flew through some pretty rough weather that had a lot of people on board screaming. Wasn't the 777's fault though, obviously.

Well, my very first flight I am aware of was on a Tupolev 154M. I wasn't really enthusiastic about, first because even at that time (I was 10 years old) I had more sympathies with Boeing and Airbus and didn't hear too much good about former Soviet airplanes, second because while boarding I was kind of shocked, how worn it looked like and third and most important point: we didn't fly. After lineup the engines spooled up and back down a few times and then the announcement came "engine problems, we can't take off". Well, from that time one I had a few flights on a Tu154 without any problems but still I wasn't to keen on flying with this bird.

Today actually I'd gladly fly with one again, or even older Soviet airplanes. I know much more about them know and I know they are very reliable and durable. Today I'd be more afraid of certain airlines, regardless of the airplane in use. Last year I've been flying with Air Algerie ATR72-500 and B737-600. THOSE looked like hell.

11725Flyer wrote:

Anything with a propeller makes me nervous.

That's a pity. I think you're missing out. Almost all of them are turbine engines anyhow, so not really different from a jet. Same basic engine, but with a prop out front instead of a fan.

I will admit, when I am on a prop, I'm not to keen on sitting in line with the blades. So, I just get a seat towards the back, and I am happy. Besides, it's quieter back there.

Not now, but back in the day...
I used to be afraid of flying and I had to move transcontinentally across Australia.
Flew GLT to BNE on a Dash 8-200 and was terrified, was just started to get used to it when it land. Thought I'd be alright for the next flight, BNE to SYD which was on a 767 - which was big and loud and it was a turbulent flight that kept orbiting over Sydney and that ,ade me physically sick. My conclusion after that flight was all jet aircraft are scary.

The next flight was SYD to PER on a 747 and I would not believe it was possible for that to fly, so I refused to get on until my mum dragged me. Thankfully we were upgraded and got to sit upstairs in recliner seats with orange juice so it took my mind off the flying. After that extremely good flight I fell in love with planes and couldn't wait for the final flight to PHE on a BAe-146.

CaptnSnow71 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not REALLY afraid of any aircraft type.
I do have a slight distaste for the 737-900ER, but that's because most of my United flights were on that bird.

Just curious, what made you feel that way? Was it just United's horrible seats or you were afraid of their maintenance/other?

For me, I was never afraid of any particular aircraft. Only time I've ever really been nervous on a plane was a United 777 flight from DEN to LHR, flew through some pretty rough weather that had a lot of people on board screaming. Wasn't the 777's fault though, obviously.

Every single one of my flights was late with 'em, so I was worried about maintenance somewhat.
Of course, Alaska's 900ERs raise no concerns. I'm quite likely and more than happy to take one to Boston this fall

Before my very first flight I was kind of afraid of the 737 which that flight was supposed to be on.
The reason for that was simply that I didn't quite get the distinction between relative and absolute measures yet (I must have been around 10 back then). In the time leading up to the flight there were a few accidents with 737s prominently on the news so it led me to believe that they were way more prone to accidents than A320s or other medium-haul airliners.
The fact that we boarded by bus and upon reaching the parking position I saw the flattened shape of the engine didn't quite help at that moment

Needless to say btw, I'm healed from that.
In fact last year I got subbed from an A321 to a B733 on an LH flight weeks before they retired their last 733 and I could have not been more happy

Many years ago I once combined two fears....Garuda and the Death Cart 10..........was actually quite a nice flight HKG-JKT, helped by continuous Tiger beer from the excellent crew

I was always apprehensive about the Death Cruiser 10... aka DC-10. It had many design compromises, poor hydraulics, and a relatively poor safety record. I also had a flight on a ATR-42 in icing conditions that put the fear of God in me. Ironically, I was rebooked onto that flight after the Dash-8 I was on suffered a hydraulic failure and had to use the alternate gear extension method for the nose gear, and had to return to the point of departure (YYZ).

I also avoided the homebuilt aircraft of some of my pilot buddies and preferred my certified-but-slow Beech Sundowner (now sold).

Beech

beechnut wrote:

I was always apprehensive about the Death Cruiser 10... aka DC-10. It had many design compromises, poor hydraulics, and a relatively poor safety record. I also had a flight on a ATR-42 in icing conditions that put the fear of God in me. Ironically, I was rebooked onto that flight after the Dash-8 I was on suffered a hydraulic failure and had to use the alternate gear extension method for the nose gear, and had to return to the point of departure (YYZ).

I also avoided the homebuilt aircraft of some of my pilot buddies and preferred my certified-but-slow Beech Sundowner (now sold).

Beech

The DC-10 got a bad name in the early days primarily because of poor maintenance/repairs. Mid 1980's onward it was a pretty safe aircraft, once they worked out the bugs.

In the period after USAir 427 crashed but before they identified the cause (which was quite some time if I recall correctly) I was uneasy on 737's. There was an unknown gremlin and that's never comfortable. Felt the same way on them once they identified the rudder issue but airlines hadn't yet implemented the fix. Granted pilots knew what to look for at that point, but you were still counting on them quickly and correctly identifying what was happening and managing it appropriately.

While I loved flying DC-10s, they did give me some pause after Sioux City - the notion that there was a vulnerability such as having all the hydraulic lines pass through one area left me to wonder what other design vulnerabilities existed. I will say that I knew a number of DC-10 pilots and they unanimously loved the plane.

I was afraid of the sound of airplane every take off and landing because it made me dizzy all my head. Should any airline that go his entire body vomiting when landing.

When I was seven I felt uneasy on Airbus aircraft because for whatever reason I thought Boeing was safer! Don't know why to be honest lol.

CaptnSnow71 wrote:

beechnut wrote:

I was always apprehensive about the Death Cruiser 10... aka DC-10. It had many design compromises, poor hydraulics, and a relatively poor safety record. I also had a flight on a ATR-42 in icing conditions that put the fear of God in me. Ironically, I was rebooked onto that flight after the Dash-8 I was on suffered a hydraulic failure and had to use the alternate gear extension method for the nose gear, and had to return to the point of departure (YYZ).

I also avoided the homebuilt aircraft of some of my pilot buddies and preferred my certified-but-slow Beech Sundowner (now sold).

Beech

The DC-10 got a bad name in the early days primarily because of poor maintenance/repairs. Mid 1980's onward it was a pretty safe aircraft, once they worked out the bugs.

Not true. A lot of the accidents were due to a design flaw in the cargo door (it opened outward instead of inward, so with the pressure difference it was vulnerable)

Also, you claim from the mid 80s it was fine?

1989: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ai ... Flight_232
1996: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garuda_In ... Flight_865


Continuing with the MD theme, the aircraft I was most nervous to fly on was the MD11. Beautiful plane, but it was a rushed design and had certain fundamental weaknesses which made it prone to crashing (especially during the short final phase of landing).

I used to fly on the DC-10 often to/from college, AA LGA-BUF -- which just goes to show how old I am!

On my very first DC-10 flight, the brakes jammed and we had to return from the runway to the terminal THREE TIMES for maintenance. And before landing, the captain announced that the 'pneumatics' had failed again and we would simply roll out on the runway and be pulled by a tug to the terminal. I must've looked pale because a stewardess (as they were then known) said to me, 'Don't be nervous, it had nothing to do with making the plane fly.' I said, 'Yeah, but it has a lot to do with making it STOP!'

And then came the cargo door implosions on American and Turkish. After that, I stuck to AA's 727s on the route.

The thought of an approaching swarm of Messerschmitt Me 264 used to keep me awake as a kid. I watched too many war films I reckon!

DC-10 for me as well, I was at the age where I was just starting to grasp what was going on in the world when the DC 10 fleet was grounded, I remember my mother being concerned because we were meant to be flying LGW-JFK on a DC-10, I want to say on B-Cal, but I could be wrong about that, we ended up being on a flight the day after the grounding was lifted.

By that point I seem to remember subconsciously resigned to the fact that I was going to die in a plane crash.

I've never, ever been a nervous flier but my scariest flight was LPB-RBQ on this bird below!



The cabin was so horribly small you had to bend at a 90 degree angle walking down the aisle, feeling incredibly claustrophobic. We are rolling down the runway in La Paz for 60+ seconds struggling to get airborne in the thin mountain air. Finally taking off, there are 19,000+ foot mountain just off our wing tip. Amazingly, after 40 minutes in the air, we then land in Rurrenabaque that is about 50 degrees warmer and 14,000 feet lower!

Thankfully the return flight to La Paz was a CRJ, but I'm never going in a Metro again!

Not aircraft, but definitely certain airlines. I won't fly on Allegiant.

CaptnSnow71 wrote:

beechnut wrote:

I was always apprehensive about the Death Cruiser 10... aka DC-10. It had many design compromises, poor hydraulics, and a relatively poor safety record. I also had a flight on a ATR-42 in icing conditions that put the fear of God in me. Ironically, I was rebooked onto that flight after the Dash-8 I was on suffered a hydraulic failure and had to use the alternate gear extension method for the nose gear, and had to return to the point of departure (YYZ).

I also avoided the homebuilt aircraft of some of my pilot buddies and preferred my certified-but-slow Beech Sundowner (now sold).

Beech

The DC-10 got a bad name in the early days primarily because of poor maintenance/repairs. Mid 1980's onward it was a pretty safe aircraft, once they worked out the bugs.

The poor maintenance procedures led to the loss of an engine, which should have never led to the loss of the entire aircraft. The routing of the hydraulic lines and the use of a cheaper cable/drum system rather than a screw jack were major contributing factors to the AA 191 accident. The departing engine, which was due to an unapproved maintenance procedure, took out the hydraulics on the port wing, which caused the slats on that wing to retract and basically making the aircraft un-flyable, or at least unrecoverable at such low altitude. An L1011 or Boeing suffering the same loss of hydraulic pressure would not have caused the slats to retract. Other factors included AA's engine-failure procedure training which traded airspeed for quick altitude gain. It meant the airplane was brought close to the stall when the crew reacted to the loss of the engine, which sealed their fate when the slats retracted. Accidents are rarely due to a single factor and unfortunately the AA191 disaster had many factors that were basic weaknesses in the aircraft's design.

The Sioux City accident also further emphasized the weakness of the MD hydraulic system design: an un-contained engine failure should not lead to the loss of all hydraulics.

Other major design flaws were the cargo door, and unvented passenger cabin floor so that a loss of cabin pressure (from the failed cargo door) caused the floor to buckle and jam control cables. It caused a near disaster on an AA flight over Windsor, and did lead to the loss of the Turkish Air DC10 near Paris with major loss of life, when the cargo door blew out, the floor buckled and the crew lost control of the elevators.

The DC10 merited it's nickname "Death Cruiser". The MD-11 was not much better.

Beech

11725Flyer wrote:

Anything with a propeller makes me nervous.

You're not alone. A lot of the flying public is scared of turboprops. I'm not sure if it's how visible the propeller blades are while they're spinning or what, or maybe how noisy they are.

CaptnSnow71 wrote:

beechnut wrote:

I was always apprehensive about the Death Cruiser 10... aka DC-10. It had many design compromises, poor hydraulics, and a relatively poor safety record. I also had a flight on a ATR-42 in icing conditions that put the fear of God in me. Ironically, I was rebooked onto that flight after the Dash-8 I was on suffered a hydraulic failure and had to use the alternate gear extension method for the nose gear, and had to return to the point of departure (YYZ).

I also avoided the homebuilt aircraft of some of my pilot buddies and preferred my certified-but-slow Beech Sundowner (now sold).

Beech

The DC-10 got a bad name in the early days primarily because of poor maintenance/repairs. Mid 1980's onward it was a pretty safe aircraft, once they worked out the bugs.

It's actually one of the only aircraft types that has a safety record that significantly improved as the aircraft got older. Ever since UA 232 the DC-10 has had a very quiet life as far as accidents and incidents go.

Beechnut, you are right that it's poor safety record wasn't just due to poor maintenance, I definitely did overlook the cause of a lot of those accidents. But as Kent said, looking 1989 onward, the DC10 has had a pretty good safety record.

Super80Fan wrote:

Not aircraft, but definitely certain airlines. I won't fly on Allegiant.

This. They're an accident waiting to happen.

KentB27 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Anything with a propeller makes me nervous.

You're not alone. A lot of the flying public is scared of turboprops. I'm not sure if it's how visible the propeller blades are while they're spinning or what, or maybe how noisy they are.

Yes, true. I don't like sitting near them in the cabin. They are noisy too. They also tend to be older aircraft? Older aircraft seem to be an issue with quite a few people too.

Not me, but I know someone who, everytime I mention 717 I they launch into a oh not that one.. It is the fact that the engines are where they are. I've flown on them enough times now not to worry about it at all (the fact that you can see the engine intake from your seat at eye level).

Any small aircraft where I can't see out the front window, like the cabins of Beechcraft 1900D or Metroliner for example, would make me afraid simply because I would feel too shut in. Even in a corporate jet, which would be awesome, the flight would have to be a relatively short one, or not be full of passengers, for those feelings of claustrophobia.

I have been in a static display of the RFDS (Royal Flying Doctor Service) or air ambulance, that in real life would be really scary. Life-saving perhaps, but that aside. You can't stand up in them.

Xi An MA-60 in particular (or any other Chinese built airliner for that matter)
I´m usually not afraid of any aircraft type but I took one flight in a factory new MA-60 that was overall in such a bad shape in and out (not maintenance related) that my trust in Chinese skills to build commercial aircraft has gone to zero.
After the flight I was able to take a closer look at the aircraft from the outside and I was shocked.
How can a brand new aircraft be even delivered with significant - visible - "waves" on the fuselage outer skin ???

I´d fly in an AN-24/26 (those being the original design built in the USSR) any day and feel 100% safe but not in a Chinese built airliner. Period.
I´m not going to put a step on any Chinese built airliner again.

When I was growing up, the DC-10 already had a reputation that made people want to avoid it, and that was before AA191 and UA in Sioux City. Having said that, I really enjoyed sitting in J on the MD-11, with its huge windows.

Not aircraft but definitely airlines. I won't fly Allegiant. Less scared and more worried about endless delays or diversions for maintenance on their ancient MD fleet

Allegiant, I also wouldn't fly a turboprop in SE Asia/ Indonesia, that dash cam video from the transasia flight really hit me. A jet can fly above the the worst of the extremely bad weather in that region of the world. I spent an entire climb and first hour of cruise panicky from FRA to SEA on an LH A330 because as we were rolling down the runway a "unimportant takeoff configuration alarm" was blaring in the cabin.

As a child (3-5 years old) my dad would tell me that if we (my brother and I) sat next to the window on the DC9 that we'd be sucked into the engine and turned into a hamburger.

jetsetter629 wrote:

I've never, ever been a nervous flier but my scariest flight was LPB-RBQ on this bird below!

The cabin was so horribly small you had to bend at a 90 degree angle walking down the aisle, feeling incredibly claustrophobic. We are rolling down the runway in La Paz for 60+ seconds struggling to get airborne in the thin mountain air. Finally taking off, there are 19,000+ foot mountain just off our wing tip. Amazingly, after 40 minutes in the air, we then land in Rurrenabaque that is about 50 degrees warmer and 14,000 feet lower!

Thankfully the return flight to La Paz was a CRJ, but I'm never going in a Metro again!

Very interesting, i'm surprised a Metro could get airborne at all from La Paz at over 13000 feet elevation with that aircraft hardly
being overpowered at sea level and those tiny wings. how full was the aircraft ?


The DC1O was a really compromised unsafe design that killed a lot of people before they finally ironed out the bugs.
The MD11 was pretty terrible as well for different reasons, I wouldn't fly on one for any reason still.


Airlines ? I wouldn't fly Allegiant, Korean Air Asiana and a few others I can't think of right now.

Max Q wrote:

Airlines ? I wouldn't fly Allegiant, Korean Air Asiana and a few others I can't think of right now.

I'll add China Airlines, Air France and Egyptair to the list. Probably AirAsia too.

A few years ago I flew the Embraer 110 with Insel Air on a short hop between Aruba and Curacao. I was seated at the very back, where the large cargo door overlaps into the passenger cabin (incidentally it's weird sitting there while the door is open, the entire wall beside your seat feels like it's missing). Anyway after closing the door and departing I noticed I could see clear blue sky and the sea through the door frame..it wasn't even remotely sealed tight. It didn't concern me, if anything the extra 'air conditioning' I was getting through the gap was welcomed.

KentB27 wrote:

11725Flyer wrote:

Anything with a propeller makes me nervous..

You're not alone. A lot of the flying public is scared of turboprops. I'm not sure if it's how visible the propeller blades are while they're spinning or what, or maybe how noisy they are.

I guess the reason most likely is that people think turboprops are really old. I'm a Q400 pilot and a regularly hear people making comments to the senior flight attendant while boarding. Things like "Did this thing already serve during WWII?" or "Now I know why the ticket was so cheap, it's because the plane is so old." are not uncommen. When I tell people, that until about a year ago the Q400 was actually the youngest fleet in my company, people can't believe it, because it doesn't have jet engines. When I tell them, that the sleek looking A320 we're parked next to is 20+ years old, while the lovely bird they're in rolled off the production line in 2010, they look at me, as if I was crazy. So I think they are more afraid of "old tech" than anything else.
Also the flying public has no clue how long airplanes normally fly for. When you ask people, they relate planes with cars and think their first owner will sell them down to a second tier airline after 3-5 years. So somebody who has no connection to aviation will most likely think that a 15y/o aircraft is an old one, while we would consider that "mid-age".

Thanks for the great replies. I'm over my DC-9 phobia, but I do still wonder about the high number of midairs.

The only time I was slightly nervous.....OK a bit unnerved was about 5 years ago from HAM-FRA on a Lufthansa A320. There was a bit storm blown in 200+kph headwinds and this thing and bucking and bumping about and I was watching the wing flex. They'd started serving drinks at tge front of the y cabin. The guy on the aisle got his the rest of us didn't. ..the stewardess had to crouch down and wrap her arms around his arm rest it go so bad for her own safety. I thought shit this is a bit rough but as soon as I thought that I thought what am I worrying about. It's an A320 and furthermore I'm flying Lufthansa with whom I have total confidence in their crews. I sort of relaxed then but was glad to get off in FRA.

When I was a young lad, I had just read Robert Serling's book "The Electra Story". It always made me a bit suspicious of the airplane type as it was only about ten years after the Whirl Mode accidents and solutions.

I would pedal my bike up to the roof of Terminal One in Toronto and watch Electra's coming and going safely, but still ... I wondered. It wasn't until mid 1970's that I finally flew on one. In retrospect, it was a silly fear and had before and since flown on aircraft with a far less stellar reputation!

QXAS wrote:

I also wouldn't fly a turboprop in SE Asia/ Indonesia, that dash cam video from the transasia flight really hit me. A jet can fly above the the worst of the extremely bad weather in that region of the world.

I yetesting, though I don't quite understand your reasoning. First of all, the Transasia was in Taiwan which is not SE Asia or Indonesia, second of all it had nothing g to do with weather or being able to climb above the clouds. They just had an engine failure.

I don't have any fear in terms of flying any type.

If however I was alive over 60 years ago I'd have said I'd be afraid of flying on the BOAC Comet, because of the serious design oversights affecting it.

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

CaptnSnow71 wrote:

2Holer4Longhaul wrote:

I'm not REALLY afraid of any aircraft type.
I do have a slight distaste for the 737-900ER, but that's because most of my United flights were on that bird.

Just curious, what made you feel that way? Was it just United's horrible seats or you were afraid of their maintenance/other?

For me, I was never afraid of any particular aircraft. Only time I've ever really been nervous on a plane was a United 777 flight from DEN to LHR, flew through some pretty rough weather that had a lot of people on board screaming. Wasn't the 777's fault though, obviously.

Every single one of my flights was late with 'em, so I was worried about maintenance somewhat.
Of course, Alaska's 900ERs raise no concerns. I'm quite likely and more than happy to take one to Boston this fall

Were those maintenance delays or something else? Based on the reported dispatch reliability rates, the UA739s are very reliable. The only delay I or my family has had recently on a UA 739 was thunderstorm related (ORD).

Not really "afraid" but I never liked the DC9 and MD80 families. Avoided them when I had the choice.
Today, I also avoid the CRJ family. Just don't feel comfortable flying those RJ. I much prefer the Embraer 170/190

Only Prop plane I've been on, was a SAAB 340 on REX (Australia), flown on it several times. I have never felt comfortable on that bird. I think the vibrations that run through the frame as the engines are bought up to temp / speed. before the props a configured to cut the air, I guess they may be overspeeding to some degree? I've always held a dim view of European cars, so the SAAB was always going to be behind the 8 ball. I think the idea of the Prop coming off and cutting through the cabin might have had something to do with my discomfort, funnily enough, it happened earlier this year and I might have been on the flight had I not chosen to miss a car show that I generally visit every year.

I don't really have an aircraft type that worries me but I have been on individual airframes that made me uneasy. I was on N924DN recently and had a flight full of malfunctions and upon looking at its other flights for the day I found that it had multiple other delays due to maintenance as well. The airplane also just seemed to have a bad attitude to it....airplanes have personalities....

I still don't trust any Russian made or operated aircraft, terrible safety records and even shoddier maintenance/operational practices. In terms of airlines, there are definitely a few I avoid or would feel uneasy flying with.