logo
Ever been worried a nuclear war would ground a flight and stop your holiday? Don't - experts are working to change policies from the 1950s

Ever been worried a nuclear war would ground a flight and stop your holiday? Don't - experts are working to change policies from the 1950s

Daily Mail​12-05-2025

Airlines have taken steps to ensure it will still be business as usual in the event of a nuclear war so passengers can continue to enjoy their holidays.
Experts are now working to change policies from the 1950s which would mean flights go ahead unabated following an atomic blast.
Currently, the rules force the grounding of all civil aircraft worldwide where there is a single nuclear detonation, as it is assumed this would lead to the outbreak of a third world war.
But bosses have scrutinised the restrictive policies saying 'why should [planes] be grounded' in the event of 'nuclear detonation'.
It comes as the deployment of nuclear weapons is now thought be more likely to involve so-called tactical warheads used in a limited role on the battlefield.
And so the insurance industry is devising plans to allow the continuation of flights in regions removed from conflict zones.
The world's largest aviation insurance broker, Gallagher, began interrogating the policy after Vladimir Putin threatened to deploy Russia's atomic weapons against Ukraine in 2022.
And now, talks have heated up further amid the clash between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.
Nigel Weyman, senior partner at Gallagher, said: 'Back when the wording was drawn up, it was assumed that any hostile detonation meant that it would all be over, Armageddon. But what they didn't have in those days was tactical nuclear weapons that vary in size and impact.'
The latest nuclear warheads yield only a fraction of the explosive power compared with the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945.
American B61 air-launched gravity bombs have a yield as low as 0.3 kilotons while the devastating Hiroshima bomb "Little Boy" carried 100kt for a single Trident II missile warhead.
Britain retired its last tactical nuclear weapons in 1998, though Russia is believed to have almost 2000.
And in 2023, North Korea unveiled what it claimed was a tactical weapon, while Pakistan's Nasr missile can also carry a battlefield nuclear warhead.
Mr Weyman said: 'Why should Air New Zealand be grounded in the event of a nuclear detonation in Europe that was quite minor?'
Under the broker's plan, a select number of insurers would evaluate where airlines should be permitted to fly after a nuclear detonation.
The research is aided by analysis from security experts at risk-management specialists Osprey Flight Solutions.
A 15-strong group, which includes Allianz, the world's largest insurer, would gather within four hours of a detonation.
Each carrier would then be given $1bn (£750m) per plane of war cover for passengers and third parties, compared with $2bn or more under existing policies.
But Mr Weyman said the cost of the scheme is less than the price of a cup of coffee per passenger.
It comes as airlines spent roughly $1.3bn (£980 million) on insurance premiums last year to cover about four billion passenger journeys.
Around 100 airlines have so far signed up to the plan.
But other insurance stipulations could put a spanner in the works including a 'five-powers war clause' that terminates cover in the event of a military clash between any of the UK, US, France, Russia and China.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘Son of Concorde' bosses reveal over 600 routes could see flight times HALVED including 3.5-hour trips from UK to US
‘Son of Concorde' bosses reveal over 600 routes could see flight times HALVED including 3.5-hour trips from UK to US

The Sun

timean hour ago

  • The Sun

‘Son of Concorde' bosses reveal over 600 routes could see flight times HALVED including 3.5-hour trips from UK to US

Jamie Harris, Assistant Technology and Science Editor Published: Invalid Date, MAKERS of a supersonic plane have revealed there are more than 600 global routes where Concorde-style speedy flights could slash flying times by as much as half. And a 3.5 hour trip between the UK and US is "absolutely" possible, the company told The Sun. 2 2 Boom Technology has been testing its XB-1 test jet which managed to fly faster than the speed of sound in January. One of the hurdles they've overcome from supersonic flying is the sound. The firm's jet, aptly dubbed the "Son of Concorde", has no audible sonic boom. A number of orders from the likes of American Airlines, United Airlines, and Japan Airlines have already been made for Boom Technology's passenger jet model, Overture. President Trump recently signed an executive order effectively lifting a 52-year ban on civil supersonic flight over land in the US. "While Boom is pleased to see the regulatory pathways to supersonic flight clearing, Boom's business case has never been predicated on regulatory change," a spokesperson for Boom told The Sun. "There are over 600 global routes that are economically viable for supersonic flight—even without going supersonic over land. "Now that rules are being updated to allow boomless supersonic flight over land in the US, additional routes will benefit from speedups. "Boom's supersonic airliner, Overture, will fly transatlantic routes, such as New York to London, at its full cruising speed of Mach 1.7 over water – about twice as fast as today's conventional airliners." "Boomless Cruise enables Overture to fly at speeds up to Mach 1.3 over land without an audible boom - up to 50% faster than subsonic jets - reducing US coast-to-coast flight times by up to 90 minutes. "International routes with overland segments can also benefit from increased speeds." The company also revealed that Overture "remains on target" to get certification from relevant bodies including the FAA by the end of the decade so it can carry passengers. Bosses are aiming to roll out the first Overture in three years, and be flight testing in four. To accomplish that, they expect production of the first aircraft in the "Superfactory" to start next year. WHY DID CONCORDE FAIL? CONCORDE was the supersonic passenger jet considered the ultimate luxury in air travel. Air France and British Airways announced they would be retiring their fleet of Concorde planes on April 10, 2003. The plane had its first commercial flight on January 21, 1976, so was retired after 27 years of service and 50,000 flights. Several reasons led to the decision to retire Concorde. Air France and British Airways cited low passenger numbers and high maintenance costs. By the early noughties, the planes were outdated and expensive to run, despite being incredibly advanced when they were first introduced almost three decades previously. The 9/11 terrorist attack in 2001 majorly impacted passenger numbers, as people opted not to fly. Passenger numbers also fell after an Air France Concorde crashed just minutes after taking off from Paris in July 2000. The disaster killed all 109 people on board and four others on the ground. The plane ran over a small piece of metal on the runway, which burst a tyre and caused an engine to ignite. It was also the only aircraft in the British Airways fleet that required a flight engineer. Image credit: Alamy By the end of this year, they expect to produce thrust during fully-operational engine core tests for Overture's bespoke engine, Symphony. "Boom's current order book accounts for the first five years of production at the Overture Superfactory in North Carolina," the spokesperson added. "Airlines have been very receptive to Overture and the competitive advantages of supersonic travel. "In fact, the passenger research we have conducted indicates that 87% of passengers are willing to switch from their preferred airline in order to gain access to supersonic travel." THE RISE OF SUPERSONIC AND HYPERSONIC There are several types of hypersonic and supersonic jets. A breakdown of what's been happening in the industry and what's expected in the coming years. Talon-A Built by Stratolaunch Reported speeds of Mach 5 The first test flight conducted in 2024 X-59 Quesst Built by Nasa and Lockheed Martin Predicted max speeds of Mach 1.4 The first test flight in 2024 - but subject to delays Venus Stargazer M4 Built by Venus Aerospace and Velontra Predicted max speeds of Mach 6 First test flight in 2025 Quarterhorse MKII Built by Hermeus Predicted max speeds of Mach 2.5 First test flight in 2026 Halcyon Built by Hermeus Predicted max speeds of Mach 5 First test flight by 2030 Nanqiang No 1 Built by China's hypersonic plane programme Predicted max speeds of Mach 6 First test flight in 2025 DART Built by Hypersonix Launch Systems Predicted max speeds of Mach 7 First test flight in 2025

Is flying getting more dangerous? Scientists reveal why so many planes are crashing - as Air India disaster kills 241 on board
Is flying getting more dangerous? Scientists reveal why so many planes are crashing - as Air India disaster kills 241 on board

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Is flying getting more dangerous? Scientists reveal why so many planes are crashing - as Air India disaster kills 241 on board

At least 260 people have died in Ahmedabad after an Air India flight crashed into a building, mere seconds after taking off. The London-bound Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner plunged into a busy suburb on Thursday morning, claiming the lives of all but one passenger. The disaster is the latest in a string of commercial airplane crashes that have sadly claimed the lives of hundreds of people. At the start of the year, an American Airlines flight collided with a military helicopter over Washington, killing 67. Then, in March, 13 people were killed in a devastating incident off the island of Ruatan. According to expert analysis, 2025 has become one of the deadliest years for air travel in the past decade. With only one confirmed survivor, yesterday's tragedy brings this year's total airflight fatalities to 460 in just the first six months of the year. So, is air travel really becoming more dangerous? MailOnline spoke to the experts to find out. While the aviation industry maintains exceptionally high safety standards, the recent string of high-profile incidents has raised concerns that flying may be becoming more risky. The average number of deaths during flights per year currently stands at 284, according to Jan-Arwed Richter, founder of Jacdec, a German consulting firm that tracks aviation safety. That means 2025 has already had almost double the average number of air travel deaths. Mr Richter told Bloomberg: 'This year still has more than six months to go, so this could be concerning if this rate of fatal accidents would go on.' While many people will likely now have concerns about the safety of air travel, experts reassure that flying is not getting more dangerous. Dr Simon Bennett, director of the civil safety and security unit at the University of Leicester, told MailOnline: 'That perception is understandable because safety goes through peaks and troughs. 'So if you take a snapshot at a particular time it can either look like things are getting seriously dangerous or that things are getting seriously safe.' 2025's high level of fatalities comes on the back of one of the safest periods in the history of air travel. Is flying becoming more dangerous? This year alone there have been 460 deaths due to aircraft crashes. The average for most years is just 284, putting 2025 at nearly double the yearly average in just six months. However, experts say that air travel is not becoming more dangerous. Air safety incidents produce big spikes in fatality numbers which skew short-term averages. Over the longer term, air travel is actually safer than ever before. Experts say that air travel is significantly safer than driving or most other forms of transport. In 2023, industry groups found that there was not a single fatal incident throughout the entire year. However, a series of high-profile events starting from the end of 2024 have grabbed the public attention. While these incidents create an illusion of escalating danger, this is not reflected in the statistical reality. As the Air India tragedy unfolded, the UK Air Accidents Investigation Branch published its annual safety review for 2024. This review concluded: 'Commercial aviation remains one of the safest forms of public transport, with global accident rates continuing their long-term decline.' Dr Bennett points out that aviation experts only look at averages over longer periods, to avoid being biased by big spikes associated with single incidents. 'If you take a 20-year snapshot, then air safety is unequivocally improving,' he explained. However, the experts also points out that it is extremely difficult to convince people of this fact. 'You will be safer five miles above the earth than you would be at home, that is a fact. But if you tell the public that they won't believe you,' he said. 'My deepest sympathies go out to those who've been affected, but I would beg the public to consider such events in the widest possible context.' As for what has caused this 'trough' in air flight safety, there may be a number of reasons with economic causes being the most likely. Dr Bennett says that downturns in the fortunes of airflight industries lead to reduced investment in safety which can spark an increase in near misses and incidents. Until the official investigation concludes, it is impossible to confirm exactly what led to the crash of Indian Airlines Flight 171. However, it currently appears that environmental and mechanical issues may have combined to prevent the flight from gaining altitude properly. Dr Sammy Diasinos, an aerodynamics researcher at Macquarie University, says: 'The B787 has very powerful engines and can easily operate if one engine fails, so for this accident to occur, we would be looking at a very rare double engine failure. 'I would expect this highlights an environmental cause rather than an engine or maintenance issue. 'It would be very unusual for two engines on the same aircraft to be on the exact same maintenance schedule, making simultaneous mechanical failure unlikely.' Experts point out that the hot conditions and the flight's full fuel would have meant it needed extra time to gain altitude - something which it appeared unable to do. With temperatures on the runway at 37°C (98°F), the flight would have needed significantly more lift to gain altitude. Additionally, Flight 171 appeared to have both its landing gear deployed and flaps retracted at an altitude of only 600ft (182m) causing it to have a lower lift. Murray Terwey, an aviation lecturer at Edith Conway University, said: 'Aircrew have been known in the past to retract the flap instead of the gear by mistake. 'This, in the early stages of flight, can lead to a significant loss of lift which can lead to an accident.' However, the exact combination of factors which led to this incident will only be revealed in a full investigation by the Indian Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau. The odds of dying in a plane crash are about one in 11 million, but the chances of surviving depend on your seating choice. An aviation expert reveals a 44 per cent fatality rate for travelers sitting in the aisle seats in the middle of the craft, compared with 28 per cent for central rear seats. Doug Drury, a professor at Central Queensland University, said because the aisle seats do not offer a buffer on one side, the passenger will likely be struck with crash properties. Travelers unable to secure the safest seats may have better luck surviving in the middle and window seats of the middle part of the plane. However, the chances of dying in an aircraft accident have less to do with where you sit and more with the circumstances surrounding the crash.

Air France-KLM CEO voices confidence in Boeing 787
Air France-KLM CEO voices confidence in Boeing 787

Reuters

timean hour ago

  • Reuters

Air France-KLM CEO voices confidence in Boeing 787

PARIS, June 13 (Reuters) - The head of Air France-KLM ( opens new tab voiced confidence in the Boeing (BA.N), opens new tab 787 Dreamliner as he expressed condolences to Air India and those affected by the deadly crash of a London-bound passenger jet in Ahmedabad on Thursday. "We still have confidence in the airplane; we have 34 787s in the KLM fleet," Ben Smith, CEO of the Franco-Dutch airline group, told the Paris Air Forum conference on Friday, noting that the tragic accident is under investigation. Speaking at the same event, Airbus ( opens new tab CEO Guillaume Faury also expressed condolences to families of victims of the crash, the worst aviation disaster in a decade. India's air accident agency is investigating the cause of the crash which killed more than 240 people and safety experts have cautioned it is too early to speculate on the causes. India's aviation regulator on Friday directed Air India to carry out safety inspections on its Boeing 787-8/9 fleet, an order showed on Friday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store