Airline apologizes for tweeting about your chances of surviving a plane crash

KLM India let us know that people sitting in the back are most likely to survive, but the FAA doesn't think the data provides a "scientifically defensible answer."

Sean Keane Former Senior Writer
Sean knows far too much about Marvel, DC and Star Wars, and poured this knowledge into recaps and explainers on CNET. He also worked on breaking news, with a passion for tech, video game and culture.
Expertise Culture, Video Games, Breaking News
Sean Keane
2 min read
An aircraft in KLM livery

A KLM regional account deleted and apologized for a tweet about your chances of surviving a plane crash.

Steve Parsons/PA Images via Getty Images

Dutch airline KLM's Indian branch apologized on Wednesday for tweeting about the impact of your choice of seat on your chances of surviving a plane crash. The since-deleted initial tweet cheerily informed us that "Seats at the back of a plane are the safest!" before jumping into death rates.

"According to data studies by Time, the fatality rate for the seats in the middle of the plane is the highest," the tweet said. "However, the fatality rate for the seats in the front is marginally lesser and is least for seats at the rear third of a plane."

The "data studies by Time" it cited came from a 2015 article's conclusion that the back middle seats had the highest survival rate (28%), based on the Federal Aviation Administration's 1985-to-2000 accident database. The article also noted that the circumstances of the crash are a much bigger factor than your choice of seat.

The airline deleted the tweet about 12 hours after it was posted, according to The Washington Post, and later tweeted an apology.

"We would like to sincerely apologise for a recent update. The post was based on a publically available aviation fact, and isn't a @KLM opinion," it wrote. "It was never our intention to hurt anyone's sentiments."

Watch this: The electric planes of the future

In an emailed statement, the FAA noted that the data KLM cited was questionable.

"Many people have tried and failed to produce a scientifically defensible answer to this question," an FAA spokesperson wrote. "There are too many variables, and this is the important one -- so few accidents -- that a simple answer is not possible."

KLM declined to add further comment.

First published at 5:07 a.m. PT.
Updated at 7 a.m. PT: Adds KLM response.

A 747 story: The history of the jumbo jet

See all photos