A growing number of air travelers are describing the experience of flying as something close to intolerable, and the frustration is not just anecdotal. Federal data on delays, lost bags, and damaged mobility equipment reveals systemic failures that have worsened even as airlines report healthier profits. The gap between what carriers promise and what passengers actually endure has become the central tension of modern aviation, and it is widening faster than regulators can close it.
Delays, Lost Bags, and Broken Wheelchairs
The complaints passengers voice most often, including late arrivals, mishandled luggage, and damaged wheelchairs or scooters, are not perception problems. They are tracked month by month by the federal government. The Bureau of Transportation Statistics released detailed performance data for October 2025 covering on-time arrivals, mishandled baggage, and mishandled wheelchairs and scooters across major U.S. carriers. Those same categories appeared in the Department of Transportation’s consumer report for December 2023, which documented surging complaints alongside standardized sections on flight delays, oversales, and baggage handling. The persistence of these problems across reporting periods suggests that airlines have not structurally resolved the operational weaknesses driving passenger dissatisfaction, even as schedules and marketing promise smooth journeys.
For travelers with disabilities, the stakes are far higher than inconvenience. The U.S. DOT Volpe National Transportation Systems Center conducted a human factors study that quantified wheelchair and scooter mishandling and framed the consequences in terms of injury risk and loss of mobility. That research is now informing a federal rule aimed at protecting air travelers with disabilities by clarifying handling standards and accountability. When a powered wheelchair is broken in a cargo hold, the affected passenger does not simply file a claim and move on; they may lose independent movement for days or weeks, miss work or medical appointments, and face costly temporary rentals. This dimension of the “unbearable” experience receives far less attention than flight delays, yet it represents one of the most serious failures in airline operations and highlights how service breakdowns can cross the line from frustration into harm.
Staffing Gaps and Supply Chain Strain
Much of the operational unreliability passengers feel traces back to two structural bottlenecks: not enough air traffic controllers and not enough new aircraft. The DOT Office of Inspector General published an audit finding that the FAA faces controller staffing challenges as air traffic operations have returned to or exceeded pre-pandemic levels at critical facilities. The FAA’s own workforce plans acknowledge that training a fully certified controller can take several years, and the pipeline has not kept pace with demand or retirements. The result is flow-control restrictions, ground stops, and reroutes that passengers experience as random chaos but that stem from predictable workforce gaps, especially in congested airspace where even minor disruptions can cascade into nationwide delays.
On the aircraft side, the International Air Transport Association has documented how delivery shortfalls, massive order backlogs, and planes grounded for engine inspections continue to constrain available capacity. IATA’s reporting on supply chain problems affecting airline performance into 2025 describes an industry flying aging fleets because manufacturers cannot deliver replacements on schedule. Fewer available planes mean fuller cabins, fewer rebooking options when things go wrong, and less slack in the system to absorb storms, mechanical issues, or crew shortages. The Government Accountability Office, in its analysis of delays and cancellations, tied post-pandemic unreliability to causes often within airlines’ own control, including maintenance practices and crew scheduling. That finding complicates the common airline defense that weather and air traffic control are solely to blame, suggesting that corporate decisions about staffing, fleet utilization, and contingency planning are central to why flying feels so fragile.
Shrinking Seats and Eroding Trust
Physical discomfort compounds the frustration of delays and lost luggage. Research on passenger psychology has repeatedly identified cramped seating and feelings of confinement as primary drivers of irritability and conflict on board, especially on longer flights where movement is limited. Some travelers say that flying is becoming unbearable as airlines squeeze more rows into the same fuselage and shrink seat width and pitch. That complaint is not new, but it hits differently when combined with longer tarmac waits, reduced onboard service, and the psychological toll of knowing your bag might not arrive. The cumulative effect is a travel experience that feels adversarial rather than transactional, as passengers brace for discomfort and disruption instead of looking forward to the journey.
Trust erosion runs deeper than any single bad flight. Unexpected charges damage trust because travelers feel misled, and a maze of fees for seat selection, carry-on bags, and itinerary changes can make advertised fares feel like a bait-and-switch. Airlines’ handling of refunds has been a particular flashpoint, leading the Department of Transportation to issue a final rule on refunds in April 2024 that tightens obligations when flights are canceled or significantly changed. Even with clearer rules, many passengers report that securing money back requires persistence and time they do not have. Meanwhile, commentators note that carriers have grown more profitable even as the passenger experience has degraded, a disconnect that aviation analysts describe as a fundamental shift in how airlines view their customers, from guests to be courted to revenue units to be optimized.
Profits, Policy, and the Future of Flying
Financially, commercial aviation has rebounded far faster than its reputation. Industry forecasts from groups like IATA show carriers returning to solid profitability as demand recovers and capacity constraints support higher fares. In a mid-2025 outlook, IATA projected that global airlines would post robust net earnings on the strength of strong passenger revenues and disciplined capacity management. For investors, that story is reassuring: a once-crippled industry has stabilized. For passengers, though, it can feel like proof that their discomfort is built into the business model. When planes are full, ancillary fees are rising, and basic comforts are eroding, the knowledge that airlines are thriving financially can deepen resentment rather than inspire confidence.
Policy responses are starting to address some of the most acute pain points, but they remain piecemeal compared with the scale of traveler frustration. Stronger refund rules, clearer disclosure of fees, and forthcoming protections for passengers with disabilities may gradually rebalance power between airlines and their customers. Data-driven oversight (through regular performance statistics, targeted audits, and human factors research) gives regulators leverage to push for change rather than relying solely on public outcry. Yet the underlying pressures of constrained infrastructure, tight fleets, and profit-focused management mean that flying is unlikely to feel generous or relaxed anytime soon. Unless airlines and policymakers treat comfort, reliability, and dignity as core design goals rather than afterthoughts, the sense that air travel has become “unbearable” will remain less a viral complaint than an accurate description of how the system is built to operate.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
