One of the problems in aviation, IMO, is that we delve so massively and completely into significant accidents, ie. fatal accidents or even spectacular accidents without fatalities (Hudson River miracle), but as a rule, the industry seems to gloss over the incidents that occur that easily could have been horrific accidents but for the thinnest of margins.
What would our attitude be with this WN incident if the runway was only 3500 feet long or the crew took and extra 2-3 seconds to figure out that something was very wrong, and the airplane ended up rolling off the cliff and exploded?
What would our attitude have been about the DL 767-300 from South America that landed on an ATL taxiway if it had collided with another airliner taxing out for an early AM departure, landing lights out in deference to the inbound landing aircraft?
How much attention would the CRJ at LEX received for taking off on a 3500 foot runway if it had shredded some leaves at the treetops and successfully became airborne?
Suppose the BOS JL 787 battery fire had happened while the plane was airborne over one of the more remote stretches between NRT-BOS?
The safety record of Western air carriers is extraordinary... but the various players... the governments, manufacturers, carriers and crews really need to put much more emphasis on the accidents that didn't happen, but easily could have!