AN American Airlines Boeing 757 on a scheduled flight crashed into a mountain in Colombia on December 20th last year killing 163 people, mostly Americans of Colombian origin, going home for a Christmas holiday.

In Europe we were shocked at hearing it, but had forgotten the event within a day or so.

Less than two months later a Birgenair Boeing 757 charter flight north of the Dominican Republic in the Caribbean, killing 189 people, mostly German holidaymakers returning home after a midwinter break.

In Europe we were still discussing the event days later and still feel uneasy about it.

Why is our reaction to the two events different? The type of aircraft was the same in both cases: the Boeing 757 is a modern airliner, and despite having entered service in 1982, with some 700 having being sold to 60 airlines, this aircraft had never - before these two events - been involved in a fatal accident. The number killed in both cases was equally shocking.

So, it could not have been the type of aircraft or the number of deaths that makes the difference to the way we feel about the two accidents.

PERHAPS we should come clean and analysis our fears. One airline was American and the other (Birgenair) as Turkish. Do we feel we know the Americans better, perhaps trust them more? Perhaps it is that we have heard of American Airlines but not of Birgenair? Rather the devil you know? That has a ring of truth about it.

The American flight was scheduled and the Birgenair was chartered. Admit it: that's what makes the real difference to how we feel about the two accidents. After all, charter flights are more dangerous - everybody knows that. Right?

Wrong.

Where did that idea come from? It ought to be a psychologist answering this question, not an aviation specialist, because the aviator can tell you the figures do not add up that way; hence the psychological tone of the first few paragraphs.

The most probable reason why there is such a widespread belief that charter flying is relatively less sale is that charter is synonymous with holiday packages, good value, or just downright cheapness. Our socially conditioned logic says: if it's cheap, it must be rubbish.

During 1995, nine jet airliners on scheduled flights were involved in fatal crashes, but no charter jets crashed. In 1994, seven scheduled jet airliners crashed and only one chartered. The picture is similar most years. Scarcely the stuff that charter nightmares are made of.

What is charter flying? We live in the right part of the world to find out. Europe is the world's holiday charter specialist. Nowhere else in the world does charter flying provide such a high percentage of the total passenger traffic - almost 50 per cent. European charter flying, per passenger/mile covered, also happens to be the cheapest form of transport apart from walking and cycling.

Surely this must mean cost cutting and short cuts on safety?

Not necessarily. Apart from the fact that charter airlines are subject to civil aviation authority checks and licensing just like the scheduled carriers, they can offer value through a kind of efficiency which scheduled airlines cannot match. Their aircraft are usually full, where scheduled flights quite often are not. And if a charter aircraft is not full, it is the tour operator who loses, because he has already paid the airline for the seats. That's the difference in the deal. A scheduled airline sells you the seats directly and takes the losses for the unsold seats. Charter airlines also get more flying hours out of their aircraft by flying them at all hours. The cheapest charter departures are in the wee small hours which no scheduled passenger would countenance.

THERE is a component of the package holiday flying business which we ought to concerned about. Think about the "package" holiday flights you have been on. When you booked your holiday, did you know which airline you were going to fly with? Did you ask? Did you care? When you take you seat in the aircraft, had you even noticed by then which airline it was? Did you just assume it would be Irish, perhaps British, but surely an EU airline?

Some tour operators tell you which airlines they usually book you with, but even they make no promises. Most do not tell you anything except where you departure airport is. Look further into the small print and you may find that the operator has even reserved the right to alter the airport of departure. Considering the consumer protection for almost all commodities which we have come to expect as European citizens, it seems odd the tour operator does not have to make any promises about which airline his customers will fly with.

In fact, examples of exotic flying experiences are highly unusual, because the tour operators know if they push their luck too far they will lose customers. Nevertheless, the lack of consumer protection in this area is unjustified, particularly because the air travel industry and the airlines are more liberalised and more global thinking than they used to be, so the chartering of distant foreign airlines is more common.

Governments who care about consumer protection in this market sector could easily insist that tour operators should specify clearly in their brochures which airlines they use.

To put things back in perspective, think just once more of the European holiday flights you have been on: did you ever find yourself on an aircraft which looked old or poorly maintained? If you did, you had an unusual experience, because the aircraft belonging to Europe's charter airlines are, on average, newer and more modern than those operated by their scheduled counterparts.

If this all matters to you, find a tour operator who makes promises about the airlines it uses to fly its customers.

Meanwhile, the reason for the Birgenair accident near the Dominican Republic will not be known until the investigators find the "black boxes" which, despite being in the sea, will probably be recovered. And the stories about the flight being uninsured and not cleared were untrue. It is amazing what people will believe about charter flights. Perhaps if holidaymakers felt they had more control over which airlines they fly with, this particular myth could be dispelled once and for all.