In a free society every free individual can think up a solution in a totilitan society on the other hand a smaller set of people will make the decision.
I like to think for myself and would prefer to let the question of a solution be handled by as many people as possible and based on reasoning and politely asking instead of appointing a group of technocrats to be worshipped as priests.
But the ruling class is nonetheless going to look after its own and leave you to the dogs. They have nothing but contempt for you. They don't give a shit what your opinion is or how this series of crises will disrupt your life, and the lives of those less fortunate and more precarious than yours.
Someone else with immense capital and assets would buy American Airlines (maybe Steve Ballmer or Larry Ellison would lean into that; Ellison likes airlines). Someone else would buy United, perhaps a major financial firm, private equity.
Capitalism is not ill suited for this crisis. This is not the first time we've seen this. We had Capitalism in 1860-1870 and 1918 as well. What people didn't like about this process in the past, is the way it often consolidates economic returns further, it generates huge winners and losers (in a way that seems to most to be particularly predatory or unfair, as an emotional take), and society often feels taken advantage of by people with vast well-stocked fortunes.
Don't confuse whether it would work with whether people like it or not. It works in fact and we've seen it multiple times in the past, we know exactly what happens: there are big winners (those that were prepared to take advantage) and big losers.
Many people took vast economic advantage of the Civil War, not least of all by buying their way out of serving (hiring legal substitutes). Rockefeller for example did well in commodities at this time, prior to the Standard Oil days.