Ironically air travel is safe BECAUSE you are so afraid of it ;-).
A big contribution to the safety of air travel is that people are so fearsome about it. You are not the only one - being confined to a metal tube in an environment where you could not breath and would freeze to death at the same time in the matter of seconds without the continuous operation of life supporting technology, while at the same time sitting on several tons of highly flammable liquid is something that will make only the most unimaginative people comfortable, even though the technology that deals with those risks has become very reliable.
Still, have a look at news coverage of any aviation disaster. Coverage is usually extremely extensive. It damages the reputation of the airline, the manufacturer and possibly the whole aviation industry, because people are so afraid. The response of the modern (western) aviation industry is a commitment to safety that goes far beyond the standards of most other industries. If something goes wrong, then there is (seemingly) no shortage of money to find out what exactly went wrong and what can be done so that this never happens again. Think about the Air France Flight 447 which crashed into the sea in a very remote location. I don't have exact figures, but just by reading through the reports of the search&rescue operation with all the highly specialized equipment you can already guess that the industry spent many, many millions of dollars just to find out what was wrong. The reasons for the accident were discovered, lessons were learned, technology was improved and pilot training was amended, just so that this won't happen again.
Air travel has not always been as safe as it is today. But there were many lessons learned. There is never a "single point of failure". E.g. if a twin engined airplane looses one engine during take-off, it will either be able to stop before the end of the runway or it will be able to take-off on the remaining engine and return for landing safely. This is calculated before each and every take-off and the airplane won't leave the gate if calculations show that this is not possible. Modern jets have at least two, most three, some even four fully independent steering systems. On 22 November 2003 a DHL frighter plane was hit by an ant-aircraft missile in Bagdad. Think about it: This was a military attempt to bring down an airplane. This missle hit it's target, the planes wing was on fire and the plane lost ALL it's redundant steering systems. Nevertheless the pilots managed to land the crippled plane in Bagdad. This shows that even with the complete loss of multiple systems planes are nowadays so well engineered, that it is even hard to crash them on purpose. This is something that terrorists also learned on 11 December 1994 when they planted a bomb on Philippine Airlines Flight 434 which blew up and nevertheless that 747 did not fall apart but made a successful emergency landing.
Airplanes are built to withstand things you never want to live through. They are built to land on water, to land without the landing gear, to continue to fly without fuel and engines. They will continue to operate if the cabin door falls out in mid-flight (you'll get cold and possibly suffer from hypoxia and need to get some treatment afterwards, but you'll survive without any permanent damage).
Nevertheless airplanes are not invincible as it has been demonstrated in history. We know that fire on board is a problem so during certification it must be shown that an aircraft can be completely evacuated in 90 seconds through only half of the doors and materials used in construction must not be easily inflammable. Also pilot training plays a critical role and pilots are trained to avoid risks and always put safety concerns first. Nowadays pilots are trained for even the remotest scenarios: Computers which finally allow the operation of highly realistic flight simulators allow to do training that has simply not been possible a couple of decades ago. On the dark side pilot training is expensive as hell. Actually just operating a modern training simulator is expensive as hell, but it is all "safety first" and this is also because the whole aviation industry knows that a single accident might end in bankruptcy.
Still nothing is 100% safe. Not even lying in bed is safe - the building could collapse on you. And it is not equally safe to fly everywhere in the world. Flying up far north or far south is "easier" than flying in the tropics where weather is much more severe, but most importantly not all countries and airlines share the "safety culture". I'd not feel comfortable with some airlines in certain developing countries either, but you can feel very safe with western airlines (also when they operate in the tropics).
Edit (concerning Europe)
I see that you are from Germany and you wrote your flight is about 2 hours. So you will basically fly over Europe the entire time. Specifically for that area flying is very safe. Computer assisted weather forecasts and advanced weather radars on board airplanes have made weather much less dangerous than it used to be, but it is still of concern. However the dangers over Europe are very very low. Weather is not nearly as severe as in the tropics and things like thunderstorms are usually local and can be flown around. Even if you cannot reach your destination due to weather there are probably 10-20 possible alternate airports on your route, so pilots will divert if weather is a problem. Also in case of any emergency there are always suitable places to land (I have been on a plane where a passenger had a sudden life threating health condition and 15 minutes later we were from cruising altitude on the ground). Also Europe has generally a good safety culture and airlines that are considered unsafe are blacklisted and won't fly in Europe. Europe has a very dense airspace with approximately 1 billion (!) passengers reaching their destinations safely each year. Nevertheless accidents are seldom.
Edit 2 (sharing of learning)
If an accident happened with Air France, does the results are shared with other airline companies like Qantas, and even the small ones like Atlas Global per example ?
Yes these results are shared in details. Not only with other airlines, but even with the public. E.g. the report concerning the Air France crash can be downloaded here. It has 223 pages and goes into a lot of details about exactly what happens and includes recommendations for all airlines world wide to prevent these things from happening again. The recommendations are often picked up by local authorities like the EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) or the FAA (Federal Aviation Agency (USA)) who then withdraw the airworthiness of planes that have not upgraded the airplanes. E.g. as part of the aftermath from the Air France accident:
On 12 August 2009, Airbus issued three Mandatory Service Bulletins, requiring that all A330 and A340 aircraft be fitted with two Goodrich 0851HL pitot tubes and one Thales model C16195BA pitot (or alternatively three of the Goodrich pitot tubes); Thales model C16195AA pitot tubes were no longer to be used. This requirement was incorporated into Airworthiness Directives issued by the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) on 31 August and by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on 3 September. The replacement was to be completed by 7 January 2010. (Source: Wikipedia)
In Germany the BFU (Bundesstelle für Flugunfalluntersuchung) is dedicated to investigating accidents and incidents. They publish their findings here. You'll find that nearly all incidents and accidents are related to private pilots and indeed it is much safer to fly with a commercial airline which have better training, better maintenance and more experience than most private pilots. Nevertheless even those accidents are investigated in detail for the aviation world to learn from.
Note that there even things you'd never noticed as a passenger are already regarded as an incident. E.g. by law each flight must be planned so that the plane as enough fuel to fly to its destination airport, then continue to fly to another airport and land there with 30 minutes of fuel to spare. If a plane lands anywhere with less than 30 minutes worth of fuel in the tank, than this is already an incident which will be officially investigated to find the causes and help the aviation world to learn and avoid these things in the future.
