Видео

In other words, the pilots secured the wrong engine. Gotcha.

I would like to know how long it would theoretically take to go from the decision to take the gear down manually, to the gear being down and locked. The right seater turns around, opens the access cover, pulls the 3 cables in series, and the gear drops- how long would that take? Not being critical, just curious if a last-minute manual gear drop could have worked, allowing braking from (if nothing else) accumulator pressure if they hydraulics were all dead. This also could have slowed them down a bit due to the drag. Mostly, I just want to know why they didn't continue the landing as I believe they were already configured for landing when the emergency began.

Why couldn't the pilot input hard right/left rudder to avoid the concrete structure assuming they had adequate speed & rudder authority?

Absolute rubbish! FAA has decertified this approach for it did not meet regulations. All parties are currently before the court: Town of Burley, Burley Airport Authority, Potato Plant, FAA & NTSB are named in lawsuits for negligence. To suggest a haircut be contributing factors is idiotic!

Had the APU been started? If not, why not? Also no excuse for the gear not being down. There are 3 manual release handles in the floor in the flight deck. They work no matter what the aircrafts power state is. Gravity drops the gear when you pull the handles. I've done it in anger. Question is, why did they go around in the first place with multiple bird strikes. Landing would have been the best option.

The only explanation for solid concrete structures being built at the end of runways is corruption and bribery

I think the construction on the other end of the runway was their decision to land the other way.

Everything you just rattled on still doesn't explain why the engines appeared to be full throttle down the runway.

Great video. I flew the 737 for 8 years. Awesome to see and hear such good insight. 👏🏻👏🏻

Why tip-toe? TRUTH! Male pilot = Idiot who didn't follow procedure. Female pilot: Exhaust stacks not painted. Young female pilot: Poor girl, exhaust stacks were at illegal height and not painted! Young attractive female: How could they put oversized exhaust stacks in her line of flight that weren't painted and not listed correctly according to their height??? Who puts exhaust stacks at the end of a runway? The city caved to the potato industry to illegally allow exhaust stacks that were too high and too close on the runway centerline. Her company ought to be ashamed for allowing this airport to be flown in IFR! She was murdered by the potato manufacturing industry and we will sue them for $millions. The FAA should have shut down this airport and filed lawsuits against the NTSB and FAA! THIS WAS NOT HER FAULT!! Her family is suing the airport, the city, weather predictors, the NTSB, the FAA, potato industry, potatoes, people who eat potatoes, exhaust stacks installers, the city, the county, and those who fueled her plane. That's how this shit works. Word.

Scully's lesson... APU, APU

Stupid birds.🐦

New update for yall. The head of the company that was in charge of the concrete reinforced dirt mount at the end of the run way is found dead. There is a lot of stuff going on in Korea and some controversies include that there is political force behind death of the CEO.

If they’d not landed precipitously this may have been avoided. Bird strike did not bring this plane down, it did not cause loss of power. The pilots got rattled and lost their focus/control, landed backwards on the airstrip.

Excellent presentation!

Jeez, you can clearly see her ejected from the cockpit. 10:57-10:58 she is just slightly above the hull, arms or legs clearly visible. How horrible.

excellent (if fast, for the non-native speakers ;-) )explanations! Thank you!

The director in charge of safety at the airport killed himself today

I have a different theory and that is you are deleting comments to fit your theory why is that? are you another common gaslighter like youtube and the gov? yes maybe you shouldn't be on youtube since you are dishonest.

Thank you for letting me know. Ant

It might surprise the flying public that actions like Alternate Flap Extension (with switches above and behind the captain's head; who is also controlling the aircraft on this occasion; probably), may only be practiced once during initial Type Rating. The standard mantra of the media and sadly of many 'expert' pundits is, "Pilots practice this all the time in the simulator" and this is simply not true. I wish they would stop saying this. I believe the phrase is trotted out in order to make the flying public feel more secure. But it's a falsehood. This does not mean that pilots do not have a complete knowledge of the systems (they do, though they need constant revision), but almost nothing that happened to this crew required a 'memory item' response ie an instinctive, trained response. In fact committing to memory of lengthy checklist items is discouraged; although it's worth having a few up your sleeve), but all the emergencies that arose for this crew required a detailed checklist procedure. Certification and crew training do not allow for multiple failures except in very limited circumstances. Once you're in a multiple failure situation, particularly involving total, or near total thrust loss at low altitude, then you are in the hands of the gods and have to come in on a wing and a prayer. To me, it's a miracle that they didn't stall/spin on the base turn, although tge outcome was sadly the same. They did a brilliant job just to reach the runway. So tragic that fate and Murphy's law intervened.

At approximately 11:40 in the video you describe the standby hydraulic pump in the 737 as supplying standby hydraulic pressure to all the flight controls. This is incorrect. The standby hydraulic system only supplies pressure to the standby rudder power control unit. If both hydraulic systems are lost the aircraft is hard to control but flyable by cables. If the left engine is running (this assumes no damage to the accessory drive and hydraulic pump/system) all the flight controls are hydraulically powered and normal landing gear extension "should" be available and ground spoilers. With the precision the aircraft was flown it looks like there is hydraulic pressure to the flight controls through the A system. Additionally, the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) is powered from No 2 AC transfer bus. If this engine is running, AND the generator is working the CVR "should" have power. The flight data recorder is powered by DC Bus 1 and AC Transfer bus 1. Turning off the battery would have stopped this system. It seems that many of the issues may have been caused by either turning off the battery (unlikely/accidentally), or (more likely) through a complete DC system failure. This would explain the loss or radios as well. I find it unlikely they didn't make any more ATC transmissions.

Way back in the 80's I gained a PPL(A) before finishing an ATPL... Roughly as follows, 16hrs 1st solo, (PA28-140, 160hp)...( I remember wondering what the hell was I doing up here on my own....!!) 64hrs PPL(A), 95hrs IMC and Night ratings, EASA BCPL @ 200hrs And EASA ATPL @ about 400hrs (I think).......... If my record had been remotely like this guy, I'd have given up voluntarily......As I'd have been unemployable anyway.. In Europe this guy wouldn't have even attained a PPL(A)............ Something is very wrong here..

Landing looked completely survivable with minimal airframe damage. Until they hit a wall shortly behind far runway threshhold.

But you can still use gravity to put the gear down Edit: Sorry, commented before watching the full video

Synthetic vision

I was shocked to find that this incident occurred close to our corner of the world. I have absolutely no recollection of it. What a punch in the gut. This fatal crash was so unnecessary. I certainly hope that the spud plant is brought to account for its failure in completing the recommended paint scheme. That fact rightfully contributed to this crash to some extent.

Question for you 737-800 pilots If the crew did get the gear down manually and now they put it down to the tarmac how do they slow down with no reverse thrust and flap selection please ??

I pick up potato flakes and slices from that plant regularly. It’s GEM State Processing. Such a tragedy.

Aborting a stabilized approach for a bird strike does not appear a rational decision.

If the ILS berm has not been there are the plane would of crashed through the concrete perimeter fence of the airport in theory what would of been the damage? Looking at Google Street view of the area it looks like the wall is about a foot thick, then 1800 feet of approach lights. I'm guessing approach lights since that side of the runway is technically the landing runway. I know people keep mentioning the structures on that side, which is a group of hotels. They are about 3000 feet from the end of the runway, but it would of probably been unlikely for the plane to hit them because if you look at street view of the area there is a hill that the hotels are on the other side of. I'm also curious as to the damage the approach lights would of caused, looking at the street view they look pretty tall, and the bottom half of each of them is a pretty big solid steel base. I would have to imagine an airplane at high speeds hitting those would slice up the plane. There are 20 of them spaced 100 feet apart. I don't claim to be an expert by any sense of the imagination, but it seems like with or without the berm this would of been a fatal crash. Maybe not 179 people would of been tragically killed, but there definitely would of been a loss of life.

Your analysis is the most sound except I think they had no brakes so why would they roll on wheels without brakes as you said system B was out and A and no power so no brakes

They did everything with full control look at the landing perfect they chose not to roll on wheels with no hydraulic brakes after system B lost fluid volume and pressure and no system A and no power, Captain knew they would never stop and would have cartwheeled into and explosion

Saying "crash caused by birds" is oversimplifying the situation. Far more of a factor is the pilot's reaction to the bird strike. Planes hit birds all the time and there are procedures to deal with such eventualities. The simple truth is they were on short final and made the decision to go around instead of continuing an approach they were configured for. They pulled the gear up, cleaned up the plane and deviated from the plan unnecessarily. Like all Asians, Koreans are very much about "saving face". At this point we still don't know who the pilots were, their level of experience or anything else. That kind of tells me that someone is "saving face" for them. That would only happen if the investigation was leaning toward pilot error. There are very few catostrophic events in airplanes where staying in the air makes things better and when you are already very close to the ground you don't have time to wait on things to get better. These pilots panicked and did a go around before they even had a chance to think or assess the condition of the aircraft. It is a crying shame but burying the truth to save face just means it will happen again.

why can't the engine intake be protected from birds with some kind of screen, maybe cone shaped, to deflect debris from entering and destroying the engine?

Are the towers pointed out on the paper flight map? Criminal penalties for failing to paint them??

5:19 there’s a video with audible compressor stalls for a few seconds leading up to this clip

Very excellent system review, and a most tragic result. Still, through 500 feet on final approach, they were, likely, fully configured to land (the video of the #2 engine compressor stall showed some flap & slat extension, can’t make out the landing gear config, but …) why they did not simply continue and land the airplane is a huge question to me. I never flew the NG but have many thousands of hours on the -200 and several other transport jets. Add whatever thrust can be mustered and continue the descent and land! They were less than 2 miles from the runway and configured to land … carry on and put ‘er down. They had a real issue to be sure but landing straight ahead would have surely been the best course of action. Very sad result and such a tragic loss of life. I had a bird strike by the outer marker on an A320. The FO was flying and suggested turning to avoid a flock of hawks. I said to just continue and we got one hit, no engine issues thankfully, but it’s far better, if you can, especially if a power loss is experienced, to continue and land, rather than attempt a go-around, in my opinion.

If they climb at a 1,700ft per min rate after the bird strike to initiate the go around, doesn’t that confirm right there that they at least had power to one of their engines?? I’m not speculating any sort of conspiracy theory nonsense or anything… But I must say, there are a lot of things not adding up with this accident. There’s so many odd details (or rather, lack there of…)

Why are these engines so vulnerable to shredded bird meat?

Thank you. Great video.

The birds only caused the plane to make an emergency landing. It didn't technically "crash".because of a bird strike. It ran into wall once on the ground. Don't blame the birds for that wall!

Retired cargo transport Pilot here. You know a lot, Please use your pilot uniform so we know you are qualified more than the others commenting about accidents..

Fly the aircraft... don't Let the autopilot fly you

What is the latest news about the 2 survivors?

A case of deliberately botched up investigation to cover up inconvenient truths.

FCOM electrical system - All generators INOP - Hydraulic pumps do not run off the standby system, the only thing related to hydraulics that run off the standby system are: Engine Hydraulic Shut Off Valves and Standby Rudder Shut Off Valve. So without AC power from the main busses, it is impossible to run any hydraulic system without the engine driven pumps. Provided engine 1 failed, engine 2 would have been responsible for gear and flap retraction via the engine driven pump despite engine 2 surging.

His is best described of accident rip victims peace to families

Very good informative video and good to hear someone who doesn't blame the pilots, everything happened so fast it was a very stressful situation and the main cause for the accident and deaths where not the pilots. Scary birds can break a plane like this though.

Likely the crew were battling a cascading series of airframe issues, including multiple bird strikes, leading to catastrophic loss of performance. Armchair experts ignore it was company policy to go around on unstable approach. Likely an additional bird strike or continuing airframe issues caused the go around to be abandoned to last ditch emergency landing attempt. Makes my blood boil all the armchair experts rushing to blame the doomed crew with little info