It's NEVER too late to do the right thing. Sadly, it took a tragedy like this to realize that mistakes were made. What's important is to learn from those mistakes and correct them so they won't be repeated in the future. The worst possible thing to do would be to deny or ignore the mistakes that were made and NOT make the necessary corrections.
@@ronc9413 Of course it was a problem also before. There must be nothing unbreakable on the runways, otherwise, guess what?, a plane in trouble could crash into them and explode. Did you notice that he didn't mention Incheon among the airports that will be redesigned? Because it's an intercontinental airport so it doesn't have that s*it, otherwise it wouldn't have had the necessary permits.
@@christopherrobinson7541 Are you aware that they made it out of reinforced concrete with the full knowledge that if a plane had hit it, it would have exploded and everyone would have died?
So it has taken 179 deaths for the Korean Authorities to realize that the localizers in their airports are a death trap? I can understand this if Korea is a 3rd world African country. However for the home of Samsung, LG, Hyundai or KIA to name but a few it's Amazing!
I have always known that South Korea has a very troubling history with commercial aviation, such as Korean Air’s horrendous air safety record from 1950s to late 1990s. But I didn’t realize their airport safety standards are this bad. Hopefully this incident will reveal more potential safety hazards, but these can be challenging to address due to factors like red tape, work culture and corruption.
I feel like there would have been more survivors if it wasn’t for that wall. A similar crash that occurred last year had more luck as there’s no wall so passengers gets evacuated via emergency slides while fire trucks put off the fire.
It's hard to be sure. If the plane had landed at a slower speed, removing the wall would definitely have saved lives. But if you look on a map, there are what look like apartments and hotels about 700 meters past that wall. At the speed the plane was going when it struck the wall, I don't think it would've stopped within 700 meters. Without the wall we might have had an even worse disaster with many people in those buildings (including the guy who shot the "birdstrike video") being killed as well. TAM 3054 overran the runway in Sao Paulo, and struck nearby buildings killing 12 and injuring 27 people on the ground (everyone on the plane also perished). But yes, in general there shouldn't be obstructions past the end of the runway. Right up until other occupied buildings need to be protected.
@@solandri69 Well it doesn't need to be one extreme or the other, a concrete wall or nothing at all. There could still be some kind of structure designed to more "gently" catch and slow down planes like this without blowing them up.
@@solandri69 then why are they removing it all now across all airports in South Korea that has a similar wall? It was not meant as a barrier to prevent planes from going beyond in the first place. The one in charge of setting those up just una1ived himself as per news report. Clearly there’s plenty of space and that grasslands will slow it to a halt like many incidents in the past in other countries.
@@solandri69 they just ordered them removed accross all airports in South Korea. Clearly that wall is just meant to hold those guiding atennas & not meant as a barrier of some sort.
Airports are not supposed to have anything breakable on the runways and that is a rule for all airports. There was no need to kill 179 people to find out, everyone who builds airports knows that. The reason why in South Korea they have those walls in the smaller airports is not because they don't know how to build an airport, but because they are corrupt and someone made money from building those walls. Have you asked yourself why the existence of a wall there wasn't reported on the airport map?
To think of how many people could have survived if that concrete wall wasn't there. People who would have be traumatized but still able to eventually heal and live their lives. But that design of that wall took away so many possibilities.
@@christopherrobinson7541 But were you paid by the Korean ministry to spread this bul**hit? There are no border walls at the airport, at most there is a fence.
Maybe JeJu Air should suspend its passenger operations and focus on its freight operations, rather than the other way around. Nobody ever was overcome by grief because 300 sacks of computer chips and toy cars got burnt up in a crash.
We are this far in technology, yet there`s still no breakthrough inventions in plane safety during emergencies, leaving the poor souls helpless to meet their fate
That was a brick wall on a runway, called a berm because its covered in dirt - many localizer antennae are located there at the end, designed to break away if hit, they are not usually encased in concrete - never should have been there...
I should have taken this incident for them to realize that having concrete walls on runways was a bad idea. You have to be able to think intelligently about this stuff. You can't just wait for stuff to happen.
The location and the construction is compliant with the current ICAO guidelines. The ILS Localizer Antenna Installation was built by the US military when it was an airbase during the 1950's.
@@christopherrobinson7541 Lies, lies, lies. Muan airport was built in 2007. You are spreading lies in all your posts, you are really a paid person from the company that put up that wall. The structures for those antennas must be breakable, it is like that in all the airports where things do not work with bribes.
Another channel with an English name that praises the Korean government... A good move would have been if the walls were not built of reinforced concrete, a good move would have been not to accept bribes from the company that built the walls.
*here in the U.S.A, even small airport dont have barricade at the end of the runway. if the plane skid and hit a house then it just skid and hit a house. nothing more, nothing less. everyone live.*
After the ferry and than this. It show how incompetent the south korean official were. It's suppressing how they can even still functioning to this day.
The real issue is that SK standards are some of the highest in the world it comes down to staff competency, bridging the gap between SK and International standards so tragedies don't reoocur on the positive side they're actively demolishing those structures to improve safety.
So. It was the South Korean Government was at fault by believing that they knew better than the international standard. And I thought that it was only some pilots who thought they knew better from international protocols. Not to mention companies like Boeing he thought they knew better that is why they cost cutted. Can't wait to find out the final investigation regarding the plane. If it was all three factors, pilot, airport and plane, that will be so problematic. It meant that all safety considerations failed.
The installation is compliant with the current ICAO guidelines. The US FAA have stricter regulations. The Korean authorities have said that they will adopt the FAA regulations.
Antennas must be mounted on a breakable wall, not a shatterproof wall. The structures for those antennas must be breakable, it is like that in all the airports where things do not work with bribes. They made it out of reinforced concrete with the full knowledge that if a plane had hit it, it would have exploded and everyone would have died. Airports are not supposed to have anything breakable on the runways and that is a rule for all airports. There was no need to kill 179 people to find out, everyone who builds airports knows that. The reason why in South Korea they have those walls in the smaller airports is not because they don't know how to build an airport, but because they are corrupt and someone made money from building those walls. Have you asked yourself why the existence of a wall there wasn't reported on the airport map?
As long as the government is so concerned about safety at the moment how about impounding all the scooters that go through red lights, pedestrian crossings, on sidewalks. Not going to happen.
I have a suggestion on how to improve landing strips. I think it's high time to create new-model aircraft that will be absolutely safe for flights. 1. It is necessary to add a fire extinguishing system to the landing strip, or to protect passengers from an explosion of aviation fuel. 2. It is also possible to use brake parachutes, which can be added to the tail of the aircraft or any other part, for emergency braking. The same as were used on space shuttles, or which are used when landing space capsules on the ground. Parachutes can also be used in case the engines fail during the flight, to soften the landing of the aircraft. I think this will not be superfluous for ensuring the safety of passengers and aircraft. 3. Landing strips can also be equipped with something like a large air cushion, which will ensure the safety of the aircraft if it rolls out of the landing strip, to soften the stop and avoid a hard collision. 4. The body of the aircraft with passengers should be equipped with materials resistant to fires and explosions of aviation fuel. 5. The aircraft can also be divided into several separate compartments isolated from each other. As is used in space capsules. Something like a train with carriages. And each of them can be equipped with a parachute. If the aircraft is in danger, it will be possible to launch a procedure for rescuing passengers in such capsules that can land safely on the ground. Each capsule can be equipped with a beacon. 6. It is also necessary to facilitate the ability of pilots or aircraft personnel to release the chassis manually, in case the electronics do not work. 7. In an emergency, passengers can jump out of military aircraft with a parachute. Why can't the same method be used in civilian aircraft? It is strange why no one has used these ideas yet, no one has developed such technologies. Probably no one benefits from saving the lives of passengers. Do you think it is impossible to make such safe aircraft? And I think that those who make money on airplanes and do not strive to improve them do not care about saving people's lives. The science of the modern world is so insignificant and scientists are so ignorant that they are not capable of creating a safe airplane? Those who are awarded Nobel Prizes are not capable of creating a safe airplane, but they know how to create bombs and weapons capable of destroying life on the planet. This is a disgrace to all of you! Isn't saving the lives of passengers worth it?
@@alfanika2934 No, he is a guy paid by the Koreans. He is writing nonsense everywhere to justify the presence of that illegal wall. He had the nerve to say that it was built in the 50s by the Americans.
The airlines should also be required to ensure their pilots are properly trained on how to successfully belly land at the beginning of the runway. No shade.
The aircraft approached at 200 kts, the correct speed for a flapless landing. At that speed it would require a 6,000m runway to stop.The runway employed was 2,800m long, hence the aircraft would have skidded 3,200m beyond the end of the runway. There is nothing that the pilots could do in that situation.
The emergency landing of the plane was perfect. There is no other term to indicate how the pilot landed with the plane in trouble: a perfect landing. If the wall had not been there, the plane would have continued to slide until it stopped. It is not true that it would not have been able to stop before the houses that were a few hundred meters away. Whoever built that wall is guilty of murder and massacre. In Korea, those guilty of serious crimes pay public relations agencies to manipulate public opinion, which almost has the final say in trials. This is why you see that there are here self-styled American aeronautical experts who talk nonsense at all blasts, they are people paid to divert the public's attention from who are the real guilties of the disaster.
The emergency landing of the plane was perfect. There is no other term to indicate how the pilot landed with the plane in trouble: a perfect landing. If the wall had not been there, the plane would have continued to slide until it stopped. It is not true that it would not have been able to stop before the houses that were a few hundred meters away. Whoever built that wall is guilty of murder and massacre. In Korea, those guilty of serious crimes pay public relations agencies to manipulate public opinion, which almost has the final say in trials. This is why you see that there are here self-styled American aeronautical experts who talk nonsense at all blasts, they are people paid to divert the public's attention from who are the real guilties of the disaster.
It's NEVER too late to do the right thing. Sadly, it took a tragedy like this to realize that mistakes were made. What's important is to learn from those mistakes and correct them so they won't be repeated in the future. The worst possible thing to do would be to deny or ignore the mistakes that were made and NOT make the necessary corrections.
so they exist in other airports across South Korea as well
They wait until people die to act and change the policy!!!!
sadly yes accdg to the report
@@TheNeighborhoodCatand you believe this horse sh??
Its too late but learn from this mistakes so no more lives wil be in danger😮
They always wait for a tragedy to do anything
Wasn’t problem before. As the saying goes “hindsight is 20/20”……….
@@ronc9413 Of course it was a problem also before. There must be nothing unbreakable on the runways, otherwise, guess what?, a plane in trouble could crash into them and explode. Did you notice that he didn't mention Incheon among the airports that will be redesigned? Because it's an intercontinental airport so it doesn't have that s*it, otherwise it wouldn't have had the necessary permits.
Never too late to improve!
its wild they even thought CONCRETE barriers at the end of runways were ever a good idea instead of proper overrun zones...
The aircraft hit an ILS Localizer Antenna Installation. It is part of the Instrument Landing System and is not designed to be a barrier.
Not designed as a barrier but built in such a way to ensure a plane gliding towards it won't survive the impact. Brilliant.
@@christopherrobinson7541 Are you aware that they made it out of reinforced concrete with the full knowledge that if a plane had hit it, it would have exploded and everyone would have died?
So it has taken 179 deaths for the Korean Authorities to realize that the localizers in their airports are a death trap? I can understand this if Korea is a 3rd world African country. However for the home of Samsung, LG, Hyundai or KIA to name but a few it's Amazing!
Stupidity exists everywhere not just in Africa.
I have always known that South Korea has a very troubling history with commercial aviation, such as Korean Air’s horrendous air safety record from 1950s to late 1990s. But I didn’t realize their airport safety standards are this bad. Hopefully this incident will reveal more potential safety hazards, but these can be challenging to address due to factors like red tape, work culture and corruption.
The debate is over. as always:
actions > words
This bunker was a horrible idea to begin with .
I feel like there would have been more survivors if it wasn’t for that wall. A similar crash that occurred last year had more luck as there’s no wall so passengers gets evacuated via emergency slides while fire trucks put off the fire.
It's hard to be sure. If the plane had landed at a slower speed, removing the wall would definitely have saved lives. But if you look on a map, there are what look like apartments and hotels about 700 meters past that wall. At the speed the plane was going when it struck the wall, I don't think it would've stopped within 700 meters. Without the wall we might have had an even worse disaster with many people in those buildings (including the guy who shot the "birdstrike video") being killed as well. TAM 3054 overran the runway in Sao Paulo, and struck nearby buildings killing 12 and injuring 27 people on the ground (everyone on the plane also perished).
But yes, in general there shouldn't be obstructions past the end of the runway. Right up until other occupied buildings need to be protected.
@@solandri69 Well it doesn't need to be one extreme or the other, a concrete wall or nothing at all. There could still be some kind of structure designed to more "gently" catch and slow down planes like this without blowing them up.
Most would have probably survived like other passengers who experienced similar issues with the plane
@@solandri69 then why are they removing it all now across all airports in South Korea that has a similar wall? It was not meant as a barrier to prevent planes from going beyond in the first place. The one in charge of setting those up just una1ived himself as per news report. Clearly there’s plenty of space and that grasslands will slow it to a halt like many incidents in the past in other countries.
@@solandri69 they just ordered them removed accross all airports in South Korea. Clearly that wall is just meant to hold those guiding atennas & not meant as a barrier of some sort.
This is why we always thank those who sacrificed and died for lessons to be learnt. I'm so sorry this shit has happened. Too heartbreaking 💔
Airports are not supposed to have anything breakable on the runways and that is a rule for all airports. There was no need to kill 179 people to find out, everyone who builds airports knows that. The reason why in South Korea they have those walls in the smaller airports is not because they don't know how to build an airport, but because they are corrupt and someone made money from building those walls. Have you asked yourself why the existence of a wall there wasn't reported on the airport map?
Korea is always reactive not pro-active
A little too late 🙄
Yes but still has to be done to prevent it from happening again.
@ Affirmative
To think of how many people could have survived if that concrete wall wasn't there. People who would have be traumatized but still able to eventually heal and live their lives. But that design of that wall took away so many possibilities.
The aircraft would have hit the airport boundary wall 70m beyond the antenna installation travelling at 150 kts, with a similar outcome.
@@christopherrobinson7541 But were you paid by the Korean ministry to spread this bul**hit? There are no border walls at the airport, at most there is a fence.
Failure in full display
Such dangerous stupidity . Only because ppl died, that they do this. Disgraceful.
Maybe JeJu Air should suspend its passenger operations and focus on its freight operations, rather than the other way around. Nobody ever was overcome by grief because 300 sacks of computer chips and toy cars got burnt up in a crash.
We are this far in technology, yet there`s still no breakthrough inventions in plane safety during emergencies, leaving the poor souls helpless to meet their fate
There is no need for any revolutionary discovery, just don't build illegal walls by accepting bribes.
0:27 why do they need a super Strong concrete base ?
That was a brick wall on a runway, called a berm because its covered in dirt - many localizer antennae are located there at the end, designed to break away if hit, they are not usually encased in concrete - never should have been there...
The base of those localizer are 2 ft thick wide and concrete probably weighing more than 30 tons. No wonder why that aircraft crumbled like a tin can.
@@infinitebeing1119 it's 4-meter-thick actually. Around 13 ft
Only in Korea.
I should have taken this incident for them to realize that having concrete walls on runways was a bad idea. You have to be able to think intelligently about this stuff. You can't just wait for stuff to happen.
The location and the construction is compliant with the current ICAO guidelines. The ILS Localizer Antenna Installation was built by the US military when it was an airbase during the 1950's.
So it was like that in the fifties. The rationale is that it should remain the same more than 60 years later. Brilliant.
@@christopherrobinson7541 Lies, lies, lies. Muan airport was built in 2007. You are spreading lies in all your posts, you are really a paid person from the company that put up that wall. The structures for those antennas must be breakable, it is like that in all the airports where things do not work with bribes.
Their only focus is KPOP and girls thats it
The guilty always try to silence those who speak the truth.
All these comments “it’s never too late” yeah tell that to the 300 dead people families.
💯
179 people died in this accident and not 300.
Are you confusing this with the Sewol incident?
@@thekenthouse6428 His name explains why.
I assume a hydrogen electric powered aircraft would not have bird strike concerns like this.
What's the purpose of that wall ?
To hold in the spirits
a concrete fence at the end of the runway that houses a set of antennas designed to guide aircraft safely during landings
@@paklo9855 to hold off the spirits which will invade Korea
@@thetravelerobserver Antennas must be mounted on a breakable wall, not a shatterproof wall.
Good Move on part of Airport Authority of Korea Unansrered question ia why this model of aicraft was not equipped with an APU or was it.
All versions of the 737 are equipped with an APU and none are equipped with a RAT.
Another channel with an English name that praises the Korean government... A good move would have been if the walls were not built of reinforced concrete, a good move would have been not to accept bribes from the company that built the walls.
*here in the U.S.A, even small airport dont have barricade at the end of the runway. if the plane skid and hit a house then it just skid and hit a house. nothing more, nothing less. everyone live.*
After the ferry and than this. It show how incompetent the south korean official were. It's suppressing how they can even still functioning to this day.
The real issue is that SK standards are some of the highest in the world it comes down to staff competency, bridging the gap between SK and International standards so tragedies don't reoocur on the positive side they're actively demolishing those structures to improve safety.
@@downundabrotha Do tell!
Oh man you wrote 32 comments on this channel. Dude, go outside rather than doom scrolling.
It was very "jejune" to have those impervious concrete blocks at runway's end.
Well better late than never, but it doesn't help those who perished.
Too late? Ya think??
Too late 😔 south Korea 🇰🇷 never forgotten about
It’s already too late no matter what they do.
Playing reactive not actively solving any problems...
Too late.
So. It was the South Korean Government was at fault by believing that they knew better than the international standard. And I thought that it was only some pilots who thought they knew better from international protocols. Not to mention companies like Boeing he thought they knew better that is why they cost cutted. Can't wait to find out the final investigation regarding the plane. If it was all three factors, pilot, airport and plane, that will be so problematic. It meant that all safety considerations failed.
The installation is compliant with the current ICAO guidelines. The US FAA have stricter regulations. The Korean authorities have said that they will adopt the FAA regulations.
Antennas must be mounted on a breakable wall, not a shatterproof wall. The structures for those antennas must be breakable, it is like that in all the airports where things do not work with bribes. They made it out of reinforced concrete with the full knowledge that if a plane had hit it, it would have exploded and everyone would have died. Airports are not supposed to have anything breakable on the runways and that is a rule for all airports. There was no need to kill 179 people to find out, everyone who builds airports knows that. The reason why in South Korea they have those walls in the smaller airports is not because they don't know how to build an airport, but because they are corrupt and someone made money from building those walls. Have you asked yourself why the existence of a wall there wasn't reported on the airport map?
As long as the government is so concerned about safety at the moment how about impounding all the scooters that go through red lights, pedestrian crossings, on sidewalks. Not going to happen.
That's anywhere. USA has that too. Infinitely more jaywalking and homeless too. Impound those as well?
@David-w3v3d You don't impound people. Objects can be impounded. Cars, scooters, etc
Put international sanctions on SK until the issue is resolved.
Korea doing in a year what would take the USA 5 to do.
I have a suggestion on how to improve landing strips. I think it's high time to create new-model aircraft that will be absolutely safe for flights.
1. It is necessary to add a fire extinguishing system to the landing strip, or to protect passengers from an explosion of aviation fuel.
2. It is also possible to use brake parachutes, which can be added to the tail of the aircraft or any other part, for emergency braking. The same as were used on space shuttles, or which are used when landing space capsules on the ground. Parachutes can also be used in case the engines fail during the flight, to soften the landing of the aircraft. I think this will not be superfluous for ensuring the safety of passengers and aircraft.
3. Landing strips can also be equipped with something like a large air cushion, which will ensure the safety of the aircraft if it rolls out of the landing strip, to soften the stop and avoid a hard collision.
4. The body of the aircraft with passengers should be equipped with materials resistant to fires and explosions of aviation fuel.
5. The aircraft can also be divided into several separate compartments isolated from each other. As is used in space capsules. Something like a train with carriages. And each of them can be equipped with a parachute. If the aircraft is in danger, it will be possible to launch a procedure for rescuing passengers in such capsules that can land safely on the ground. Each capsule can be equipped with a beacon.
6. It is also necessary to facilitate the ability of pilots or aircraft personnel to release the chassis manually, in case the electronics do not work.
7. In an emergency, passengers can jump out of military aircraft with a parachute. Why can't the same method be used in civilian aircraft?
It is strange why no one has used these ideas yet, no one has developed such technologies. Probably no one benefits from saving the lives of passengers. Do you think it is impossible to make such safe aircraft? And I think that those who make money on airplanes and do not strive to improve them do not care about saving people's lives.
The science of the modern world is so insignificant and scientists are so ignorant that they are not capable of creating a safe airplane? Those who are awarded Nobel Prizes are not capable of creating a safe airplane, but they know how to create bombs and weapons capable of destroying life on the planet. This is a disgrace to all of you!
Isn't saving the lives of passengers worth it?
*NONSENSE*
@@christopherrobinson7541 I assume you are flying on a private modern jet which is completely safe.
@@alfanika2934 No, he is a guy paid by the Koreans. He is writing nonsense everywhere to justify the presence of that illegal wall. He had the nerve to say that it was built in the 50s by the Americans.
@@bqanto The guilty always try to silence those who speak the truth.
The airlines should also be required to ensure their pilots are properly trained on how to successfully belly land at the beginning of the runway. No shade.
The aircraft approached at 200 kts, the correct speed for a flapless landing. At that speed it would require a 6,000m runway to stop.The runway employed was 2,800m long, hence the aircraft would have skidded 3,200m beyond the end of the runway. There is nothing that the pilots could do in that situation.
The emergency landing of the plane was perfect. There is no other term to indicate how the pilot landed with the plane in trouble: a perfect landing. If the wall had not been there, the plane would have continued to slide until it stopped. It is not true that it would not have been able to stop before the houses that were a few hundred meters away. Whoever built that wall is guilty of murder and massacre. In Korea, those guilty of serious crimes pay public relations agencies to manipulate public opinion, which almost has the final say in trials. This is why you see that there are here self-styled American aeronautical experts who talk nonsense at all blasts, they are people paid to divert the public's attention from who are the real guilties of the disaster.
The emergency landing of the plane was perfect. There is no other term to indicate how the pilot landed with the plane in trouble: a perfect landing. If the wall had not been there, the plane would have continued to slide until it stopped. It is not true that it would not have been able to stop before the houses that were a few hundred meters away. Whoever built that wall is guilty of murder and massacre. In Korea, those guilty of serious crimes pay public relations agencies to manipulate public opinion, which almost has the final say in trials. This is why you see that there are here self-styled American aeronautical experts who talk nonsense at all blasts, they are people paid to divert the public's attention from who are the real guilties of the disaster.
Should install on the control tower!