The wall shouldn't be there, but that isn't what made the 'plane explode, in front of the wall was the locator beacon for the ILS system, they put the beacon on a 6-foot berm for some unknown reason. The 'plane hit that berm at around 140mph. It was already in flames when it hit the wall.
Great expert. What he didn't say because he's too classy is that, while victims' families should be respected and kept informed up to and beyond reasonable expectations, they are often -- though not always -- terrible arbiters of how well the investigation is proceeding, especially in these early phases.
This plane, the day before, flew from Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, to Muan, South Korea, then to Taipei, Taiwan, then back to Muan, then to Tokyo, Japan, back to Muan, ending the day in Bangkok a few hours before this faithful flight. It was quite the workhorse.
You've done your homework! That plane was definitely on a whirlwind tour. It's amazing to think about all the places it was in just the day before. Thanks for sharing that info!
The 737 800 at least WAS prpbably the safest plane ever built. This crash will probably alone skew the data, but its the only plane europes ryanair flies and they have never had a serious crash in their entire history. Idk i tend to think this might be maintainence and or pilot error. As tragic as that is.
I also just found out from a Korean comment on another channel that this airport (Muan) was rarely used (30,000 pax per year), given they have a main airport just 30 mins away. They started or reorganized for International flights only a few weeks ago, Dec 17. No wonder, that concrete wall or mound... also that cinder block perimeter fence beyond it (not the typical chain link fence) is unusual.
So many things didn't work in favor of to this plane. Bird strike, a possible pilot error whereas turning off the working engine instead of the damaged one, ground effect upon belly landing, and the fatal one is that localizer foundation made of poured concrete and elevate above ground at the end of the runway.
Great explanation by Korean news on what might’ve happened: ruclips.net/video/PtdULdDdYtg/видео.htmlsi=T3YkLXpEuEZADXpB the localizer was also at the beginning of the runway (not end) and there’s another concrete wall encompssing the entire airport right behind it so wall didn’t kill them, it was the speed and pilot landing nearly halfway on the runway from opposite direction
@ElwynnForest Thanks for the video. You are right, the localizer is at the beginning... of runway 01 (a.k.a starting end). But since the plane can't make it and made a go around and try to land on runway 19, the elevated localizer is at the end of it (opposite end). This elevate localizer with poured concrete foundation wall design is proven deadly. Most airport design has the localizer at ground level and collapsible.
It'll be clear when the black box analysis comes out, but here's the scenario I'm thinking of. 1. Two engines were lost because of a flock of birds. The engine stopped, so it started losing power and the control key hardened. 2.There was no power to turn while going around the runway, and the pilot had to land in a hurry in the reverse direction even at the halfway point of the runway. 3. So there was no time to unload the landing gear, and the crash landing was successful, but the acceleration was high. 4. And at the end, there was that deadly concrete wall.
Thanks for sharing your detailed scenario. It paints a picture of a very challenging emergency situation. As you mentioned, the black box analysis will be absolutely crucial in determining the exact sequence of events, including what happened with the engines, the pilots' decision-making process, and the condition of the aircraft's systems.
Not sure this is apparent but it did occur to me today. Not one single person on that plane would have known their fate. They may have been breathing a sigh of relief that they had landed and were still ok. Unfortunately, the pilots would have felt the most fear.
From a Korean comment on another news channel, I just found out that this smaller airport was rarely used since it was built (30K pax per year) because the main international airport (Jeju International) is only 30 minutes away. Muan reorganized for International flights only this year, Dec 17.
You're right to bring up the wall. Ideally, airports have what are called Runway Safety Areas (RSAs) beyond the end of the runway. These are cleared, graded areas designed to provide a buffer zone if an aircraft overruns or undershoots the runway. The presence or adequacy of an RSA is definitely a factor that would be looked at in an investigation. There are FAA and ICAO standards for these safety areas, which vary depending on the size and type of aircraft that use the runway.
@@DIVINEFRIENDSHIPNEWS The layout and distances are almost identical to my local airport- with a small road and about a half mile of flat open ground beyond just like this airport- only no walls, just a chain-link fence that wouldn't stop a car, far less a plane.
Jeju airlines is a fantastic budget airline with a very strong safety record. Very friendly and experienced crew. I Flew with them many times. This is just so devastating personally.
This has nothing to with Boeing, or its aircraft. This is pilot error for not flying, and landing the airplane first. A bird strike is a totally normal occurrence. The wall didn’t help.
I think the pilot or pilots panic after the bird strike. The landing gear should have no problem being released. It is also quite difficult to imagine the bird strike could affect the hydraulic systems controlling all the navigation systems which raised a lot of questions on the approaching speed, the landing distance, and the decision to land despite the barrier at the end of the runway.
6:22 She was asking how rare it is to have surviving crew perspective. FA's aren't primarily servers of drinks, they're trained in safety and cabin procedures, sometimes more. They would have a more informed perspective on what happened in-cabin, what orders the flight crew gave and when etc.
That's the point, if a bird strike puts out that one engine, it can still fly with the other. The engines also have no correlation to the landing gear. It also looks to me like no reverse thrust was implemented after landing and the reason for this may have been because if one engine went reverse thrust, it would have spun off the runway. This is called asymmetrical thrust and considered dangerous. This leads me to believe there was insignificant planning involved between the pilot and control tower in regards to a longer runway if landing with no landing gear. I'm baffled about the non landed gear and the bird strike....doesn't add up
*back in the days, the U.S.A army declare war on bird because the birds down their plane more than the enemy. Many birds where almost wipe to extinctions.*
It doesn't, usually. Just conjecture at this point but my thinking is: It was, from the time of the bird strike to the plane landing was no longer than 6 minutes which means they didn't do the relevant checklists to get the plane configured for landing with landing taking into account the issues they had. Both pilots under heavy work load probably rushing to get back to the airport to land, didn't do the checklists which means they forgot to configure the plane for landing by lowering the gear and extending flaps. It's very interesting since these checklists are drilled into them in training. If you have an issue after take off unless the plane is on fire or in imminent danger where you just want to come straight back in. you normally ask for some clear airspace to run through checklists and configure the plane for an emergency landing. When you don't follow the checklists and you are under a high stress situation like this, it's very easy to miss things...That's why they were introduced after all.
All airports runway should have a Runaway lane help prevent accidents when landing gears fail. Simi-trucks have that on freeway to stop the truck when break fail. My condolence to the families who have been affected !
You're right, bird strikes are a real issue for aviation safety. They can cause significant damage to aircraft, particularly the engines. There have been a number of incidents over the years where bird strikes have led to emergency landings or other serious consequences. 2008 was the year of the "Miracle on the Hudson" incident in New York, which was also caused by a bird strike. There may well have been other incidents that year involving birds.
@@cccold-q8e This type of plane doesn't have the ability to dump fuel. Usually pilots would simply spend time in the air to burn off fuel in preparation for landing, even in emergency situations, but clearly they didn't have time (or perhaps it was pilot error) in this case.
Like thank you! As an European, it’s honestly frustating hearing that while watching the news, you never know how much we are talking about?! And those stupid cups to make muffin!? You should convert to the international measuring system, seriously😂.
I hear you! It can be a bit jarring to hear imperial units used, especially since most of the world uses the metric system. In aviation, feet are still commonly used for altitude, and knots (nautical miles per hour) for speed, even internationally. This is partly due to historical reasons and the long-standing use of these units in the industry. However, many other measurements in aviation are indeed metric. Also, the FAA has considered a transition to metric, but there are significant logistical and cost challenges to overcome.
Design failure of putting that wall there. Shouldve been underground like everywhere else. Everyone wouldve likely survived yet korean government scared to talk about that wall:
I can not believe that in the verge of 2025 a bird in a turbine will bring a whole plane down. I cannot believe that there aren't any good methods to save the lives of passengers and crew members! There have been multiple solutions proposed and nobody is taking them seriously!!
18 дней назад+1
There wasn't a wall on on the runway ...it skidded OFF THE RUNWAY. You people act like there was a concrete wall smack dab on a runway.
This may end up being pilot error on not deploying landing gear. Loss of one engine will not result in loss on hydraulic power. There is also an APU that will provide hydraulic and generator power in ghe event of total engine loss. Indicator lights would tell pilots that the landing gear is not deployed..
I heard from independent aviation industry insiders and experts that this horrific tragedy came as no surprise as the Boeing manufacturer's quality has been hugely compromised over the last decade by the employment of huge numbers of poor quality Indian technical workers who took every opportunity to cut corners resulting in many defective parts for the aircraft and so Boeing and it customers are now starting to pay a heavy price for such a huge personnel recruitment mistake!
You're right, the "black box" is built to be incredibly tough - surviving impacts, fires, and deep-sea pressure. However, making an entire aircraft that resilient would present huge engineering challenges. The materials that protect the data recorders are extremely heavy. A plane made entirely of those materials would likely be too heavy to get off the ground, and if it did, it would be incredibly fuel-inefficient. Engineers are always researching new materials that are both strong and lightweight to improve aircraft safety and efficiency.
Flying may be statistically safer but not based on survival rates per accident. On average, there are 3,287 car deaths per day internationally. More than 94% of all vehicle accident deaths are caused by user error. Road traffic crashes remain the leading killer of children and youth aged 5-29 years. One person is killed every 26 seconds on average due to road traffic injuries. Would you rather drive or fly?
Hi CNN, Wasn't the problem neither a bird strike nor a landing gear failure, but a wall-like structure at the end of the runway that should not have been built there? the failed design of the airport, so to speak, the final piece of this disaster?
@@ikea5619 Yes, they did have to go around and land in the opposite direction, but actually it wasn't the perimeter wall they hit, it was an ILS berm. They did not make it to the wall, after exploding on impact with the berm.
Landing gear and flaps were not down. Bird strikes don't cause belly landings.Pilots may have been flying long shifts given the plane's schedule the previous day. Wall at the end of the runway....it will take a while for things to get sorted !
To you people saying birds don’t take planes down. Did you forget about US Airways flight 1549 or the “Sully” movie? Birds can definitely take planes down (especially geese) CPT Sully had to land the airplane on the Hudson River in New York back in 2009 after a bird strike. My issue is the FUCKING design of the airport. How are you going to put CONCRETE WALLs anywhere near a landing strip? We have gates at airports but they are wire gates that can easily be taken down by a plane with no issues.
A 'belly up' landing? ---- I think it slid along the runway quite well, but it was no match for the cinder block defense at the other end holding position.
The big mound and wall was built there because previously typhoon took out the antenna so the airport ceo said to build that wall and reinforce it as much as concrete as possible . As usual ceo is responsible for innocent deaths.
Puzzles me how such an incredible design could be crippled by a bird 🐦. This bird must have had a serious high level of IQ. 😢 Knew exactly where to strike. 😔
@@bnsmit14 where in my statement do you see Boeing? Are all of the planes that have suffered bird 🐦 strikes Boeing? Please, read to understand. How many lives to date according to records, have been lost due to bird strikes on aircrafts? Bird, bird, BIRD, NOT BOEING, BIRD. Please 🤦🏼♂️.
The birds were just the start of a series of unfortunate events. Personally, I think the bird strike led the pilots to panic, which escalated the issue. Then on top of all that, the airport was poorly designed with the wall at the end of the runway.
😮 The Muan Airport in South Korea, where the recent fatal accident occurred, did not have the Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS). The accident, involving a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800, raised concerns about runway safety and the absence of systems like EMAS.
That's a very profound point, and it's a crucial consideration in any industry, especially one like aviation where safety is paramount. Ideally, safety margins should be determined by what's needed to protect human life, not by what's most cost-effective. It's a constant challenge to find the right balance, and it's something that regulatory agencies, manufacturers, and operators need to be continually vigilant about.
The pilots overcame the bird strike/landing gear failure and landed the plane onto level ground. A hard obstruction was on the runway and disintegrated the aircraft.
Your comment touches on the tragic irony that can sometimes occur in aviation accidents. If this is based on a real incident, the investigation will certainly be focused on understanding how such an obstruction could have been present on the runway and what can be done to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Your comment touches on the tragic irony that can sometimes occur in aviation accidents. If this is based on a real incident, the investigation will certainly be focused on understanding how such an obstruction could have been present on the runway and what can be done to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Pilots didn’t overcome anything this honestly seems like pilot error. Landing gear wasn’t down when all they had to do was pull the manual gear release. From the video it looks like a bird strike caused a compression stall in engine 2 which shouldn’t be an issue, a 737 can fly on one engine. It seems very strange that a single bird strike would lead to a loss of both engines and all hydraulic power, but they were still able to control the plane down to the ground?
Bird strike didn’t cause hydronic issues with landing gear, it caused issues with the left engine (on camera). Also if there were issues with the landing gear, there are several ways to try to get it down, which the pilots did not try . They landed anyways
Making runways larger isn't a solution. All runways and aircraft are designed for certain types of operations. There is a margin of safety built into each flight. This runway had obstructions which were not supposed to be there and were not designed as per ICAO standards. That's why there was so much loss of life
The runway at Muan International Airport is 2.8 kilometers long. A Boeing 747 needs a minimum of 1.5 kilometers to make a safe landing. The runway is plenty long enough for the Boeing 737 and virtually all Airbus airliners. Real estate -- and that includes runways -- is very expensive. Mandating runways that are "4 or 5 times" longer would mean closing down many, if not most, airports around the world and end in the collapse of the airline industry. Because you can land a 747 easily at Muan, landing a much smaller 737 is that much easier. Landing requirements vary, too. If the runway is wet, or other issues are present (how hot the day is and the altitude of the airport itself) an airliner may need more runway length to land. For takeoff, a plane may need a longer runway, too, especially if is heavily loaded and which directly the wind is blowing. But 2.8 kilometers should be long enough to handle any 737 taking off or coming in to land, regardless of the temperature, wind direction, rain, and weight of the aircraft at takeoff or touchdown. One continuous issue at Muan (and other airports near large bodies of water) is its location near to the ocean -- with the presence of large numbers of birds. One issue specific to Muan was the erection of a concrete wall over an earthen mound for the placement of the instrument landing system (ILS) antennas close to the end of the runway. While most planes apparently land in the opposite direction, the pilots of the destroyed aircraft simply did a u-turn when they aborted their first landing attempt (after the bird strike) and then came straight in. The craft showed neither deployed flaps on the wings or lowered landing gear to prepare for the landing. Were the pilots unable to deploy these crucial items, or did they forget to do so in a panic? Landing gear on the 737 do not need functioning electronics or hydraulics to be deployed. Pulling levers on the deck near the first officer's seat will automatically deploy the gear using gravity. Why was this not done?
Same for me. They have an international airport just 30 mins away from Muan. Apparently, this smaller airport started International operations only this month according to a Korean comment from another news channel.
I would understand if it's a flock of birds.. That the plane can't almost be seen, or move. But in thr videos, there is just one 😢.. So don't blame everything to the bird. Their must be an engine error, the wall, the pilot error (sorry to mention may his soul rest in peace). I pray for the souls of the dead. I pray for their families' strength.
It’s a number of things, not just one. You first see an error as they slowly started to descend. There was a stall in the left engine (seen on camera) by possible bird. That has nothing to do with the hydraulic landing gear though. Instead of the pilots staying in air to assess the situation, they decided to just bypass it and land. The localizer antenna placement is a major no no in the states for that reason that took place in the crash. When you fly in different countries, that’s the risk you take. There are less regulations than in the states
Great explanation of the issues at stake by Justin Green (3:12) including the issue of why redundant systems did not come into play after the initial birdstrike/initial failure.
Drones are definitely a new factor to consider when it comes to aviation safety! It highlights the need for both drone operators and aviation authorities to be extra vigilant. Thanks for bringing that up!
That's a critical question that investigators will likely be looking into. Airports are supposed to have what are called Runway Safety Areas (RSAs) extending beyond the end of the runway. These areas should be clear of obstacles to provide a safety margin if a plane overruns or undershoots the runway. Regulations, such as those from the FAA in the U.S. and ICAO internationally, specify the dimensions and requirements for these safety areas. It will be important to determine if this particular airport met those requirements, or if there were any deviations from the standards. Also, keep in mind that regulations change over time. An older airport may have been built to older standards.
Save investigators some time. Yes, birds were at fault. But, when the plane landed it was the WALL the plane hit head on which caused the deaths. The idiot that designed the landing space decided to place a wall which caused the deaths of these people. Prayers to family.
The speculation doesnt add up... That puff of smoke was accompanied by an object dropping vertically from the plane. There would be NOTHING left of any bird to fall back out of the enginge it had just flown into. Makes NO sense whatsoever.
That's one possibility that investigators would certainly consider. Landing gear issues are a known cause of aviation incidents. A thorough investigation would examine the pilots' actions, the aircraft's systems, and any warnings or alerts that may have been present in the cockpit.
@DIVINEFRIENDSHIPNEWS other channels suggest there are many backups to get the gear deployed...the pilot was freaking out...forgot...PIA A320 same thing
That's a good question about runway orientation! Runways are numbered based on their magnetic heading, rounded to the nearest ten degrees. So, a runway numbered 36 means it's aligned roughly 360 degrees, or north. The opposite end of that same runway would be numbered 18 (for 180 degrees, or south). It sounds like the aircraft may have landed in the opposite direction of its initial approach, which is not uncommon and can happen due to wind changes or other operational reasons. They may have performed a "go-around" maneuver, circling back to land from the other direction.
That's a good question about runway orientation! Runways are numbered based on their magnetic heading, rounded to the nearest ten degrees. So, a runway numbered 36 means it's aligned roughly 360 degrees, or north. The opposite end of that same runway would be numbered 18 (for 180 degrees, or south). It sounds like the aircraft may have landed in the opposite direction of its initial approach, which is not uncommon and can happen due to wind changes or other operational reasons. They may have performed a "go-around" maneuver, circling back to land from the other direction.
chain of events.. bird strike,,, pilots shut down wrong engine,,, loss of hydraulic/power,,, no check list/emergency landing,,, ground affect/touchdown halfway down the runway,,, concreate wall/no runoff..
That's a very detailed breakdown of a possible accident sequence. It emphasizes how crucial thorough investigations are in understanding every link in the chain that leads to such incidents. By analyzing each step, we can learn valuable lessons for improving aviation safety. Thanks for your comment.
The plane was already at low altitude preparing for landing during the bird strike. A passenger on a previous flight stated in a post that the engine in this plane had shut down a few times in the air. In the confusion the pilots panicked and shut off the wrong engine by mistake, which is why the landing gear was not deployed and the flaps not extended. The pilots did not know the actual state as none of these things are visible from the cockpit.
That's preposterous. If your claiming they shut off wrong engine your wrong. They can see clearly which engine had failure in cockpit mind you probably more clear than anything else in entire cockpit especially if there is an engine failure.with the speed they were at a or both engines were on Maybe they were not able to shut it down?
Boeing has faced increased scrutiny recently, particularly with regard to the 737 MAX. Investigations and regulatory reviews are ongoing, and it's important to follow those closely to understand the full picture.
seems like there a bunch of boeing haters in the comments azerbaijan hit by russian anti air defense its boeing fault even though its embraer korean airline struck by a concrete wall its boeing fault .....
The ignorance of the public that gets exposed when they have a keyboard in front them never ceases to amaze me. This looks like a piloting issue to me the emergency was handled badly probably in a number of ways and why the hell was the wall there
Whoever made the decision to erect that retaining wall is a bloody idiot.
The wall shouldn't be there, but that isn't what made the 'plane explode, in front of the wall was the locator beacon for the ILS system, they put the beacon on a 6-foot berm for some unknown reason. The 'plane hit that berm at around 140mph. It was already in flames when it hit the wall.
Was thinking the same..like wtf
Not as dumb as the pilot who forgot the landing gear
It seems that after aborting the initial landing attempt, they tried to land from the opposite direction and collided with a wall.
죽음의 벽
Bird strike alone shouldn’t be fatal… The pilot not deploying landing gear and that concrete wall are likely other factors…
Imagine being the two survivors and wondering for the rest of your life why you were spared..
Great expert. What he didn't say because he's too classy is that, while victims' families should be respected and kept informed up to and beyond reasonable expectations, they are often -- though not always -- terrible arbiters of how well the investigation is proceeding, especially in these early phases.
As a person living in Korea and flown Jeju Air so many times I can vouch for what a great airline they are …RIP
RIP 💔😢
Please accept our Love and sorrow from Iran 💔😢
You love everything yellow when you have yellow fever...how did you find that thing?
@treplay8846 What kind of idiotic comment is that?
So sorry. Strength to all of you. Love from Namibia 🇳🇦 🙏🏾
@@treplay8846what type of idiotic comment is that don't be stupid and immature
So,NO ONE KNOWS. LET THE BOXES TELL US
This plane, the day before, flew from Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, to Muan, South Korea, then to Taipei, Taiwan, then back to Muan, then to Tokyo, Japan, back to Muan, ending the day in Bangkok a few hours before this faithful flight. It was quite the workhorse.
You've done your homework! That plane was definitely on a whirlwind tour. It's amazing to think about all the places it was in just the day before. Thanks for sharing that info!
The 737 800 at least WAS prpbably the safest plane ever built. This crash will probably alone skew the data, but its the only plane europes ryanair flies and they have never had a serious crash in their entire history. Idk i tend to think this might be maintainence and or pilot error. As tragic as that is.
I also just found out from a Korean comment on another channel that this airport (Muan) was rarely used (30,000 pax per year), given they have a main airport just 30 mins away. They started or reorganized for International flights only a few weeks ago, Dec 17. No wonder, that concrete wall or mound... also that cinder block perimeter fence beyond it (not the typical chain link fence) is unusual.
Machine will definitely fail one day.
To be honest, most planes have schedules like that.
So many things didn't work in favor of to this plane. Bird strike, a possible pilot error whereas turning off the working engine instead of the damaged one, ground effect upon belly landing, and the fatal one is that localizer foundation made of poured concrete and elevate above ground at the end of the runway.
Great explanation by Korean news on what might’ve happened: ruclips.net/video/PtdULdDdYtg/видео.htmlsi=T3YkLXpEuEZADXpB
the localizer was also at the beginning of the runway (not end) and there’s another concrete wall encompssing the entire airport right behind it so wall didn’t kill them, it was the speed and pilot landing nearly halfway on the runway from opposite direction
@ElwynnForest Thanks for the video. You are right, the localizer is at the beginning... of runway 01 (a.k.a starting end). But since the plane can't make it and made a go around and try to land on runway 19, the elevated localizer is at the end of it (opposite end). This elevate localizer with poured concrete foundation wall design is proven deadly. Most airport design has the localizer at ground level and collapsible.
My full condolences to all victims family 🙏
Bird strike is not the direct cause of the plane crash
The catalyst
@@davidgiles9651its the barrier/wall at the end.
@michwang1796 it's not designed for this kind of impact
飞机在着陆后滑行了一段距离才撞于硬墙至油箱爆炸着火而将人活活烧死，机师责任最大，他看到前方有物阻挡应将飞机驶离跑道。😂
It looks like it started the plane issues
It'll be clear when the black box analysis comes out, but here's the scenario I'm thinking of.
1. Two engines were lost because of a flock of birds. The engine stopped, so it started losing power and the control key hardened.
2.There was no power to turn while going around the runway, and the pilot had to land in a hurry in the reverse direction even at the halfway point of the runway.
3. So there was no time to unload the landing gear, and the crash landing was successful, but the acceleration was high.
4. And at the end, there was that deadly concrete wall.
Thanks for sharing your detailed scenario. It paints a picture of a very challenging emergency situation. As you mentioned, the black box analysis will be absolutely crucial in determining the exact sequence of events, including what happened with the engines, the pilots' decision-making process, and the condition of the aircraft's systems.
but pilot can still manually lower tires 🛞 even if both hydraulics broke
you dont even watch and take in the available information, you simply spew, and add numbers to quasi intellectual vomit.
My heart hurts so much for all the souls that were lost that day.
Not sure this is apparent but it did occur to me today.
Not one single person on that plane would have known their fate. They may have been breathing a sigh of relief that they had landed and were still ok. Unfortunately, the pilots would have felt the most fear.
Building better airports is what I think they should look into.
From a Korean comment on another news channel, I just found out that this smaller airport was rarely used since it was built (30K pax per year) because the main international airport (Jeju International) is only 30 minutes away. Muan reorganized for International flights only this year, Dec 17.
the airport is not designed very well like who puts a wall there bruh
At the airport, the authority should build a soft wall with dirt if they wanted to block the planes at the end of the runway.
Please let's talk about that wall..
You're right to bring up the wall. Ideally, airports have what are called Runway Safety Areas (RSAs) beyond the end of the runway. These are cleared, graded areas designed to provide a buffer zone if an aircraft overruns or undershoots the runway. The presence or adequacy of an RSA is definitely a factor that would be looked at in an investigation. There are FAA and ICAO standards for these safety areas, which vary depending on the size and type of aircraft that use the runway.
@@DIVINEFRIENDSHIPNEWS The layout and distances are almost identical to my local airport- with a small road and about a half mile of flat open ground beyond just like this airport- only no walls, just a chain-link fence that wouldn't stop a car, far less a plane.
Please let’s talk about that plane..
@@cechev0422the fuck ya gonna do when you get a bird strike? Learn these things and then comment with better knowledge.
Jeju airlines is a fantastic budget airline with a very strong safety record. Very friendly and experienced crew. I Flew with them many times. This is just so devastating personally.
I know it may sound crazy but maybe that wall actually made the crash worse?
Yes.. definitely..and crazy nonsense why that structure was made at the end of the runway such a short distance.
Perhaps Boeing is not telling the truth of the many faulty issues with their planes. Since this is not the first incident
This has nothing to with Boeing, or its aircraft. This is pilot error for not flying, and landing the airplane first. A bird strike is a totally normal occurrence. The wall didn’t help.
I think the pilot or pilots panic after the bird strike. The landing gear should have no problem being released. It is also quite difficult to imagine the bird strike could affect the hydraulic systems controlling all the navigation systems which raised a lot of questions on the approaching speed, the landing distance, and the decision to land despite the barrier at the end of the runway.
The attorney got off to a bad start with me by calling this a “belly-up landing.”
6:22 She was asking how rare it is to have surviving crew perspective. FA's aren't primarily servers of drinks, they're trained in safety and cabin procedures, sometimes more. They would have a more informed perspective on what happened in-cabin, what orders the flight crew gave and when etc.
Unfortunately the pilots probably panic badly.
If a single bird take down a plane. Humans need to seriously rethink airplane technology.
That's the point, if a bird strike puts out that one engine, it can still fly with the other. The engines also have no correlation to the landing gear. It also looks to me like no reverse thrust was implemented after landing and the reason for this may have been because if one engine went reverse thrust, it would have spun off the runway. This is called asymmetrical thrust and considered dangerous.
This leads me to believe there was insignificant planning involved between the pilot and control tower in regards to a longer runway if landing with no landing gear. I'm baffled about the non landed gear and the bird strike....doesn't add up
@@psyismylifea wall, not a bird, took out this airplane.
*back in the days, the U.S.A army declare war on bird because the birds down their plane more than the enemy. Many birds where almost wipe to extinctions.*
Yeah frigin birds everywhere… a large passenger plane can’t be that fragile…
The bird was the start of it, but it wasn’t the main reason why the flight became fatal.
This is the second case of landing gear not coming down! What the heck is going on?
America is a failure now.
What's going on? Things break.
It sounds like pilot error. The landing gear can be lowered manually and without power.
@ that is my thought too 🥺
Why the traffic control remains silent?
What morons, public shame, fines and jail for managers of that airport.
What ????
The short vid showing the engine #2 flameout, also shows a small puff of smoke from engine #1.
Really sad and heartbreaking
2 planes in one week,
Where else? Thx
how does a bird strike prevent the landing gear from retracting and the flaps from moving?
*lowering
Hydrolics
It doesn't, usually.
Just conjecture at this point but my thinking is: It was, from the time of the bird strike to the plane landing was no longer than 6 minutes which means they didn't do the relevant checklists to get the plane configured for landing with landing taking into account the issues they had. Both pilots under heavy work load probably rushing to get back to the airport to land, didn't do the checklists which means they forgot to configure the plane for landing by lowering the gear and extending flaps.
It's very interesting since these checklists are drilled into them in training. If you have an issue after take off unless the plane is on fire or in imminent danger where you just want to come straight back in. you normally ask for some clear airspace to run through checklists and configure the plane for an emergency landing. When you don't follow the checklists and you are under a high stress situation like this, it's very easy to miss things...That's why they were introduced after all.
Boeing and the person who built that stupid walll at the end if the runway deflecting the blame to birds
ruclips.net/video/sj5kxh9cf_0/видео.html
this is a theory of what could have happened.
All airports runway should have a Runaway lane help prevent accidents when landing gears fail. Simi-trucks have that on freeway to stop the truck when break fail.
My condolence to the families who have been affected !
blackbox had been damage?? now come on boeing!! that box are not meant to be damage in any kind of crash!!
yes, if there is a nose-dive case then BB can get damaged.
Not the main blackbox, the voice recording box is reportedly damaged.
Excuse you, it's Box of Color. Please use the proper vernacular, we're not in the 1800s anymore.
@@anja0412Black boxes do get damaged and they are not designed by Boeing. Made by Honeywell.
@@vshazam You guys just can't let it go, can you?
What birds had to do with landing gear ?!
Apparently in 2008 an airplane in Italy stopped when birds got involved.
You're right, bird strikes are a real issue for aviation safety. They can cause significant damage to aircraft, particularly the engines. There have been a number of incidents over the years where bird strikes have led to emergency landings or other serious consequences. 2008 was the year of the "Miracle on the Hudson" incident in New York, which was also caused by a bird strike. There may well have been other incidents that year involving birds.
Hundreds or single bird ????
Why the pilots didn't make the plane to run out of fuel before landing? There would be less fire after the crash.
Well good assumption but his not The only one To decide and ll see other factors too rather than going to the worst🫂st!
It is a small plane so there is no function to run out of fuel
Couldn't he dump the fuel
@@cccold-q8e This type of plane doesn't have the ability to dump fuel. Usually pilots would simply spend time in the air to burn off fuel in preparation for landing, even in emergency situations, but clearly they didn't have time (or perhaps it was pilot error) in this case.
@@bcspm1bcspm158 it takes lot if time to dump fuel unfortunately
May they rest in peace.🙏 this is horrible.
Issues can be on the BIRD STRIKE, PHYSICAL STRESS OF THE PILOT, LANDING GEAR, WALL AND ITS PURPOSE
It's honestly embarrassing to hear words like "yards" and "feet" used to describe measurement still. And I'm American.
Like thank you! As an European, it’s honestly frustating hearing that while watching the news, you never know how much we are talking about?! And those stupid cups to make muffin!? You should convert to the international measuring system, seriously😂.
I hear you! It can be a bit jarring to hear imperial units used, especially since most of the world uses the metric system. In aviation, feet are still commonly used for altitude, and knots (nautical miles per hour) for speed, even internationally. This is partly due to historical reasons and the long-standing use of these units in the industry. However, many other measurements in aviation are indeed metric. Also, the FAA has considered a transition to metric, but there are significant logistical and cost challenges to overcome.
Second airplane crash were people in tail section survived
Design failure of putting that wall there. Shouldve been underground like everywhere else. Everyone wouldve likely survived yet korean government scared to talk about that wall:
I can not believe that in the verge of 2025 a bird in a turbine will bring a whole plane down. I cannot believe that there aren't any good methods to save the lives of passengers and crew members! There have been multiple solutions proposed and nobody is taking them seriously!!
There wasn't a wall on on the runway ...it skidded OFF THE RUNWAY. You people act like there was a concrete wall smack dab on a runway.
This may end up being pilot error on not deploying landing gear. Loss of one engine will not result in loss on hydraulic power. There is also an APU that will provide hydraulic and generator power in ghe event of total engine loss. Indicator lights would tell pilots that the landing gear is not deployed..
Just a question, will the black boxes and the engines and wreckage show if it is, a bird strike or a NK drone, or be able to differentiate?
They take DNA swabs and physically observe the engines. So yes they can tell.
The plane approached the runway, but in the opposite direction to normal.
Is there any other airports in the world that have a wall at the end???? Import info to avoid
Praying for all the victims loved ones during this tragic & devastatingly sad time.. ❤️🙏🏼😰
I heard from independent aviation industry insiders and experts that this horrific tragedy came as no surprise as the Boeing manufacturer's quality has been hugely compromised over the last decade by the employment of huge numbers of poor quality Indian technical workers who took every opportunity to cut corners resulting in many defective parts for the aircraft and so Boeing and it customers are now starting to pay a heavy price for such a huge personnel recruitment mistake!
Once again; no new information...
The black box always survives. It's virtually indestructible. They need to build planes with the same materials and designs
It’s not possible, planes wouldn’t be able to takeoff
You're right, the "black box" is built to be incredibly tough - surviving impacts, fires, and deep-sea pressure. However, making an entire aircraft that resilient would present huge engineering challenges. The materials that protect the data recorders are extremely heavy. A plane made entirely of those materials would likely be too heavy to get off the ground, and if it did, it would be incredibly fuel-inefficient. Engineers are always researching new materials that are both strong and lightweight to improve aircraft safety and efficiency.
That's true
Putting a moat in front of a runway is like building a wall in front of a water slide.
A bird strike started the chaos and killed 179 people? Somethings not right.
Flying may be statistically safer but not based on survival rates per accident. On average, there are 3,287 car deaths per day internationally. More than 94% of all vehicle accident deaths are caused by user error. Road traffic crashes remain the leading killer of children and youth aged 5-29 years. One person is killed every 26 seconds on average due to road traffic injuries. Would you rather drive or fly?
Hi CNN,
Wasn't the problem neither a bird strike nor a landing gear failure,
but a wall-like structure at the end of the runway that should not have been built there?
the failed design of the airport, so to speak, the final piece of this disaster?
That's CNN for you....they think they are experts
How did this retaining wall effect an airplane mid flight and cause the gear to malfunction in the first place?
@@tonosan4696 It seems that after performing a go-around, they attempted to land from the opposite direction and collided with a wall.
@@ikea5619 Yes, they did have to go around and land in the opposite direction, but actually it wasn't the perimeter wall they hit, it was an ILS berm. They did not make it to the wall, after exploding on impact with the berm.
The plane cannot stop because the landing gear did not open. You can see the plane's belly scrapping the tarmac and not being able to stop
Landing gear and flaps were not down. Bird strikes don't cause belly landings.Pilots may have been flying long shifts given the plane's schedule the previous day. Wall at the end of the runway....it will take a while for things to get sorted !
To you people saying birds don’t take planes down. Did you forget about US Airways flight 1549 or the “Sully” movie?
Birds can definitely take planes down (especially geese) CPT Sully had to land the airplane on the Hudson River in New York back in 2009 after a bird strike.
My issue is the FUCKING design of the airport. How are you going to put CONCRETE WALLs anywhere near a landing strip? We have gates at airports but they are wire gates that can easily be taken down by a plane with no issues.
never, have so many people, knowing so little, had so much to say, as found in RUclips commentary. content free speech.
A 'belly up' landing? ---- I think it slid along the runway quite well, but it was no match for the cinder block defense at the other end holding position.
The big mound and wall was built there because previously typhoon took out the antenna so the airport ceo said to build that wall and reinforce it as much as concrete as possible . As usual ceo is responsible for innocent deaths.
One engine striked still redundancy get it down safely no ???
Why fly into a dirt mountain
Puzzles me how such an incredible design could be crippled by a bird 🐦. This bird must have had a serious high level of IQ. 😢 Knew exactly where to strike. 😔
I bet it's north korean bird 😂
😂😂😂😂😂
lol at "incredible design" when Boeing planes have been having major mechanical issues for many years now, especially lately.
@@bnsmit14 where in my statement do you see Boeing? Are all of the planes that have suffered bird 🐦 strikes Boeing? Please, read to understand. How many lives to date according to records, have been lost due to bird strikes on aircrafts? Bird, bird, BIRD, NOT BOEING, BIRD. Please 🤦🏼♂️.
The birds were just the start of a series of unfortunate events. Personally, I think the bird strike led the pilots to panic, which escalated the issue. Then on top of all that, the airport was poorly designed with the wall at the end of the runway.
Metal net over the turbine?
😮 The Muan Airport in South Korea, where the recent fatal accident occurred, did not have the Engineered Materials Arresting Systems (EMAS). The accident, involving a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800, raised concerns about runway safety and the absence of systems like EMAS.
1:53 Ahhh, the football field measurement unit
safety margin limited by the economic factors is no longer a safety margin.
That's a very profound point, and it's a crucial consideration in any industry, especially one like aviation where safety is paramount. Ideally, safety margins should be determined by what's needed to protect human life, not by what's most cost-effective. It's a constant challenge to find the right balance, and it's something that regulatory agencies, manufacturers, and operators need to be continually vigilant about.
The pilots overcame the bird strike/landing gear failure and landed the plane onto level ground. A hard obstruction was on the runway and disintegrated the aircraft.
Your comment touches on the tragic irony that can sometimes occur in aviation accidents. If this is based on a real incident, the investigation will certainly be focused on understanding how such an obstruction could have been present on the runway and what can be done to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Your comment touches on the tragic irony that can sometimes occur in aviation accidents. If this is based on a real incident, the investigation will certainly be focused on understanding how such an obstruction could have been present on the runway and what can be done to prevent similar tragedies in the future.
Pilots didn’t overcome anything this honestly seems like pilot error. Landing gear wasn’t down when all they had to do was pull the manual gear release. From the video it looks like a bird strike caused a compression stall in engine 2 which shouldn’t be an issue, a 737 can fly on one engine. It seems very strange that a single bird strike would lead to a loss of both engines and all hydraulic power, but they were still able to control the plane down to the ground?
Bird strike didn’t cause hydronic issues with landing gear, it caused issues with the left engine (on camera). Also if there were issues with the landing gear, there are several ways to try to get it down, which the pilots did not try . They landed anyways
Also the pilots didn’t try to put flaps down when they landed which would help slow down the plane
I always wonder why runways can not be 4 or 5 times larger? Is this really that expensive?
Yeah . Land is expensive
Making runways larger isn't a solution. All runways and aircraft are designed for certain types of operations. There is a margin of safety built into each flight. This runway had obstructions which were not supposed to be there and were not designed as per ICAO standards. That's why there was so much loss of life
@@shubhromuSo you are an expert. 👍
S.Korea is not a large country with limited place to build a bigger runway
The runway at Muan International Airport is 2.8 kilometers long. A Boeing 747 needs a minimum of 1.5 kilometers to make a safe landing. The runway is plenty long enough for the Boeing 737 and virtually all Airbus airliners. Real estate -- and that includes runways -- is very expensive. Mandating runways that are "4 or 5 times" longer would mean closing down many, if not most, airports around the world and end in the collapse of the airline industry. Because you can land a 747 easily at Muan, landing a much smaller 737 is that much easier. Landing requirements vary, too. If the runway is wet, or other issues are present (how hot the day is and the altitude of the airport itself) an airliner may need more runway length to land. For takeoff, a plane may need a longer runway, too, especially if is heavily loaded and which directly the wind is blowing. But 2.8 kilometers should be long enough to handle any 737 taking off or coming in to land, regardless of the temperature, wind direction, rain, and weight of the aircraft at takeoff or touchdown. One continuous issue at Muan (and other airports near large bodies of water) is its location near to the ocean -- with the presence of large numbers of birds. One issue specific to Muan was the erection of a concrete wall over an earthen mound for the placement of the instrument landing system (ILS) antennas close to the end of the runway. While most planes apparently land in the opposite direction, the pilots of the destroyed aircraft simply did a u-turn when they aborted their first landing attempt (after the bird strike) and then came straight in. The craft showed neither deployed flaps on the wings or lowered landing gear to prepare for the landing. Were the pilots unable to deploy these crucial items, or did they forget to do so in a panic? Landing gear on the 737 do not need functioning electronics or hydraulics to be deployed. Pulling levers on the deck near the first officer's seat will automatically deploy the gear using gravity. Why was this not done?
Didn’t know Muan is International Airport. One big clap.
Same for me. They have an international airport just 30 mins away from Muan. Apparently, this smaller airport started International operations only this month according to a Korean comment from another news channel.
It seems it is only international for the busy holiday season.
I would understand if it's a flock of birds.. That the plane can't almost be seen, or move. But in thr videos, there is just one 😢.. So don't blame everything to the bird. Their must be an engine error, the wall, the pilot error (sorry to mention may his soul rest in peace). I pray for the souls of the dead. I pray for their families' strength.
It’s a number of things, not just one. You first see an error as they slowly started to descend. There was a stall in the left engine (seen on camera) by possible bird. That has nothing to do with the hydraulic landing gear though. Instead of the pilots staying in air to assess the situation, they decided to just bypass it and land. The localizer antenna placement is a major no no in the states for that reason that took place in the crash. When you fly in different countries, that’s the risk you take. There are less regulations than in the states
"belly up landing"?!?! 🤔
Great explanation of the issues at stake by Justin Green (3:12) including the issue of why redundant systems did not come into play after the initial birdstrike/initial failure.
Please rest in peace , my heart and soul to the family and the poor souls.
It might be a drone instead of bird.🤔
Drones are definitely a new factor to consider when it comes to aviation safety! It highlights the need for both drone operators and aviation authorities to be extra vigilant. Thanks for bringing that up!
How did this airport pass all security checks, with a concrete wall so close to the runway.
That's a critical question that investigators will likely be looking into. Airports are supposed to have what are called Runway Safety Areas (RSAs) extending beyond the end of the runway. These areas should be clear of obstacles to provide a safety margin if a plane overruns or undershoots the runway. Regulations, such as those from the FAA in the U.S. and ICAO internationally, specify the dimensions and requirements for these safety areas. It will be important to determine if this particular airport met those requirements, or if there were any deviations from the standards. Also, keep in mind that regulations change over time. An older airport may have been built to older standards.
Runways in the US bases in Korea are checked, everywhere else who cares.
Seems like they could have survived if that concrete barrier weren't there.
God bless the families
Save investigators some time. Yes, birds were at fault. But, when the plane landed it was the WALL the plane hit head on which caused the deaths. The idiot that designed the landing space decided to place a wall which caused the deaths of these people. Prayers to family.
Were the pilots Islam fanatics?
It wasn't the wall, it was the earth berm on which the localizer antennae were mounted. They were not built as per international standards.
No one asking...
How's the wall wellbeing anyway... 😅
boeing defective part anyone?
The speculation doesnt add up... That puff of smoke was accompanied by an object dropping vertically from the plane. There would be NOTHING left of any bird to fall back out of the enginge it had just flown into. Makes NO sense whatsoever.
reverst thrust engaged?
Pilot forget to drop the landing gear
That's one possibility that investigators would certainly consider. Landing gear issues are a known cause of aviation incidents. A thorough investigation would examine the pilots' actions, the aircraft's systems, and any warnings or alerts that may have been present in the cockpit.
@DIVINEFRIENDSHIPNEWS other channels suggest there are many backups to get the gear deployed...the pilot was freaking out...forgot...PIA A320 same thing
There’s a manual landing gear all they had to do is pull it.🤷♂️
Exactly I’m wondering how much human error went into this. Everyone’s focused on the wall but not on the pilots
Aren't they BACKWARDS ON THE "APPROACH" RUNWAY, because of the pilots 180 instead of circling back ?
That's a good question about runway orientation! Runways are numbered based on their magnetic heading, rounded to the nearest ten degrees. So, a runway numbered 36 means it's aligned roughly 360 degrees, or north. The opposite end of that same runway would be numbered 18 (for 180 degrees, or south). It sounds like the aircraft may have landed in the opposite direction of its initial approach, which is not uncommon and can happen due to wind changes or other operational reasons. They may have performed a "go-around" maneuver, circling back to land from the other direction.
That's a good question about runway orientation! Runways are numbered based on their magnetic heading, rounded to the nearest ten degrees. So, a runway numbered 36 means it's aligned roughly 360 degrees, or north. The opposite end of that same runway would be numbered 18 (for 180 degrees, or south). It sounds like the aircraft may have landed in the opposite direction of its initial approach, which is not uncommon and can happen due to wind changes or other operational reasons. They may have performed a "go-around" maneuver, circling back to land from the other direction.
talk talk talk soon all will be forgotten Without actions
chain of events.. bird strike,,, pilots shut down wrong engine,,, loss of hydraulic/power,,, no check list/emergency landing,,, ground affect/touchdown halfway down the runway,,, concreate wall/no runoff..
Pretty much
But But most commentators only talked of the birds and "Wall". Not the other things. 🤔
That's a very detailed breakdown of a possible accident sequence. It emphasizes how crucial thorough investigations are in understanding every link in the chain that leads to such incidents. By analyzing each step, we can learn valuable lessons for improving aviation safety. Thanks for your comment.
Somethings are very puzzling about this crash. No conspiracy theories but actions of pilots ?
Well with have to wait for all the data from the black box .The pilot was able to land the plane is just that wall! Very sad.
Is that why Putin is apologizing? Because of the birds?.....
The plane was already at low altitude preparing for landing during the bird strike. A passenger on a previous flight stated in a post that the engine in this plane had shut down a few times in the air. In the confusion the pilots panicked and shut off the wrong engine by mistake, which is why the landing gear was not deployed and the flaps not extended. The pilots did not know the actual state as none of these things are visible from the cockpit.
That's preposterous. If your claiming they shut off wrong engine your wrong. They can see clearly which engine had failure in cockpit mind you probably more clear than anything else in entire cockpit especially if there is an engine failure.with the speed they were at a or both engines were on Maybe they were not able to shut it down?
May have survived without that concrete wall! Maybe a new flexible barrier! So so sad! ✝️💔🙏🏽
military developed a new technology to neutralize navigation on any plan technology edge right now. it's military test that goes political.😢
Anyone find it unbelievable that two people survived? How???
They were both flight attendants sitting in their jump-seats at the very, very back of the plane.
Boeing plane ? Shortcuts and greed ?
we all know it’s Boeing.
You jumped into conclusion. There are many unknown factors under investigation.
The day before this plane was having issues from some news reports.
Boeing has faced increased scrutiny recently, particularly with regard to the 737 MAX. Investigations and regulatory reviews are ongoing, and it's important to follow those closely to understand the full picture.
What if another bad enters another Engine
seems like there a bunch of boeing haters in the comments
azerbaijan hit by russian anti air defense its boeing fault even though its embraer
korean airline struck by a concrete wall its boeing fault
.....
The ignorance of the public that gets exposed when they have a keyboard in front them never ceases to amaze me. This looks like a piloting issue to me the emergency was handled badly probably in a number of ways and why the hell was the wall there
CVR OK but FDR damaged, will complicate data recovery 😕
One stone killed 2 birds, One bird can killed 179 people 😮
It's not one bird, it's a flock of birds.the actual number of birds ingested is unknown presently.
Actually, it was that earthen berm, topped by a reinforced concrete wall, just beyond the end of the runway, that killed those people.
@ the statement is an on folk lord saying.
Look at the debris from this crash. Then look at the debris of the crash Russia supposedly shot down. Take a good look.