Doomed Jeju Air flight was diverted for tech issues two days before fatal crash: Analyst
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 ก.พ. 2025
- Investigations have begun into the Jeju Air flight 7C2216 crash in South Korea that killed 179 people when it touched down on its belly without landing gear and skidded off the runway in a fiery explosion. Analysts said multiple questions remain, including whether technical issues encountered on the plane two days before the incident had anything to do with its ultimate demise. Independent aviation analyst Alvin Lie tells CNA’s Asia Now the plane was on a routine flight from Jeju to Beijing last Friday when it was diverted to Incheon, South Korea’s main airport. Read more: cna.asia/41VRbhk
Subscribe to our channel here: cna.asia/youtu...
Subscribe to our news service for must-read stories:
Telegram - cna.asia/telegram
WhatsApp - cna.asia/whatsapp
Follow us:
CNA: cna.asia
CNA Lifestyle: www.cnalifestyl...
Facebook: / channelnewsasia
Instagram: / channelnewsasia
Twitter: / channelnewsasia
TikTok: / channelnewsasia
Isn't it strange when so many aviation experts mentioned how strange a concrete wall is there, there is no mention of the concrete wall in South Korea media.
South Korea news is for the Americans & west public 😂😂
Australian Sky news expert mention this. It's related govt. Corruption or chaebol i smell. That's why. But idk. Let the korean netizen explain.
there should be wall at first place coz normally runway has freerun area. Even they keep saying hit to fence . they snt know what is different between wall and fence
It was a reinforced concrete foundation for the landing radar. The cinder block wall was 200 feet further away.
it was. and also explained. Could have just removed your polarized opinion. and get life.😅😅😅
the wall had caused so many casuality, the plane was intact while it landed if no wall everyone lives
Actually there was a residential area just a couple hundred meters after the wall. At the high speed they were going into the wall if not there probably plow deep into houses and kill even more people. Why are there houses so close to the end of the runway as well?
is just 1 factor
There's a 10' perimeter wall right behind the localizer berm. Landing far down the runway w/ no flaps or gear caused this. Leave any runway around the world at 150+mph and you'd have the same result.
The plane hit the localizer berm which can do much more damage for obvious reasons.
@@yours2313 But the MAIN factor.
May their souls rest in peace 🙏
How can they? I'd be so pissed off knowing I just died, can't say bye to anyone, and just lost all my connections along with everything I know in this life. I hope whatever's next is better than this, so much better, that that don't even want to come back and prefer to wait for us to come there.
This aircraft had 3 separate hydraulic systems. It is highly unlikely that all 3 where disabled.
and on top of that losing both engines
The wall shouldn't be there
Setuju, harusnya dinding itu (apapun fungsinya) tidak dibangun di ujung landasan. Harusnya pihak operator bandara mempertimbangkan untuk membuangnya setelah kecelakaan pesawat ini
@@sagi-m9of These Airport authorities deserve a fair court judgement.
The wall might have been there before they built the airport, but then again, the outcome could have been different if they had removed the wall. Who knew?
@@bengong4383 The structure was the base of the instrument landing system. 'twas criminal negligent at western standards.
@TheRetiredrummer exactly
Every news media is not putting up the title : "The Concrete Wall Killed 179".
It was not only the concrete wall alone it's was also a reinforced concrete embankment wall to be more practical as assumed
Wrong, leaving a runway @ 150+mph killed 179
@@CMill78 In Jamaica On 22 December 2009, an American Airlines Boeing 737-800, operating American Airlines Flight 331 also came in too fast at NMIA airport, overshot the runway in bad weather and ended up on the beach. Every one survived. I guess even a third world country knows NOT to build concrete wall across the end of a runway, just in case there is an over run.
@lawrencedavidson6195 There's a 10' concrete security fence right behind the localizer, they would have hit that 1 second after had the localizer berm not been there.
That perimeter wall is only cinder block. It would have helped slow it down, not destroyed it.
Human error is not an accident. Putting a concrete wall at the end of an airport runway is not an accident.😢
Pilot / co pilot error will have to be investigated / determined Plus the Concrete and tragic ending..
Airports have to be walled off at some point. Planes should not be travelling at 200miles per hour on the ground.
Landing gears should have gone down. Pilot error
The soil and concrete structure that the plane collided with is not at the end of the runway, it's before the beginning of the runway, with this particular runway being only used in northwards direction.
The plane landed in opposite direction, which by all reason wouldn't have been granted if it was communicated to the tower that the plane has issues reconfiguring itself into landing configuration; indeed it would have been re-routed to a more suitable airport. A possibility has been suggested that pilots simply forgot to reconfigure the plane for landing after performing the go-around and weren't aware they were landing without flaps and gear, though it is prudent to await more data from the investigation to see what sort of issues the pilots were exactly dealing with.
@@TopSecretVid Even if that wall wasn't there, there's another brick wall behind it which is the boundary of the airport and runway just a couple feet away, they need to put that because there's a high way next to it. With that speed they would've hit a wall otherwise so they were really doomed when they landed and skidded the runway unless they slowed down.
@@ThomsConstantHm not from the Google earth images I've seen..there is a significant amount of room to scrub more speed before the boundary. Also there's a huge resistance difference between a concrete and brick wall
What really kill is the WALL!
No what killed them is the pilots attempting to land when the aircraft was not configured for landing whatsoever.
👍🏼👍🏼
It was not the wall. There was a mound of dirt it hit. A human-made wall would not remain intact. Mother Nature is immovable.
No it's Boeing 737-800 faulty
The aircraft never reached the concrete security wall. It struck an earthen berm where the ILS antenna was mounted.
The main reason why nearly all the passengers and crew are dead because of that concrete wall. Its like hitting in a death wall
The reason they hit the wall is because the plane wasn’t / couldn’t be configured properly for landing. That plane had plenty of runway to stop on if it had its ground spoilers, brakes, tr’s, etc.
@@WillFlyForTips The wall killed them..period!
The place should never have reached that point.
In the airport (Air Force base) where I was working there were two very huge and powerful nets with hydraulic control systems at the end of the runways to stand the aircraft.
The nets were made with a distance of about 100 meters from each other, so that if the first one fails to stop the plane, the second one will catch the plane.
The Air Force base was made by the Americans about 60 years ago! Why airports do not use this system?!
At JT AFB there are safety nets to stop the plane if it over shoot the runway. Not a Durawall.
Greed.😢
"Bird strike" also takes the pressure off the airline and the aircraft manufacturer.
Exactly
And whoever built a concrete wall at the end of a runway.
the muricans are trying to blame the incident on anything they can. the reason it burst into fire is because the airplane is poorly made and Boeing deserves to go bankrupt.
I am sick of bird strike for everything.
Isn't it a BOEING ?
All the bird strike allegation is a diversion from the true factors around the airplane maintenance, airport operation, airport design and human error for responsible parties to evade liability.
yup
That kinda looks like it. If you remember at first Korean officials blamed the birds AND the weather. The weather was PERFECT!
Isn't a BOEING ?
You are making some wild accusations. You are gonna eat your words in a few weeks.
@@steveh5307 People aren't stupid to eat whatever speculative information is fed. They have minds of their own to speculate valid probabilities of what really happened. A bird strike majorly cannot affect the vehicle's landing gear systems to fail, a few airplane pilot youtubers mentioned. Resulted to many speculations; could be the pilot panicked or the plane was really poorly maintained resulting into malfunctions. But despite if all of that is really the case, the wall at the end on the runway played the major cause why they did not survived.
The plane LANDED SAFELY. What caused the plane to explode is impact at the Concrete Wall end of Runway - who authorise a Concrete Wall there should be charged for homicide and negligence
It landed at a way too high speed, way too far down the runway, not in landing configuration (flaps, etc.), landing gear not deployed, without starting thrust reversers...not close to "landed safely." Looks to me like the pilots might have been seriously injured by a bird that hit their window. The engines were both running, the controls functioned enough for them to guide it onto the runway, so it's surprising that they didn't circle and land in the other direction again.
Safely? 😂 Ma'am, as much as the wall was an issue the pilot's landing was bad too. Unless the plane had confirmed "complete" hydraulic failure then that was a bad landing too.
There is no homicide. Maybe negligence if it didn't meet international standards.
it wasnt even the concrete wall, it was the dirt pile that they used to heighten the localizer antenna, but the concrete wall would have been bad too! very bad airport design
Lol, the plane certainly DID NOT land safety, from the video the landing gears were not even successfully deployed, the body of the plane was grinding against the runway. Clueless.
Tech issues is having a CONCRETE WALL at the end of a AIR STRIP!!!! Thats just insane. Being here seoul now No one is even talking about that?
It's not at the end but the beginning, with this runway designed to be used in one direction only. Somehow the pilot decided to land in the opposite direction.
@@SianaGearz You keep repeating this nonsence..lol
@@SianaGearza runway that only goes in one direction?? You sure about that?
When you land with out flaps, there is Air Cussion that makes the plane float for a while delaying the touch down. Which explains why plane touched down halfway through the runway. Appears like confused and panic mode pilots who seem to had good control of trying to land the plane. They could have manually lowered the landing gear with manual levers right behind their seats, which I am not sure if they were aware or forgot. They didnt take time at all to do any checklist and simply landed hoping for the best. Even landing in sea of Japan right next to the airport would have saved lives.
Seriously are these pilots trained to handle emergencies at all. Any US commercal pilot could have saved all the passengers.
Correct! Perhaps they should have waited a bit and form a strategy to handle the situation.
Other than the wall, there is nothing or nobody to blame. We don't yet know what was going on in that cockpit. We need to find out what the investigation brings to light.
Keep in mind they did not deploy the Slats on the wings tops either which are designed to push the wings down and create more landing gear friction for braking along with the Flaps.
At this point it is unclear how much thrust they had on landing. It is apparent the left engine is shut down and the right engine (which took the initial bird hit) is still running but might be at partial thrust.
We do not really know what happened after the initial bird strike. There may have been another crippling the left engine, the pilots might have shut it down the left engine in error.
The point being they were suppose to go completely around but landed the other direction really fast. For whatever reason it looks like they thought they needed to get down and it might been because of reduced or lack or engine power. If they thought they were going to come up short of the runway it makes sense to keep the gear up and flaps not deployed for maximum glide distance. Since this is not the normal landing configuration this may have caused them to over shoot the landing area. It does not explain why they did not deploy the gear, flaps, and slats once they were assured of touchdown.
As far as training another 737 pilot from a large French airline stated that these dual engine planes are considered so reliable that a dual engine failure is not required training by his airline anymore. They are required to do extensive single engine failure simulations but any dual engine failure simulations (which he did) is done on their own initiative and time. He did not know about other airlines but I am guessing these pilots might have experienced something they were never trained for.
Another thing other pilots have continued to point out is that this flight started at 3:00 AM and the pilots could easily been fatigued. We do not know if they flew the first part of this round trip flight either which would be even worse. As the other pilots pointed out a fatigued pilot with all the training in the world is much more likely to make mistakes than a non fatigued one especially in a stressful situation.
They didn't even jettison the fuel which might have reduced the blast.
Sincere condolences to everyone experiencing tragic loss. Until the investigation unravels the facts, events and causes, expressing sympathy and empathy is all that can be done. (From the UK)
the pilot did its best to belly land the plane that could not deploy its landing gear and extend it flaps for still unknown reasons...the plane was fine during the belly landing but what doomed the plane is the enbankment structure at the end of the runway where the ILS is located...if there was no enbankment there, the ILS will just collapse when the plane overshoots and chances are, the plane and its passengers and crews may survive since there is an open ground with no other structures beyond the runway.
Which puzzled me why there is a solid structure in the first place.
There is a tall concrete block perimeter wall after the earthen ILS berm. So they would have hit a concrete wall anywise.
@@Azion1126 tried to look on ILS on some airport runways and find no barrier or enbankment...i find no reason to put a barrier at the end of the runways since some planes on emergency landing might overshoot the runway so there should be an open ground beyond the runway and not a barrier.
There are houses down the runway. Go google it. It may or may not have stopped before the houses.
why put a a concrete wall on a runway????
Putting a concrete wall at the end of a runway is like putting broken glass in a playground for children.
As with most Asian cultures with the TOP DOWN APPROACH, I suspect that people or designers in the industry KNOWS that the reinforced wall shouldn’t be there. HOWEVER, even if One were to notice the dangers and raise the issue up. If It’s gonna COST MONEY, the higher ups are not willing to spluge on something that they view as “unlikely to happen”.
That is, until someone pays for it dearly with their lives and ONLY THEN, will they be willing to make drastic safety changes.
May their soul rest in peace, I pray for strength for the victims of the family.
Read between the lines. This expert seem to have difficulty in being vocal about a systemic issue regarding cost and availability od spare parts for safe and proper maintenance.
Notícias marcantes.😊😊
Calling the Beijing diversion a technical issue is a lie. Incheon International Airport has stated the diversion occurred due to medical/health reasons.
Incheon International Airport is the airport this plane was diverted to and they would know. This information was known earlier yesterday.
So either this network doesn't bother to fact check, or they deliberately played lied in order to get a clickbait headline.
@jimbobeire I'm a bit more lenient with networks with Breaking-esque news unless they have a clear history to be questionable. I don't know about this network, but the analyst has way less wiggle room. He stated a clear certainty when he didn't have the information to state it like that. It's somewhat okay if he didn't know the update from yesterday. But there was no reason for his level of certainty in his answer.
CNA,excelente trabalho
It was a medical incident that made the plane return. What an unprepared expert.
The crash should have remained a minor incident. But due to human error and negligence it turned into a fatal catastrophe. Bird strike started the incident, which shouldn't have been a problem for any modern aircraft. Somehow the pilots panicked and landed without working the proper emergency checklist, which led to no landing gear, no flaps, wrong engine turned off and landing 2/3 into the runway. When they finally touched the ground, there still was a good chance for everyone to survive hadn't the wall been there. There would have been plenty of space for the plane to come to a halt. The party most responsible in my opinion is the airport. There never should have been a concrete wall, it should have been a light structure. Somebody said they made it out if concrete because a storm took down the previous lighter structure and they were simply too lazy and wanted to avoid having to rebuild it again after future storms.
Medical or mechanical you mean. I heard of none of the flight crew having medical issues.
The runway is only intended to be used northwards, and the pilot landed southwards for some reason. The fatal structure is beyond the south end of the runway, so it was deemed safe, since it's not in the path. Yet another mystery to add to the list why landing wrong direction.
No it was not.... The passenger medical emergency was on another flight, not the crashed one.
@@SianaGearz Nonsense! Runways are designed to be used safely IN EITHER direction..smh
That would be a serious pilot error to not put the plane in landing configuration when making an emergency landing!!
It shouldn't have been allowed to fly. I hope this man has good security.
Why should a perfectly good 737-800 not be allowed to fly?
@@bills6093A perfectly good 737-800 with perfect landing gears and wing flaps. The video was faked …..
@@mongsengquek5810 forgetting to lower the gear in the rush to land is not a design flaw.
Birds being framed, birds rights groups must be crying.....😮😮😮
Stop being an attention seeker. Devildevil, oh you're so edgy, you're so cool.
😂
Chyna bird
Bird Lives Matter😂
Dammnnitt I spoilt my cola reading that 😭😂😂
Condolences on such a terrible tragedy.
Pilot did not dump fuel when he knows the landing gear wont deploy. This alone probably save some lives.
No reason to land without the landing gear because of a bird strike. The pilots did not take the time to work through any emergency checklist
Yeah the bird strike dint seal their fate, that landing did.
The pilots didn't have that much time to go through any checklists, spending minimum 10-20 minutes on a checklist. They already declared May Day.
Sounding like there may have been a loss of power issue which led to the non-deployment of landing gear.
Unlikely, but it IS possible that the landing gear malfunctioned. But what is 100% avoidable is a reinforced concrete wall at the end of a runway.
@@misdangered4326 The FO can reach around to the left behind and release the landing gear by cable pull, which will be deployed by gravity no hydraulic or electric at all. It may happen that one gear is stuck and needs a bit of a shake to come out by gravity but all three? They didn't even try to deploy it. May have forgotten that they retracted gear and flaps for go-around and no longer had presence of mind to deploy them again.
Why the bloody wall
My condolences to the families 👪
I believe negligent somewhere
Our condolences 🤍🩶🫶🏽😢
CNA didn’t mention the design of the airport
the expert mentions it at 2:21
Code on the January 27th flight was 7700. It was a medical emergency on board. Confirmed by multiple sources.
Humans are very intelligent to blame it on birds, get easy way out. Hope the authorities find the truth
I had another source that said the emergency diversion two days earlier was due to a ill passenger. Not a technical issue.
The ceo said there was no fault with plane, now there is technical issues huh . All these companies and their BS .
Boeing fault, if they it's fixed then that's what it is
What about Boeing? Time to call genius trump to rescue
It was diverted previously for a medical emergency. Not a tech issue
@@TimLoo-w4u Weak. Very weak.
Today morning 6.37am same company same type of plane also "same" problem.
flight 7C1O1.
Great to know!
The loss of one engine due to a bird strike. Should NOT end up with a catastrophic result. Pilots practice this event regularly. Some thing caused the second approach, to be carried out, gear up, no flaps and engine out. This led to a very high landing speed , which meant a runway excursion, and the subsequent collision with the ILS antennae mound made of concrete. It was this final event which determined the catastrophic level of casualties.
The right engine (which supplies air to the cockpit) had the bird strike, if it also caused a compressor stall, smoke would have filled the cockpit prompting them to land immediately at all cost.
Bird Strike Caused Landing gear FAILURE ?
1ST bird Strike in AVIATION History ?
Maybe double strikes like sully?
Excelente 👏🏾
Bird strike is a non issue...they sound like idiots
they didn't want to be sued that's why.
the muricans are trying to blame the incident on anything they can. the reason it burst into fire is because the airplane is poorly made and Boeing deserves to go bankrupt.
1st Bird Strike in Aviation History
Tell that to Sully.
Even if landing gear was not out, why were flaps retracted? That is the question, if they were extended, they would be a lot slower and stop sooner
Bird strike caused the unprepared crew to rush the landing, making mistakes and skipping checklists. The wall was their finisher.
Why the wall is there
You don't know it was a bird stike!
How can you so definite about that?
@@hopespringseternal2624confirmed bird
@@djibicisse 579 people have been murdered on Boeing jets since 2018. This particular jet had deathtrap issues before this flight. Investigations take months to determine what caused the crash. Stop assuming things before the final reports come out.
Informative
The crew rush the Go Around and left hardly any time to set the aircraft up for landing. The GA was only 7 mins! No way is that long enough.
sad to say, this is a human error
Amazing 👏
You don't really need to wait for the black box, they must have been in contact the whole time with flight control, they already know what happened.
The black box Is important and all the answer from both sides… at least there is an evidence who is at fault and to know what really happened… the problem is it takes long to review the black box especially if it is severe damage….
First off the Flight Data Recorder shows the status of all the systems and what was done when, second during an emergency contacting the tower isn't a priority, it's not an open mic that the flight controllers can hear everything the pilots say, pilots have to manually contact them, you don't do that much when you are trying to land with one engine, and without extending the landing gear. Flight control may have some general idea but they definitely won't know what was going on in the cockpit, they might be able to guess with accuracy but that's not good enough when 179 people are dead so they do need to find out what exactly happened.. but one thing seems clear, if the concrete wasn't present more people would likely be alive
The 'black box' is not just a recording of ATC conversation. The Cockpit Voice Recorder recorded all discussion in the cockpit between the pilots, not just their radio calls, and the Flight Data Recorder will tell the status of multiple systems and the instructions sent to them.
@@ck-bs2ms It's not that big a problem that it takes a while to review the black box. Investigations should not be rushed. The news channels have trouble filling the air with anything other than speculation, but that's no concern to the investigators.
These black boxes were in the tail which was the only bit of the plane not destroyed, so they are probably intact.
Forgetting to lower the landing gear is not a tech issue. Bird strike had no impact.
The plane was diverted not because of thechnical issues, but because of medical emergency. After leaving the ill passenger the plane continued the flight and landed safely in the intended destination.
Yup
Some of her questions ....
The fact that another 737-800 skidded off the runway in Norway gives us some food for thought.
To many dei pilots. To much human error still these days. They need much more training.
the muricans are trying to blame the incident on anything they can. the reason it burst into fire is because the airplane is poorly made and Boeing deserves to go bankrupt.
Also in Jamaica in 2009, also in Guyana in 2018, everyone survived those over runs because there was no wall.
@@xcalibertrekker6693Do you mind citing a source backed by scientific evidence or is this your opinion?
It's winter so nothing major in Norway
the analyst is excellent in his comments unlike others who gave non-committal responses
Mis information…plane was diverted for passenger problem not technical.
A few facts needed here
Even if the plane had a bird strike in the engine it can still land safely
They aborted original landing then panicked to land almost immediately going the other direction without configuring the aircraft.
No landing gear,no flaps, and landing almost halfway down the runway.
Then as we all know what killed everyone almost was that reinforced concrete wall at the end of the runway.
Needless loss of life…R.I.P to all.
Looks like both engines stopped. Lack of hyd A and B can’t move the flaps and slats. Landing on a short runway with landing gear down will not slow down the aircraft. Belly landing is the best way to drag the aircraft on a short runway especially landing in its mid point. Pilots managed to land the aircraft , unfortunately.. a concrete wall is there.
Out of date information. This wasn’t available initially
that embankment should be recessed !
That moron attitude "runway is over, so you no longer have any business here" killed this people.
Huh?
@@rachmadsuhartono I am not able to translate the correct meaning into bahasa indonesia. There is an old german attitude,
"It cannot be what must not be" so the Pilots and Airplanes have to accept it and with that attitude you may place for example a concrete Wall 100 meters at the End of a runway.
Lamentável 😢😢
Que tragédia.😩🥹
The news say that the plane landed in the opposite direction of the runway, hence the concrete wall? So sad and tragic.
There IS NO OPPOSITE direction, runways are designed to be used safely in either direction. It's shocking how so few people know that..smh
@@lawrencedavidson6195 Don't break your neck shaking your head. I can think of two of them that aren't. If officials thought that a concrete wall was not a problem at the end of a runway, as crazy as it sounds, I can only imagine that that must have been their reasoning to do so.
@@jadedelargeYou mean government officials? You can’t trust the government lol
And Muan airport’s runway is meant to go in both directions, no?
@@cee_el I know! I'm Canadian, lol.
English is my second language, so I don't know if one would call these people "officials".
I have the same questions raised by this independent aviation guy.
Why wasn't the landing gear down and why belly land? Birds or not, no reason not to lower the landing gear unless it is not working. It was well explained in the video. If the landing gears were down, the pilot would have turn it 90° and let the plane slow down to a halt
It stinks of the flight computer being in flight mode because gear was not down , engines and speed is constant dragging along runway , and as one expert said , to slow it requires reverse thrust setting that would require landing mode.
It's difficult to perceive it in the videos but it was around "flying" along the runway.
The deaths, ... solely the ILS protection wall position!
Ultimately, though, why was no valid attempt to slow the aircraft committed!? There was well sufficient distance to stop safely for a belly landing!
We need the person who built the wall to speak about his creation. What was his intention ? Tell us now?
According to the korean comment. The superior ordered it despite the warnings and safety protocols
@@wonrei Dang..
It would be more like who in the south korean government approved a concrete "Bunker" be built there?
It sound like originally they had ILS towers there but they were continually damaged by wind and typhoons due to the ocean location.
Since ILS antennae are used to guide the planes straight in to the runway and I think the glide path as well it is imperative they are kept working. Since ILS system down effects the airport someone probably decided that they were going to replace the towers with a reinforced berm to put them on to strengthen them and lessen the chance of damage, increase up time, and reduce ongoing costs.
Since there is marshy sloping ground at the end of the runway runoff area they needed to elevate the ILS I think to the same elevation of the actual runway. They placed the ILS then on a dirt berm with layers of concrete embedded inside to obtain the height and strength needed.
Now there are international standards for clear runway runoffs areas and these were easily meet (90m minimum) but they came up slightly short on the recommended (240m). The longer distance is far less an issue the longer the actual runway is as it decreases the actual chance of an actual runoff. The runway is 2800m long which is plenty to land a 737-800 assuming it lands in the correct spot, at the correct speed, and is properly configured for landing (none of which happened here).
Now there are also international standards for objects placed around runways to the sides and ends. Any objects placed within a certain distance are suppose to be frangible (break away). They may or may not have meet these standards as the standards do not really say where to measure from. Do you measure from the end of the actual concrete or from the end of runway hash marks which are farther back. If the hash marks are used as the measuring point which side do you measure from as they are quite wide.
All that being said there were hundreds if not thousands of landings done on this airport without going off the end and striking the berm. It has been there some time and not been an issue when pilots land their planes correctly which these pilots did not.
Even if the berm was not there the plane would have hit a row of ILS towers in the same spot at 150mph and a second later hit a concrete cinder block wall surrounding the airport. No one knows what damage that would have caused to the plane or whether it would have tumbled and torn to pieces. Planes going off the end of runways are usually traveling at just a fraction of the speed of this one as they have brakes, flaps, slats, reverse thrusters employed down the entire runway and they land much earlier on the runway. You cannot plan for every situation or justify the costs.
@@jaycahow4667 I now hear that the airport had plans to remove the concrete structure but were waiting on the funds to do so.
In the United States in 2023, 19,603 wildlife strikes were reported, which averages out to about 54 bird strikes each day, according to the FAA report. Of those 19,603 bird strikes, only 3.6 percent caused any appreciable damage and no crashes.
when under carriage is not down, the ground should have notice and inform the pilot to abort landing. why did the pilot still go ahead and land with no landing gear and flap not extended? the plane will be advise by tower to divert to land on some longer runway at the same time to run down the fuel and all ground work ready for it to belly land.. or is it the pilot has no time to react due to engine failure?
I think the issue is that the plane was already too low and if the bird strike theory is correct the plane wouldn’t have had the time to climb on just one engine given how low they were.
the flaps and speed brakes were all not extended. With only one engine left working (ig after the bird strike), the tower wouldn't recommend the plane to go further. If you saw the full uncropped video, you can see how late the touchdown was. I'm pretty certain that it was a mixture of pilot error and also mechanical failure.
*im not any type of investigator. I've flown the 737 on xplane11 for more than 50hrs and I "kind of" know how the plane is going to react. These are just my theories based on my experience and also what I saw.*
Very Good
Other sources claim the airplanes’s diversion the few days before the crash was due to a medical emergency onboard the aircraft suffered by a passenger, not technical or mechanical reasons.
And no one questions the narrative? It’s not like Boeing has not been caught several times already….strong arming opposition
Interessant very good.
So many experts here. Wow.
Yep, and btw. you may learn something from them. Builders of Muan Airport did not learn from Formula 1.
Yes. Internet has millions of aviation experts, airport design experts, airport regulations experts, concrete wall experts, bird flock experts, hydraulic system experts, electrical system experts, Korean corruption experts, etc.
@@TheRetiredrummer, 😂😂😂
The problem wasn't the wall. They should have flown inverted.
Those so called experts are for the birds!
We do not really understand why there had to be a Solid Concrete Wall at the end of the Runway? Dont they anticipate that 1 year 365 days a plane might overshoot it? Damn!!!!😢
Not birds. Who was the captain, and let's see his FULL MEDICAL RECORD.
Excelente 👏
What bird crash, the plane hit a wall at the end of the runway. Is everyone blind?
Nobody said there were birds on the runway. Try to get a clue.
Those blaming the birds are themselves for the birds!
the muricans are trying to blame the incident on anything they can. the reason it burst into fire is because the airplane is poorly made and Boeing deserves to go bankrupt.
Very nice 👌
should be a maintenance or human issue… nothing to do with the poor bird
Bird strike is common but the landing gear had issues which was the reason why it didn’t stop
@@Fmaistix1 its not just landing gear but flaps so electronics or something is faulty
Airport issue too. Now I have different look on sq006 crash
Actually kim jong eun ordered the birds to strike the plane..
Tbh the pilots managed to land and skid the runway without the landing gear is impressive, I don't know what kind of human error happened. For me I think it is a plane fault.
I have read that the Friday emergency landing was due to medical emergency with a passenger.
CNA, for heavens sake, please get a more credible "Expert" advisor. Thank you.
Thank you that this expert mentions the wall. OMG none of the experts on American media (I’m Korean- American and live in America) is mentioning the damn wall. The plane touched down on its belly without crashing. That’s impressive! It’s the wall that killed them all.
It's Boeing 737 again, and again.
The 737 series don't have heater for landing gear compartment and hydrolic system components. When there is a subzero temperature during the winter, the hydrolic will freeze up if the hydrolic fluid isn't replaced properly or if there is moisture or water in the system.
This also can cause the hydrolic pump in the engine to blow up.
If it's the Airbus, there wouldn't have any of this problem.
They need to take the 737 out of service completely.
This absolutely FALSE. the 737 has 2 redundant hydraulic systems that prevent from this from happening. and even if both fail it has a 3rd system that works WITHOUT any power (gravity controlled). stop spreading fake news. This accident has pilot error written all over it and the concrete wall shouldn't have been there.
Wrong, this time the fatal morons, was the architect of that concrete structure straigth in the path. same mindset by the sinking of that ferry, same mindset that made a torture show, raising hope by reading the list of the passengers, name by name to the relevantes when Authorities long know ALL are death.
I guess all those arctic 737 operations are fake then?
Doesn't look like winter time in that place.
Your liking the airbus has clouded much. Explain why the gear was down and flaps extended on the first approach? Its clearly obvious with the photo that showed the puff of smoke from the right engine. Then, they put the gear up and flaps up to do their go around. If the hydraulic fluid freezes on 737's, when did that start to happen after all of the 737 planes got ordered and sold? A fluid heater won't help the moisture problem and corrosion issues, it would prevent ice only. BTW, when flight occurs at 20,000+ feet, the outside temps are 45 below and this happens all year long and with every flight so it seems they don't see any issue after decades of flights.
The plane didn't hit the wall, it hit the berm upon which the direction indicators were installed. I think the man being interviewed is ignorant or lying about the cause of the sudden stop at the end of the runway. I think the direction indicator was built wrong, as do many other experts about the crash.
Uh…..there was a twelve foot concrete wall covered with dirt. The law requires ALL berms to be frangibly constructed. Concrete is not frangible.
Muan airport opened in 2007 and that wall isn't a new addition it had been there for most of that time and not one person reported it?
Don’t blame the wall since it has no way of defending itself, what about the plane?
Even if one reported, no one would listen until accident like this happened !!!!!
Yeah, but they just open their international service flights this year. Before they only do domestic flights. Also the bangkok-muan route just starts open this december, maybe the airport isn't ready for international flights yet
@@raindezvous9868 oh wow... thanks for that info. Not off to a good start. :(
@@raindezvous9868typical SK corruption at work 😡😡
Very Nice
In this day and age why isn't the flight data being streamed in real time to a secure server on land? So that there is no delay in receiving the data and also less risk of losing the data in a crash. Seems like it should also include video of the cockpit. In an emergency situation the pilots aren't narrating what's going on.
Unions won't allow live stream cameras in the cockpit. I agree there should be!
Flight data are recorded live on a plane by 2 black boxes, the cockpit voice recorder and also the flight data recorder. The cockpit voice recorder are not streamed in real time. For flight data, "basic" ADS-B data were streamed in real time to various websites. These data are presented on app/websites such as Flightradar24.
There is no way for the data to be lost unless: 1)The plane is lost therefore the black boxes too (take MH370 as an example) 2)The black boxes were damages in the process of a crash. The black boxes are made to survive plane crashes and presume data for further investigation.
Even with all the data that you've mentioned here streamed in real time to servers, there is still no way that anyone on ground could have stopped the accident. We now should just wait for the official investigation to conclude and wait for the answer. Hope you get what I mean.
Video of cockpit would be too much big brother like
Can you imagine how much bandwidth that would require? How much storage? The extra cost and maintenance time of adding that system to aircraft? Plus, the more systems you add, you add possibilities of problems from that system not working - electrical problems, fire, someone over reacting if the thing stopped broadcasting, etc.
Black Boxes are recovered in the vast majority of crashes, and the delay in receiving data isn't a big issue other than for news stations trying to pad out a dramatic headline with ' there's a lot we don't know yet, but can you please speculate for our audience? '
I'm sure Musk would be happy if someone paid for more starlink satellites up there just to stream flight data.
Video in the cockpit would be even bigger huge amount of data to broadcast, and also not welcome by flight crews. Maybe a case could be made for it to be recorded and stored in a black box and over written after each flight, but transmitting it would be problematic. If you don't encrypt it, then anyone with malicious intent could also monitor the a/c with a lot more information than we currently get from ADSB on sites like FlightRadar.
The direction of the runway alternates according to wind direction so there's no wall on any runway. The doomed flight was not on a runway
the main issue is the wall, with all these tech issues the pilot still manages to perfectly land it without a landing gear.
There aren't many cases of a belly landing for passenger planes, so they need to figure that out as well.
ILS localizer antennas are supposed to break in the event that a plane hits it. they are usually built on soft ground, not concrete. the wall should not be there. The belly landing in itself looked smooth. I wonder how differently it would have played out if the antennas were built the way it should be.
Yes. There are always self styled authorities in every comment section of unfortunate situations. They just mouth off while having no knowledge at all.
ALL berms are supposed to be built with frangible materials.
Hiding a twelve foot concrete wall with dirt is a criminal act.
Poor pilots, they never thought the berm would be an issue. They did an amazing job in trying to land it safely.
Same nonsense, again, same mindset, as what happened In Itaewon…which could have also been prevented with a little foresight.
I'm starting to doubt the pilot's emotional state. A bird strike is unlikely to be the cause of the plane's landing gear failing to deploy.
thats not true bird strikes can cause hydrolic broblem
You can manually deployed the landing gear in cause of hydraulic problem by pulling the lever in the cockpit and the gravity will pull the landing gear down itself. The problem I see here is that the pilot was overwhelmed with engine failure, too many things happening all at once in the cockpit and when he’s about to land, he forgot the basic fundamental of emergency landing procedures. Landing gear down, flaps extended. None of that was evident in the video. Pilot errors and the wall was the caused of many casualties
@@fallenf1owers no time for that; it habbend all in 5 mins
@@Mikaruzamazu you know you can still fly with one engine?
it made a go around before with gear out, think someone lost brain here, landingspeed looked like ToGa speed
This mishap is just strange. It seems like the aircrew panicked.
This airplane will fly on one engine.
Thrust reversers activated, no flaps, landing gear up, spoilers not activated.
There are backup systems. I think the crew panicked.
Birds could be an issue, but the solid concrete wall was sure the killing factor
Click bait
.. for somebody on the plane at a cardiac emergency and not thing to do with the plane itself.
Shoddy journalism. The "technical" issue experienced by the aircraft, HL8088, two days earlier was a passenger related incident, in which the same craft departed for Beijing only 3 hours after the unplanned landing at ICN. A moderate level of investigation proves this. It seems this news channel merely interviewed an "independent aviation analyst" willing to comment publicly with an unsubstantiated claim.
I was scrolling to see if someone else already point that out. Clickbait title with nothing to back it up.
If your gear doesn't drop, manually or otherwise, you don't just turn around and land on your belly..... they weren't out of fuel, were they? they should have had at least 3-4 go arounds of fuel left.
Drone strike over bird strike.
Fantastic
This particular airplane had technical issues 2 days prior to crash.
Rubbish, the 7700 called was due to an unruly passenger, NOT a technical issue. This talking guy is a fool.
Is that confirmed? I read reports it diverted due to medical emergency for passenger.
@@jimbobeire correct, the medical emergency was the unruly passenger.
@@lukes6868 ah, you posted a minute before me. Thanks for the extra info.
The cynic in me wonders if the news channel _knew_ it wasn't really a technical issue, but just wanted a clickbait headline anyway so played dumb.
@@jimbobeire I think the cynic in you may be correct, unfortunately the clickbait is leading other people in the comments to blame the plane.
Always avoid Boeing especially 737. Most deadly plane ever.
which one? The 200, 300, 600, 700, 800 or the max?
@@macclesfieldman the 737
@@anassatria4277… given the sheer amount of them , still one of the safest…
@@macclesfieldman the 737
@@anassatria4277 there are a variety of variants that work differently. I would fly in an 737 anytime as long as I have pro pilots on board.
Excelente 😊😊
I am an expert with 87 flying hours PPL in a Piper Cherokee including 3 hours night rating flew exclusively at night when it is normally dark, especially in England at 52 N winter, anyway, I digress, my expert analysis and research has concluded that the aeroplane hit a large object at the end of the runway.
Lol
Beautiful
pilot did a fly by, shut down the wrong engine, panicked and then forgot to put down flaps and landing gear and then came in too fast.... 💥🔥
The black box and flight recorder were damaged?
Bird Strike + Landing gear failed + Flaps failed causing need for high speed landing + Giant concrete bunker holding airport localizer sitting at the end of the runway + Pilot's bad choice to land here instead of in the water given the circumstances..
It's A BOEING