The saddest aspect is that I am almost certain they had no idea what their fate was once they landed. They were undoubtedly relieved when they touched down and no one, except the pilots, could see the wall.
@Agnes_Hensley One girl messaged a family member while this was happening. Saying,"A bird strikes the plane."Can't land." "Should I write my will?" And the pilots declared a mayday. So I believe they did know but not too long before the crash.
I just wrote on another YT,ber why they do NOT have this similar TRUCK STOP RAMP for BIG TRUCKS, to help TRUCKER who lost their BRAKE or Ctrl. ... so very innovative you take up this issue on the: EMASMAX by Zodiac Arresting Systems, The video link encl. I hope OK to encl. link. Because this has saved a lot of people in this fatal Jeju AIR Crash: th-cam.com/video/emcSX1kijXM/w-d-xo.html But as we know is a lot of corruption going on this AirPort ... /// McRoman has been piloted for like 20 years... so I know a little about safety etc This should never happen, and PILOT could land on the grass slip instead of the runway....
What's crazy is that the same exact accident happened to Canada cargo plane in 2004. They had the same berm but got rid of it after the accident. Simply non complaint but ignored by the airport.
The passengers could have survived if that concrete wall was not there! It's really frustrating..My heart breaks to those families involved. You're in my prayers
They could have also survived if the pilot didn't panic and forget to deploy landing gears and flaps. So many things went wrong here, bird strikes happen all the time, the pilot overreacted here.
The tents have been set up inside the airport ---- Koreans are a very kind people; and to decide to accommodate those grieving in this way ---- so all can be together with food ordered in for them, as well ---- says it all.
Whatever went wrong, the pilots landed the plane relatively safely. What killed everyone was a concrete wall that some genius decided to put at the end of a landing strip.
That's an incorrect analysis. Even the sketchy information we have thus far shows the crew landed very fast and very far down the runway. There was no "concrete wall" at the end of the runway - only an ILS antenna required for instrument landings that every runway has. It may have been with insufficient regard to overrun safety, but right behind it was the concrete perimiter wall of the airport, which reall is a wall, and right behind that was a 4-lane roadway. So even if the ILS antenna had not been there the result would have been exactly the same, landing at this speed so close to the end of the runway.
@@MikeBenko the pilots made serious mistake’s. However pilots mid air make mistakes especially under stress after declaring mayday. Not everyone can fly like Sully. They need a lot of training, luck and support.
@@gregfaris6959no, the plane hit a concrete structure, way stronger than a perimeter wall. The plane would pass trough the wall, it would be damaged and possibly exploded too, but probably with less casualties. What people in plane accidents tend to err is in only trying to find one guilty, when actually theres more than 1 factor to an accident
My non-expert opinion is that the pilots were taken by surprise and didn't have enough time to react/didn't follow the expected process for the emergency they were experiencing. We don't know how experienced the pilots were yet either. The barrier at the end of the runway is absolutely also a negligent and criminal safety oversight on the airport's part!
you are both right and wrong : there was less than 1 min. window of opportunity 2 operate all the emergency landing gear deployment procedure - that pilot simply had no time to try manual releasing of the landing gear before touch down the berm was at the beginning of runway - the plane landed in reverse direction, after aborting the 1st attempt to land
It's very likely it lost both of its engines after bird strike on initial landing attempt. It couldn't fly back up at all, so down it went. Maybe a minute or so is all it had to manually release the landing gear but I believe they panicked on such short notice or with flaps not functioning at all, any experienced pilot could've made a decision feeling confident to land successfully without wheels. He did crashland great but you know rest of the story with stupid concrete walls..
@boostny right, it's been suggested that they lost one engine and maybe shut down the wrong side, disabling the plane's ability to stay airborne and a rushed landing followed. Only the blackbox will be able to tell us.
@@labguru7628the way the plane landed seems like the pilots were calm af. everyone’s saying the landing was great because there was no fire the problem was the wall and why it was there
all airports should have concrete barrier to prevent anyone from coming in, the landing came in short and the plane was very fast, it seems that the pilot panicked and landed at the very end of the airport, they could have gone around and land on the opposite direction, everyone is an expert now BTW.
Passenger were killed by the concrete wall. Plane landed and their was no fire while it was skidding. Who every built that must be prosecuted. Also, airports around the world must also take a look at their design. No one knows how many brick walls have been built!
What are you talking about, you can't see the sparks because it was bright sunny day. I assure you there were sparks. The concrete wall is criminal for sure, hopefully it will prompt that to not be the norm in many overseas airports.
@@miguell2 there were sparks on the underbelly because of rubbing against the runway tarmac. But it did not cause the aircraft to go in flames. Had there been no wall and just open field, may be the plane would have stopped or broken into. Now it is just a speculation as plane appeared to carry lot of fuel while landing and that was a ticking bomb.
@@miguell2what are you talking about. The wall determined their fate. It exploded on impact. If you’re talking about the sparks, why didn’t it explode before hitting the wall. You do know what other planes have landed in similar ways and didn’t explode and passengers survived.
@lemontea128 the wall is not the cause of the accident though. It's ultimately what killed everyone but the accident was caused but botched emergency landing, that's all I'm saying and what the main focus should be. Should look into the wall and fixing that everywhere going forward but that's not the main failure here.
If 2 engines failed then your hydraulics fucked. Then flight control also fucked then both pilots HAND FLY -> not enough time and altitude to lower the gear or doing other shits. Obviously more investigations to come but it's easy to say SHOULD'VE DONE THIS SHOULD'VE DONE THAT. That's because we are just chilling in front of TV or computer screen.
@@scottprather5645 What is happening is that plane crashed and we saw it. Personal aspect of it is irrelevant for society. Whoever is empathetic, they will anyways understand what is going on in families. Whoever does not care, just makes content out of all this.
no ppl need to see. how fucked up these stupid airlines are that they are putting so many lives at risk with not properly training these pilots. the grief needs to be shown.
From a historical perspective, there is an 80-90% chance the pilots panicked and rushed for a teardrop approach to land from the other side instead of circling around and properly configuring the plane. This rushing to land left them no time to think, go through checklists, and configure the plane for landing. History tells us that pilots have routinely turned survivable incidents into emergencies that ended up in catastrophes. Unfortunately, the inconsiderate design of a concrete base at the end of the runway sealed the fate of this plane in what should have been an otherwise survivable accident.
Also they landed with a tailwind rather than the headwind they had on the initial approach, they just set themselves for failure for rushing out of panic. I bet they didn't even try to do their checklists.
Yes, this is most likely what happened. They panic for whatever reason and made a rushed decision. Probably thought both engines were damaged but a concrete wall had no business to be there.
@@gregfaris6959they would have to prove that the accident would be catastrophic to this extent without the embankment. If there was ANY chance of survival once the plane touched the ground then the airport has the biggest blame.
@@vanesalusaria7860 If you drive 80MPH down a country road posted at 30MPH, and you slam into a wall, does the wall owner or manufacturer have to prove you would have hit something else if their wall were not there, or is the primary responsibility with your actions? I am not mocking you with this facetious hypothetical, but seriously the antenna structure may or not be inappropriately constructed, but either way it can only be a contributing, not a primary cause. When you’re off the end of any runway at 150 knots you’re really on your own.
You can't really blame the news media for this. They know the public wants all the information NOW, and they want it to be simple and straightforward, nothing tgechnical and with clear-cut guilty parties. The truth will instead be very technical, with MANY contributing factors, highly technical, and by the time it is really known the people who are clamoring for information today will have moved on to other things and will not be interested any more.
What does he pilot, kites? Bird strikes are not uncommon - as ALL experts have said since this accident, bird strikes do not cause planes to crash. If they did, we would have a plane going down every day.
@@loelds4817You’re right…but if that wall wasn’t there, the plane would have continued to slide and eventually come to a stop. The fire did not start until the impact with the brick wall.
This story is about pilots below the standers!. All what had happened they should do on simulator, 2 times/year . Engine failure, lost of hydraulic system A,B, Standby… landing with one operative engine, with flaps up, with retract landing gear…. First!!! Do not rash! Fly the plane! Holding patern, do all for the stabilized approach.., check the runway condition, the weather..than report, that u are ready for approach.be max professional, and quiet. This is why are u pilot.
The electric REIL and localizers antennaes caused the explosion. The slab dirt mound split the plane in the tail : explains 2 crew seated back survived
The saddest part is I can almost guarantee that they didn’t know what their fate was once they landed. They were probably relieved at touch down and no was able to see the wall except for the pilots.
I dont know. I think maybe thats better for them… cause it must be terrifying if you knew what was going on. I just hope they didn’t suffer and immediate death
This title is totally wrong, there was no crash landing, the plane landed perfectly, with some expected flaring given the circumstances. All the problem was that reinforced concrete that should never be there, in the immediate end of the runway.
Sad to imagine for us, but the passengers may have felt a moment of relief and the stress dissipating, so they didn't die in agony. There is little solace in this, but it might have been the case.
Anyone with half a brain could tell that the bird strike could not have affected the landing gear whatsoever, even if it had damaged the both engines because the pilots could have easily pulled down the landing gear manually as Miles had said in the other video. My theory is that something catastrophic must have happened to the plane especially with the engines when it was about to land for the second time, which forced the pilot to land in sheer panic with no landing gear, no flaps, and at such high speed. It is truly mysterious. Again, something horrible went wrong with the plane before the landing, which forced the pilot to do what he did. Lastly, if the runway had more buffer zones and was better equipped with a wall that was made to be broken instead of solid concrete, the outcome would have been so much better. RIP to the victims. The wall actually was the main culprit of so many deaths and not the bird strike as many Koreans believe!!
People aren't familiar with what a bird strike might do to an engine and plane. It's ridiculous for you to make a negative comment ("anyone with half a brain" would just know it couldn't cause a hydraulic failure). Nice job insulting people. Go back to your popcorn.
There has been much development of "soft" breakable conctete overrun areas - called EMAS - at some airports. After this accident, there will probably be a call for more of this type of construction. But remember, no technical solution is a panacea - and there is not room to install a 500-acre nature reserve at the end of every airport runway. The airport facilities will not be found to have been causal in this tragedy, and ony a secondary factor in the fatalities.
@@gregfaris6959 Looking at google maps, south of this runway there is just fields and small roads. Without the localizer embankment and the perimeter wall of the airport (which seems to be also made out of bricks for some reason) the airplane would have had hundreds of meters of space to stop.
Growing up in the Pacific islands south (Philippines) I haven't heard that much flight accidents. I don't brag but geeze those refurbished local planes they fly, at the start of take off it's making a loud noise and screeching but then it fly like a bird amid the storms, Typhoons, heavy rains, winds and near volcanoes. Nevertheless many of us use Korean air because it's clean, reliable, safe and crews very lovely and nice. Just unfortunate that this disaster happened when you thought you have landed and ready to meet your family.
And with no brakes, what’s the use of the landing gear ?? , the plane would have landed and rolled faster into the wall at higher speed The pilots used a belly landing to scrape along the ground , use friction to slow the plane
Control tower they said , it was a Smoke in the cockpit, thats why they were in Harry to land , they could not see if the landing geer was open nor the flaps , they was in panic and screaming
Imagine being a family of the pilots. South Korea is notorious for excess demanding of apologies and humiliation when one makes a mistake. Cant imagine what they have and will have to go through...
Some are people saying that wall was built to save residential areas, but what about the passengers on the plane? Have you thought about that? They deserve to be save too!!
@@harrisonlaylayalexus Doesn't look like residential areas to me on Google maps. Nearest building is something like 500m from the end of the runway, without the localizer "embankment" and the wall of the airport (which is also bricks for some strange reason) the airplane could have slided for hundreds of meters on scenery with empty roads / fields without issue. It's Muan airport and I think they were landing north to south direction, you can see it on google maps satellite view or street view too.
Not true. There’s nothing but a crossroad and wide open fields beyond the burm. Also, information came out quite quickly that the burm was build according to the design and regulations of the country. Doesn’t mean it’s right
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.
There is a back up for everything, as per the plane manufacturer and airlines. God knows what is the truth. Als, every country has a federal aviation agency who only job is to ensure passenger safety. Why they allowed solid brick wall at the , that too in developed country like south Korea?
@@hagninety4116 no! Can’t hack these systems. I’m saying something caused the pilots to disregard using the other systems and emergency checklists and hurry around to land. The voice and data recorders will reveal why they did what they did. Whether errored or no other choice.
1) WHY did the pilot abort his first attempt at landing IF the "bird strike" occurred on initial approach?? 2) IF the "bird strike" ocurred during the go-around, WHY was the pilot unable to land on his initial approach to begin with?? 3) When alarms sounded in the cockpit w/ regards to the engine - the pilot would be instantly confused and could NOT have known that a bird was involved. They think we are stupid.
I watched another video from a pilot saying this plane had to make an emergency landing days before this tragedy. It was a code that pilots use when there's a problem, the plane had to turn around mid flight to land
Sounds like a panicked pilot to me freaking out and not doing their checklist and just wanted down, the worst thing to have in a emergency... if you slowdown the video of the crash when the windows is visible you can see a pilot with their hands up likely bracing for the crash.
@miguell2 he wasn't panicked since he aborted his first attempt to land with 6 minutes passing between the Mayday and the crash.. What stopped him from landing on his first approach to runway? He made the decision to climb back up and circle back around. It makes no sense to do that if he knew a bird had burnt up in the engine.
I was about to comment this same thing!!! That was disgusting!!! I understand it’s a public space but filming someone grieving and crying is the poorest taste!!! Could have easily covered the story without those clips! Prayers to the families🙏🏽
My heart skips a beat every time I think about what the families must have to go through. The reports saying that many of the bodies were either burned and can't be identified, along with mutilated bodies. Absolutely crushing. I really, really hope that the whole aviation industry, airports can learn from this. This raised so many more questions than answers.
The Jeju plane had a good wings level, nose-up landing about one-third down the, and all the passengers survived. Unfortunately, at that point even the pilots were just passengers. The critical error in this case was placing a reinforced concrete wall and a mound of earth near the end of the runway. It was an accident waiting to happen.
@@jetfloatchoppersail5166are we really sure about that yet? I mean, what if there is something really weird that happened that caused this outcome, like maybe the plane just didn’t work right itself after the bird strike, some kind of malfunction
If the pilot tried really hard, the flap will be extended, No extra fuel causing explosion, the engine will be reversed for landing. Just because he did belly landing doesn't mean he try hard.
The Ryanair 4102 flight was able to land safely after suffering a massive bird strike and they were able to lower the landing gear despite both engines stalling. So this jeju plane landing without landing gear after a massive bird strike is unusual because there is a back up system in place for this.
I lost my wife to cancer 50 days ago and am still *grieving painfully*. I can only imagine the sheer *agony* these families are enduring-it’s truly heartbreaking. Instead of *waiting* for the black box data, the government must *immediately* provide maximum support to all 181 individuals, both *financially and psychologically*.
I’ve watched videos of other pilots commenting on this incident. One of the best theories I’ve heard from a 737 pilot is that the pilots may have inadvertently shut down the wrong engine which was functional and not related to the bird strike. The pilots may have pulled the engine fire extinguisher lever and made the engine lose all power. And doing so the plane lost all power with two nonworking engines, and from what the pilot said, the plane essentially would be a glider and from what he said the configuration is no flaps no gear down because if the gear was down and flaps deployed all of this would cause the plane to lose altitude and perhaps the pilots felt that they needed the altitude to make it to the runway so that’s why they didn’t deploy the landing gear or the flaps. I wonder if they did not have to do the go around if landing in the original direction with the no gear no flaps configuration would have been fatal because I’m not sure if there was a concrete structure in place at the end of the runway with their original landing. Also, due to no gear being deployed, the plane experience a phenomenon noted as float caused by the air disturbance underneath the plane, and this contributed to the plane landing halfway down the runway. The theory that I heard is speculation and it is difficult to blame the pilots when they were undergoing so much stress and coupled with the fact that this was a redeye flight that they may have also been tired. The circumstances may have been non-fatal if it wasn’t for the fact that the concrete structure existed 200 feet beyond the end of the runway for the localizer system. So tragic.
The pilot was an ex-airforce pilot and also a veteran and instructor in the industry who was highly regarded and respected. I really believe something happened and all we can really do is wait for the investigation to unfold. 2 of the survivors were crew members so maybe they have more details and they also recovered the black box.
How can you say the crew handled it badly ? What if they loss BOTH engines on top of the landing gear ? Literally the only thing they could control was the landing (without landing gear) and it was perfectly done. Have some respect man.
What most of the media did not report was the airplane was landing in the opposite direction but even so a concrete structure at the end of both sides of runways should not be there.
Korean here. Here’s a few answers from the korean news: Q: Why not land in the water? A: it’s freezing cold in korea right now and muan airport is not in an urban area either. If the plane sank, passengers would have frozen to death in minutes. Q: Why is korean media not talking about the wall? A: We are talking about it non stop and questioning its purpose. Q: why was there a wall? The concrete wall/localizer was more than 1000ft/300meters from the end of the runway and it complies with international aviation law. Beyond the south end of the wall there is a ditch, a street and hotel buildings. So even if the wall wasn’t there, it would have still been a disaster.
@@loelds4817 If the Korean news is telling people the wall complies with international standards then they are lying. Such objects are not allowed to be near runways.
Bird strikes can disable engines, and the hydraulics that drive the gear, flaps and flight controls are driven by the engines. There are backups, but with pilot mismanagement (shutting down the wrong engine is one possibility) the airplane can be crippled. There are MNAY more contributing factors, which is why it's going to take time to piece together a meaningful picture of how this happened.
@@EthanDickenson Only time will tell, and to really know the answer we are all going to have to wait many months until the detailed investigation is complete. While waiting, we must accept the most likely causal scenario, which would imply that the flight crew reatced ineffectively to an in-flight emergency, making it much worse than it should have been on its own, until the situation became unrecoverable. It's very sad to say, but the end result is very likely to conclude that the pilots, not the bird, not the aircraft, and not the airport infrastructure caused this terrible tragedy.
Please understand that they landed from the WRONG direction!!! That runway is for landing from the opposite direction. The wall is not a factor at all in normal circumstances.
I know of another case and saw the consequences when a bomber, taking off at 300 km/h, smashed the control tower; at the end of the take off, the runway was covered with ice and the pilots were unable to control the plane. No one survived
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.
As a pilot it's critical on final approach two items, gear down flaps down. gear down flaps down, This is pilot error no doubt They might have been overwhelmed but you still have to get those two things down, and that's a fact
@@marciaquarle8870 That would be a very poor security wall if that was the case. I'm more likely to believe that it's just likely to topple over due to it being a relatively small wall likely to just topple over by a large plane barreling through it but then again a car can punch through a brick wall.
That's actually a very good question! It has been asked - and answered - many times, and if you search it you will find the answer. The short answer is that the performance penalty on engine thrust would be unacceptable - but this is not something you can know without running the math on it.
I saw a jet barrelling down and crashing at reinforced concrete wall at over 150 mph and it’s not like the airport didn’t have space to make the area longer . This is not acceptable.
It actually is as though the airport didn't have the space to make it longer. Right behind the antenna you incorrectly refer to as a "wall" was a real wall - the concrete perimiter wall of the airport, and immediately behind that was a 4-lane road. It is indeed unacceptable to hit any of these immovable objects in an airplane at 150MPH, but any airport design issues will only be listed as "contributing factors" to the pilots' mismanagement of the emergency which should have been managable.
Even if that burm wasn't there the plane was traveling so fast it would have smashed into the outer airport security wall and the outcome would of been exactly the same. Let's stop talking about the ils antenna wall and really investigate and get into what the hell the pilots were doing and thinking and saying. This is clearly pilot error in the fact that they obviously handled the single engine bird strike issue poorly. Once the cockpit voice recorder data is extracted we will know exactly what happened.
As a mechanical engineer here is my 2 cents: The pilots did land the plane but without hydraulics no control of devices that slows down the plane- panicked forgetting you can manually lower the landing gear in a few steps; imo what caused the explosion the cement wall/mound- a piece of cement slab on a dirt mound that probably caused the plane to split in the tail( this is why the 2 crew in the end of the plane seated survived ; the localizer antenna and REIL- Runway ELECTRICAL Identifier Lights once it impacted the airplane caused the explosion from the high electrical force. To make a long story short almost all runways have these to support the landing/take-offs for the planes and are adjacent to the end of the runways. The wall is also a sound barrier for residental neighborhood and protection from roadside.The plane pretty much blows up Very unfortunate an obstacle killed 179...
Korean here. Here’s a few answers from the korean news: Q: Why not land in the sea? A: it’s freezing cold in korea right now and muan airport is not in an urban area either. If the plane sank, passengers would have frozen to death in minutes. Q: Why is korean media not talking about the wall? A: We are talking about it non stop and questioning its purpose. Q: why was there a wall? The concrete wall/localizer was more than 1000ft/300meters from the end of the runway and it complies with international aviation law. Beyond the south end of the wall there is a ditch, a street and hotel buildings. So even if the wall wasn’t there, it would have still been a disaster.
Do you think maybe they should change the regulation and zoning rules? Or maybe something like this is so rare it doesn’t require a change. You guys have had it tough lately :/ but I know you can handle it, I see something cool brewing over there with you folks. Things are hopefully all going to change for the better because it looks like people are just super active right now and take no bs
I am tired of people saying Jee ju. It is pronounced Jay Ju. I was on a flight from Jeju City to Kimpo the day before. I keep wondering why they didn't at least open up the flaps to create drag to try to slow it down.
First: Condolences to all suffering from this tragedy. Disclaimer: I am ~not~ an aviation expert by any stretch. Observation: It is apparent that one line of inquiry by many seems to focus on why the landing gear ~wasn't~ deployed. It seems to me that by not having the landing gear deployed, the physics of friction between the aircraft and runway surface enables the forward velocity to DEcelerate. I have to wonder if that was the purposeful choice and well-meaning intent of the pilot(s), to try to slow down the aircraft as much as possible. Of course, had the belly-direct touch down been able to be started sooner (i.e., touched down more toward the front end of the runway instead of toward the back end of it), despite the fact that a cement barrier was at the end of the runway still in question as a possible design flaw, we might have had less or even the possibility of no casualties at the end of this tragic story. Corollary: In the end, supposing all of that doesn't matter to the grieving families and loved ones; sadly, there were 179 souls lost. #PrayersForPeace&Comfort
Metal is a poor friction material, its smooth and deflects to the surface its on. It's like those pucks you get to move furniture around without lifting, it glides more than brakes. Landing gear with rubber tires and brakes would be loads more effective. That piloted should have known that.
@@miguell2 Thank you. Good point, makes sense. The other point of wondering is relative to the reports that the final fatal approach was actually after a go-around, where the primary planned approach would have been in the opposite direction on the runway. Then it begs the question, is there another (unexplained) concrete wall in that other opposite direction, too? At the end of the day, in any case, it seems that the existence of the concrete wall itself being there at all would be a -- if not ~the~ -- major point of inquiry by the investigators.
@@DrummerKK100 Yeah they did what is called a teardrop approach due to the path's appearance when drawn as a line. Normally go around would circle back to a predetermined holding pattern and then wait for clearance to attempt the approach again. In this instance the pilot had declared an emergency and went down in a hurry in the opposite direction than the original approach. This caused them to have a tailwind which means they were approaching at a faster speed relative to the ground because plants fly through the air and their speed is based on their speed through the air so to remain airborne with a headwind his relative speed would have been slower which would have helped things. It sounds to me like the panicked crew that skipped through checklists and just wanted down quickly.
From what was released, the FO is about a year old in his rank, promoted in 2023; just can't recall how many hours he had. The Captain was promoted in 2019 and has almost 10 thousand hours.
@@GoodlifeInvestor good question. From yesterday's press briefing by SK Airport authorities, they stated that the Mayday call, and subsequent landing, crash occurred within six minutes. Unfortunately, they haven't released the ATC communications yet. Good news, they found the colored box.
@@neljade3341 let’s say everything failed & nothing functioned, one thing can’t be explained - why on earth did the pilot land 2/3rds down the runway; “too fast” to land before can’t be a valid argument, Other question is why was the plane not maneuvered upon landing, if they were so far out and they could see the wall…from the look of things there was plenty of time to avert
Landing in the water would've saved the majority if not all lives onboard. It's easy to speak on it from our phones and computers while we are home safe. The pilot panicked after the bird strike. The concrete wall certainly didn't need to be there. Condolences to the families of the deceased
It looks to me that the those pilots were attempting to abort the landing when they suddenly realized that the landing gear was not deployed. That's why the plane had so much speed at landing. Landing gear did not malfunction, they could have used the emergency manual landing gear release lever and pull the cable to release the landing gear. They would have been able to engage the breaks of the plane was to fast to stop. It looks like there was miscommunication and poor coordination in the cockpit!👍🏽👍RIP, I'm pulling my ears to rethink what the heck the pilots were thinking. When you drugged the engines on the runway for too long, friction will generate heat and spark FIRES 🔥
Please read again what you have written. Your first few sentences don’t make sense bro. Jesus. ‘Attempting to land, but realizing no landing gear so they just landed?…
@@bendyrland7213 yup.and even without engine,all landing gear can be deploy via electric power from RAT,Ram air turbine,or be deploy manually by releasing the lock or drop by gravity/gforce.That plane really land with zero landing configuration,except reverse thrust on engine2.
The belly of the plane is so low to the ground but the landing gear can’t stick out? My heart is broken by this tragic incident, it’t the worst nightmare to the victims and their families.
The saddest aspect is that I am almost certain they had no idea what their fate was once they landed. They were undoubtedly relieved when they touched down and no one, except the pilots, could see the wall.
Doubtful, they would have all feared the worst as it would have been very rough when they hit the ground and the speed they were still travelling at.
조종사도 흙더미 속에 콘크리트가 있을거라 생각은 못한거 같아요.
콘크리트 방벽도 그곳에 몇년 전에는 없었어요.
부딪히기 바로 전까지도 장애물을 통과해 승객들을 살릴 수 있다고 생각하고 끝까지 핸들을 놓지 않은 조종사를 포함해 사망한 모두가 희생자 입니다.
@Agnes_Hensley One girl messaged a family member while this was happening. Saying,"A bird strikes the plane."Can't land." "Should I write my will?" And the pilots declared a mayday. So I believe they did know but not too long before the crash.
몇년전 태풍에 대비해 콘크리트 매설을 했다고 합니다.
당시 정부 용역 보고서에는 로컬라이즈 방벽이 쉽게 부서지는 재질 이어야 된다고 나와 있는데 그냥 무시하고 콘크리트로 만들었다고 합니다.
This is one aviation accident in which the airport runway design significantly contributed to the fatalities.
Without the wall many lifes could have beend saved. But the landing itself have some errors.
Absolutely 💯
I just wrote on another YT,ber why they do NOT have this similar TRUCK STOP RAMP for BIG TRUCKS, to help TRUCKER who lost their BRAKE or Ctrl. ... so very innovative you take up this issue on the: EMASMAX by Zodiac Arresting Systems, The video link encl. I hope OK to encl. link. Because this has saved a lot of people in this fatal Jeju AIR Crash: th-cam.com/video/emcSX1kijXM/w-d-xo.html
But as we know is a lot of corruption going on this AirPort ...
/// McRoman has been piloted for like 20 years... so I know a little about safety etc
This should never happen, and PILOT could land on the grass slip instead of the runway....
What's crazy is that the same exact accident happened to Canada cargo plane in 2004. They had the same berm but got rid of it after the accident. Simply non complaint but ignored by the airport.
Try ENTIRELY!
The passengers could have survived if that concrete wall was not there! It's really frustrating..My heart breaks to those families involved. You're in my prayers
its like die hard
They could have also survived if the pilot didn't panic and forget to deploy landing gears and flaps. So many things went wrong here, bird strikes happen all the time, the pilot overreacted here.
I do not think the landing gear was working. I think the pilot did not have enough time to manually lower the landing gear as it require many steps.
Pilots first time bird strike proly
A wall or mound should not be at the end of the runway. A huge lesson for the aviation industry
FROM TEXAS... OUR SINCERE CONDOLENCES AND PRAYERS TO THE FAMILIES!!!
My God the families camping out in tents grieving together. My heart and prayers goes out to the families 😔
The tents have been set up inside the airport ---- Koreans are a very kind people; and to decide to accommodate those grieving in this way ---- so all can be together with food ordered in for them, as well ---- says it all.
@ i think thats epic 🙏
I mean what else are they gonna do? Makes sense they’re hanging together there but it’s a bit depressing
Sum Ting Wong
Wi Tu Low
Whatever went wrong, the pilots landed the plane relatively safely. What killed everyone was a concrete wall that some genius decided to put at the end of a landing strip.
That's an incorrect analysis. Even the sketchy information we have thus far shows the crew landed very fast and very far down the runway. There was no "concrete wall" at the end of the runway - only an ILS antenna required for instrument landings that every runway has. It may have been with insufficient regard to overrun safety, but right behind it was the concrete perimiter wall of the airport, which reall is a wall, and right behind that was a 4-lane roadway. So even if the ILS antenna had not been there the result would have been exactly the same, landing at this speed so close to the end of the runway.
@@MikeBenko the pilots made serious mistake’s. However pilots mid air make mistakes especially under stress after declaring mayday. Not everyone can fly like Sully. They need a lot of training, luck and support.
Armchair Gregs unite!!!’
@@MikeBenko South Korea is a county of geniuses
@@gregfaris6959no, the plane hit a concrete structure, way stronger than a perimeter wall. The plane would pass trough the wall, it would be damaged and possibly exploded too, but probably with less casualties. What people in plane accidents tend to err is in only trying to find one guilty, when actually theres more than 1 factor to an accident
My non-expert opinion is that the pilots were taken by surprise and didn't have enough time to react/didn't follow the expected process for the emergency they were experiencing. We don't know how experienced the pilots were yet either. The barrier at the end of the runway is absolutely also a negligent and criminal safety oversight on the airport's part!
you are both right and wrong :
there was less than 1 min. window of opportunity 2 operate all the emergency landing gear deployment procedure - that pilot simply had no time to try manual releasing of the landing gear before touch down
the berm was at the beginning of runway - the plane landed in reverse direction, after aborting the 1st attempt to land
@@freewheeler1728 How long does it take to deploy flaps? That crew was not ready to land their ship safely.
It's very likely it lost both of its engines after bird strike on initial landing attempt. It couldn't fly back up at all, so down it went. Maybe a minute or so is all it had to manually release the landing gear but I believe they panicked on such short notice or with flaps not functioning at all, any experienced pilot could've made a decision feeling confident to land successfully without wheels. He did crashland great but you know rest of the story with stupid concrete walls..
@boostny right, it's been suggested that they lost one engine and maybe shut down the wrong side, disabling the plane's ability to stay airborne and a rushed landing followed. Only the blackbox will be able to tell us.
Birds didnt killed them. Stupid concrete barrier 🚧.
and possibly a panicked flight crew?
@@labguru7628the way the plane landed seems like the pilots were calm af. everyone’s saying the landing was great because there was no fire the problem was the wall and why it was there
More like bad pilots.
God damn. This REALLY breaks my heart. I am soooo sorry for the family’s loss..I just have no words.
all airports should have concrete barrier to prevent anyone from coming in, the landing came in short and the plane was very fast, it seems that the pilot panicked and landed at the very end of the airport, they could have gone around and land on the opposite direction, everyone is an expert now BTW.
Just brutal, to lose a loved-one in this way so briefly before the year ends. Just awful.
Sorry for the accident, we are mourning with you in Ghana
Passenger were killed by the concrete wall. Plane landed and their was no fire while it was skidding. Who every built that must be prosecuted. Also, airports around the world must also take a look at their design. No one knows how many brick walls have been built!
What are you talking about, you can't see the sparks because it was bright sunny day. I assure you there were sparks. The concrete wall is criminal for sure, hopefully it will prompt that to not be the norm in many overseas airports.
@@miguell2 there were sparks on the underbelly because of rubbing against the runway tarmac. But it did not cause the aircraft to go in flames. Had there been no wall and just open field, may be the plane would have stopped or broken into. Now it is just a speculation as plane appeared to carry lot of fuel while landing and that was a ticking bomb.
@@miguell2what are you talking about. The wall determined their fate. It exploded on impact. If you’re talking about the sparks, why didn’t it explode before hitting the wall. You do know what other planes have landed in similar ways and didn’t explode and passengers survived.
@lemontea128 the wall is not the cause of the accident though. It's ultimately what killed everyone but the accident was caused but botched emergency landing, that's all I'm saying and what the main focus should be. Should look into the wall and fixing that everywhere going forward but that's not the main failure here.
Its very hard to understand how a bird strike would disable the landing gear
It can't .
If 2 engines failed then your hydraulics fucked. Then flight control also fucked then both pilots HAND FLY -> not enough time and altitude to lower the gear or doing other shits.
Obviously more investigations to come but it's easy to say SHOULD'VE DONE THIS SHOULD'VE DONE THAT. That's because we are just chilling in front of TV or computer screen.
Maybe the bird strike hit the door to the landing gear and jammed it shut.
99.9% impossible
They don’t even add Boeing in the title lol
Why is it necessary to show people grieving? This is not appropriate I think
What about the suffering. Should suffering be censored?
@@NealLampi It is not about censoring. It is about relevance...
It's totally appropriate people need to see the reality of what's happening in the real world.
@@scottprather5645 What is happening is that plane crashed and we saw it. Personal aspect of it is irrelevant for society. Whoever is empathetic, they will anyways understand what is going on in families. Whoever does not care, just makes content out of all this.
no ppl need to see. how fucked up these stupid airlines are that they are putting so many lives at risk with not properly training these pilots. the grief needs to be shown.
From a historical perspective, there is an 80-90% chance the pilots panicked and rushed for a teardrop approach to land from the other side instead of circling around and properly configuring the plane. This rushing to land left them no time to think, go through checklists, and configure the plane for landing. History tells us that pilots have routinely turned survivable incidents into emergencies that ended up in catastrophes.
Unfortunately, the inconsiderate design of a concrete base at the end of the runway sealed the fate of this plane in what should have been an otherwise survivable accident.
Perfectly true.
Spot on
Also they landed with a tailwind rather than the headwind they had on the initial approach, they just set themselves for failure for rushing out of panic. I bet they didn't even try to do their checklists.
I completely agree!
Yes, this is most likely what happened. They panic for whatever reason and made a rushed decision. Probably thought both engines were damaged but a concrete wall had no business to be there.
The embankment, did them in. The airport must take majority of the responsibility and the pilots the rest.
It will prove to be the opposite.
@@gregfaris6959 You owe us a funny emojis when you are proved wrong. I am also curious to know who live in the buildings protected by the embankments.
@@gregfaris6959they would have to prove that the accident would be catastrophic to this extent without the embankment.
If there was ANY chance of survival once the plane touched the ground then the airport has the biggest blame.
@@vanesalusaria7860 If you drive 80MPH down a country road posted at 30MPH, and you slam into a wall, does the wall owner or manufacturer have to prove you would have hit something else if their wall were not there, or is the primary responsibility with your actions? I am not mocking you with this facetious hypothetical, but seriously the antenna structure may or not be inappropriately constructed, but either way it can only be a contributing, not a primary cause. When you’re off the end of any runway at 150 knots you’re really on your own.
How many different videos do you make in a day with no new informations?
😂
You can't really blame the news media for this. They know the public wants all the information NOW, and they want it to be simple and straightforward, nothing tgechnical and with clear-cut guilty parties. The truth will instead be very technical, with MANY contributing factors, highly technical, and by the time it is really known the people who are clamoring for information today will have moved on to other things and will not be interested any more.
I’m sorry, my father has been a pilot for more time than I’ve been around, and I’m not young. The one thing he fears? Bird strikes.
I know the navy takes birds very serious.
So crazy never knew it was such a problem. Are we talking tons of birds??
What does he pilot, kites? Bird strikes are not uncommon - as ALL experts have said since this accident, bird strikes do not cause planes to crash. If they did, we would have a plane going down every day.
@ no. Sorry your Reddit forum shut down, and you decided to bring that shit here.
Bird strikes happen all the time , 10000 pound concrete walls don’t happen all time though
The wall didn’t cause the plane to malfunction
@@loelds4817Well-trained pilots know how to manage crew resources to ensure landing gear is lowered before needing it.
@@loelds4817You’re right…but if that wall wasn’t there, the plane would have continued to slide and eventually come to a stop. The fire did not start until the impact with the brick wall.
BS. You are ignorant of what had happened but yearned to comment like you are a Know-all or an expert.
BS please he is 100 percent right lmao@@ninakhan3803
This story is not about a bird strike...
It is about passengers, people and a WALL.
And the manufacturer which is the main culprit
This story is about pilots below the standers!. All what had happened they should do on simulator, 2 times/year . Engine failure, lost of hydraulic system A,B, Standby… landing with one operative engine, with flaps up, with retract landing gear…. First!!! Do not rash! Fly the plane! Holding patern, do all for the stabilized approach.., check the runway condition, the weather..than report, that u are ready for approach.be max professional, and quiet. This is why are u pilot.
There is a video of the crash. Looks like the jet ran into a dirt mound with a wall on top. Birds did not cause the explosion.
lol
The electric REIL and localizers antennaes caused the explosion. The slab dirt mound split the plane in the tail : explains 2 crew seated back survived
Design/layout of the airport itself should be looked at also...why was the localizer encased in a concrete wall so close to the end of a runway???
My condolences to the families that are hurting 🙏🕊️
The saddest part is I can almost guarantee that they didn’t know what their fate was once they landed. They were probably relieved at touch down and no was able to see the wall except for the pilots.
I dont know. I think maybe thats better for them… cause it must be terrifying if you knew what was going on. I just hope they didn’t suffer and immediate death
This title is totally wrong, there was no crash landing, the plane landed perfectly, with some expected flaring given the circumstances. All the problem was that reinforced concrete that should never be there, in the immediate end of the runway.
No they didn't suffer at all it's heart breaking for they families 💔🥹❤️
How is that the saddest part? The saddest part is hundreds of relatives lost their family members
Sad to imagine for us, but the passengers may have felt a moment of relief and the stress dissipating, so they didn't die in agony. There is little solace in this, but it might have been the case.
Anyone with half a brain could tell that the bird strike could not have affected
the landing gear whatsoever, even if it had damaged the
both engines because the pilots could have easily pulled down the landing gear manually
as Miles had said in the other video. My theory is that something catastrophic must have happened to
the plane especially with the engines when it was about to land for the second time,
which forced the pilot to land in sheer panic with no landing gear, no flaps, and at such high speed.
It is truly mysterious. Again, something horrible went wrong with the plane before the landing,
which forced the pilot to do what he did. Lastly, if the runway had
more buffer zones and was better equipped with a wall that was made to be broken
instead of solid concrete, the outcome would have been so much better. RIP to the victims.
The wall actually was the main culprit of so many deaths and not the bird strike as many Koreans believe!!
Excettly.High landing speed and landing gear was not deployed.Bird strike has nothing to with plane crash.
People aren't familiar with what a bird strike might do to an engine and plane. It's ridiculous for you to make a negative comment ("anyone with half a brain" would just know it couldn't cause a hydraulic failure). Nice job insulting people. Go back to your popcorn.
@@stephanieadams3747 truth hurts
I think after the runway there should be a shallow pond or lake, not the concrete wall.
Of course a favorite habitat for birds!
There has been much development of "soft" breakable conctete overrun areas - called EMAS - at some airports.
After this accident, there will probably be a call for more of this type of construction.
But remember, no technical solution is a panacea - and there is not room to install a 500-acre nature reserve at the end of every airport runway.
The airport facilities will not be found to have been causal in this tragedy, and ony a secondary factor in the fatalities.
@@gregfaris6959 Looking at google maps, south of this runway there is just fields and small roads. Without the localizer embankment and the perimeter wall of the airport (which seems to be also made out of bricks for some reason) the airplane would have had hundreds of meters of space to stop.
Growing up in the Pacific islands south (Philippines) I haven't heard that much flight accidents. I don't brag but geeze those refurbished local planes they fly, at the start of take off it's making a loud noise and screeching but then it fly like a bird amid the storms, Typhoons, heavy rains, winds and near volcanoes. Nevertheless many of us use Korean air because it's clean, reliable, safe and crews very lovely and nice. Just unfortunate that this disaster happened when you thought you have landed and ready to meet your family.
YOU DON’T NEED HYDRAULICS TO DEPLOY A 737-800 LANDING GEAR.
Because the landing gear is already heavy and gravity force is sufficient to deploy it
But it only takes one finger to turn off CAPS lock.
And with no brakes, what’s the use of the landing gear ?? , the plane would have landed and rolled faster into the wall at higher speed
The pilots used a belly landing to scrape along the ground , use friction to slow the plane
Boeing is in trouble
Control tower they said , it was a Smoke in the cockpit, thats why they were in Harry to land , they could not see if the landing geer was open nor the flaps , they was in panic and screaming
Imagine being a family of the pilots. South Korea is notorious for excess demanding of apologies and humiliation when one makes a mistake. Cant imagine what they have and will have to go through...
…on top of the families of the pilots also losing their loved ones
아니예요.
오히려 외국 개인 유튜브 채널 영상들에 한국 조종사와 승무원들 그리고 한국인을 비난하는 코멘트가 더 많아서 놀랐어요.
한국 언론을 보시면 그 어떤 언론과 유튜버들도 조종사와 승무원을 욕하는 곳이 없어요.
항공사와 콘크리트 방벽을 설치한 정부를 욕하죠.
What does a bird strike have to do with failed landing gear???
Exactly..now you're onto something
Nothing. nor would it effect the flaps, which could have slowed the craft down.
Some are people saying that wall was built to save residential areas, but what about the passengers on the plane? Have you thought about that? They deserve to be save too!!
Why are residential areas so close to the runway/airport?
@@harrisonlaylayalexus Doesn't look like residential areas to me on Google maps. Nearest building is something like 500m from the end of the runway, without the localizer "embankment" and the wall of the airport (which is also bricks for some strange reason) the airplane could have slided for hundreds of meters on scenery with empty roads / fields without issue. It's Muan airport and I think they were landing north to south direction, you can see it on google maps satellite view or street view too.
Not true. There’s nothing but a crossroad and wide open fields beyond the burm. Also, information came out quite quickly that the burm was build according to the design and regulations of the country. Doesn’t mean it’s right
I can't believe two people survived that.
They were facing to the rear and were in the rear are the reasons.
Back up for all those systems. No way a bird strike took out all those backup systems.
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.
There is a back up for everything, as per the plane manufacturer and airlines. God knows what is the truth. Als, every country has a federal aviation agency who only job is to ensure passenger safety. Why they allowed solid brick wall at the , that too in developed country like south Korea?
Are you saying they were hacked?
@@hagninety4116 no! Can’t hack these systems. I’m saying something caused the pilots to disregard using the other systems and emergency checklists and hurry around to land. The voice and data recorders will reveal why they did what they did. Whether errored or no other choice.
@@Rossjones66246 sully had flaps and landing gear available. Even with no engines at all you can deploy gear and flaps.
That wall 🤷🏽♀️🤦🏽♀️ why on earth is that there?
1) WHY did the pilot abort his first attempt at landing IF the "bird strike" occurred on initial approach??
2) IF the "bird strike" ocurred during the go-around, WHY was the pilot unable to land on his initial approach to begin with??
3) When alarms sounded in the cockpit w/ regards to the engine - the pilot would be instantly confused and could NOT have known that a bird was involved.
They think we are stupid.
Very good questions.
I watched another video from a pilot saying this plane had to make an emergency landing days before this tragedy. It was a code that pilots use when there's a problem, the plane had to turn around mid flight to land
Sounds like a panicked pilot to me freaking out and not doing their checklist and just wanted down, the worst thing to have in a emergency... if you slowdown the video of the crash when the windows is visible you can see a pilot with their hands up likely bracing for the crash.
@miguell2 he wasn't panicked since he aborted his first attempt to land with 6 minutes passing between the Mayday and the crash.. What stopped him from landing on his first approach to runway? He made the decision to climb back up and circle back around. It makes no sense to do that if he knew a bird had burnt up in the engine.
Sadly, not every pilot is competent like Chesley Sullenberger.
😊
Whoever built that barrier(along with whoever approved it) is going to be in a lot of trouble.
Apparently it was built to the standards and regulations of the country.
Corruption, it shouldn't be there
This is so sad. Condolences to the loved ones of those killed in the crash. Hopefully, the cause of the crash will be determined soon.
Is there news on passengers list ?
that is so sad 😪may their souls rest in peace.
The most heartbreaking part was that there was a concrete structure at the end, hidden by soft dirt.
Heartbreaking scenes of families mourning together and staying in tents , it shows South Korea strong family system and values . Rest in peace all
Thank you for saying this. As a korean, that's why these scenes are so important
Did the pilot panic?
Probably I mean he lost engines.
@@DP-eo5xdjust one, and they are trained for this
highly likely
That’s what I think happened.
As a former 737 pilot my hunch is they panicked and rushed to get onto the ground.
Oh those grieving families - my heart hurts for them 😔
This is sick showing grieving relatives shame on you CNN
I was about to comment this same thing!!! That was disgusting!!! I understand it’s a public space but filming someone grieving and crying is the poorest taste!!! Could have easily covered the story without those clips! Prayers to the families🙏🏽
@ I'm pleased you agree
My heart skips a beat every time I think about what the families must have to go through. The reports saying that many of the bodies were either burned and can't be identified, along with mutilated bodies. Absolutely crushing. I really, really hope that the whole aviation industry, airports can learn from this. This raised so many more questions than answers.
The Jeju plane had a good wings level, nose-up landing about one-third down the, and all the passengers survived. Unfortunately, at that point even the pilots were just passengers. The critical error in this case was placing a reinforced concrete wall and a mound of earth near the end of the runway. It was an accident waiting to happen.
Latest news say that the aircraft conducted 13 flights within 48 hours!!
The poor Pilot tried so hard R.I.P😢
This is 99% pilot error.
@@jetfloatchoppersail5166are we really sure about that yet? I mean, what if there is something really weird that happened that caused this outcome, like maybe the plane just didn’t work right itself after the bird strike, some kind of malfunction
If the pilot tried really hard, the flap will be extended, No extra fuel causing explosion, the engine will be reversed for landing. Just because he did belly landing doesn't mean he try hard.
@@jetfloatchoppersail5166no, it’s not.
remember your comment here once the report comes out
Take the concrete wall off the airport field. It is blocking the plane from the runway.
What bird strike has to do with Landing Gear? landing gear was not deployed and plane landing speed was faster than normal.
How did bird strike prevent landing gear from operating?
Perhaps someone is sabatoging these planes
Pilots doing a terrible job is why the landing gear and flaps weren’t used
@@Pepe46873 how long had the pilot been flying?
@@kimsold22I heard that one pilot since 2019 and one since 2023. So still fairly new pilots imo.
@ oh my 😳
The Ryanair 4102 flight was able to land safely after suffering a massive bird strike and they were able to lower the landing gear despite both engines stalling. So this jeju plane landing without landing gear after a massive bird strike is unusual because there is a back up system in place for this.
They panicked, manually lowering landing gear takes a few steps
I think the pilot did not have enough time to manually drop the landing gear.
I lost my wife to cancer 50 days ago and am still *grieving painfully*.
I can only imagine the sheer *agony* these families are enduring-it’s truly heartbreaking.
Instead of *waiting* for the black box data, the government must *immediately* provide maximum support to all 181 individuals, both *financially and psychologically*.
I’ve watched videos of other pilots commenting on this incident. One of the best theories I’ve heard from a 737 pilot is that the pilots may have inadvertently shut down the wrong engine which was functional and not related to the bird strike. The pilots may have pulled the engine fire extinguisher lever and made the engine lose all power. And doing so the plane lost all power with two nonworking engines, and from what the pilot said, the plane essentially would be a glider and from what he said the configuration is no flaps no gear down because if the gear was down and flaps deployed all of this would cause the plane to lose altitude and perhaps the pilots felt that they needed the altitude to make it to the runway so that’s why they didn’t deploy the landing gear or the flaps. I wonder if they did not have to do the go around if landing in the original direction with the no gear no flaps configuration would have been fatal because I’m not sure if there was a concrete structure in place at the end of the runway with their original landing. Also, due to no gear being deployed, the plane experience a phenomenon noted as float caused by the air disturbance underneath the plane, and this contributed to the plane landing halfway down the runway. The theory that I heard is speculation and it is difficult to blame the pilots when they were undergoing so much stress and coupled with the fact that this was a redeye flight that they may have also been tired. The circumstances may have been non-fatal if it wasn’t for the fact that the concrete structure existed 200 feet beyond the end of the runway for the localizer system. So tragic.
Makes absolutely no sense at all to have a concrete barrier at end of runway.
Looks like the flight deck crew handled the bird strike badly.
I am not a Boeing fan but the the 737-800 is a very safe aircraft
Airbus is way safer, but you're right.... 737-800 is safe indeed
The pilot was an ex-airforce pilot and also a veteran and instructor in the industry who was highly regarded and respected. I really believe something happened and all we can really do is wait for the investigation to unfold. 2 of the survivors were crew members so maybe they have more details and they also recovered the black box.
We don't know what happened in the cockpit, and we won't for months.
@@Chris-qh5tzMany commercial planes have crashed by pilot error flown by pilots that were once military pilots.
How can you say the crew handled it badly ? What if they loss BOTH engines on top of the landing gear ? Literally the only thing they could control was the landing (without landing gear) and it was perfectly done. Have some respect man.
What most of the media did not report was the airplane was landing in the opposite direction but even so a concrete structure at the end of both sides of runways should not be there.
Remember when Sully landed the plane in the Hudson after bird strikes in both engines
He didn't have an unnecessarily hard object shortly after the end of the runway. Design of the airport is to mostly blame
Korean here. Here’s a few answers from the korean news:
Q: Why not land in the water?
A: it’s freezing cold in korea right now and muan airport is not in an urban area either. If the plane sank, passengers would have frozen to death in minutes.
Q: Why is korean media not talking about the wall?
A: We are talking about it non stop and questioning its purpose.
Q: why was there a wall?
The concrete wall/localizer was more than 1000ft/300meters from the end of the runway and it complies with international aviation law. Beyond the south end of the wall there is a ditch, a street and hotel buildings. So even if the wall wasn’t there, it would have still been a disaster.
@@unlazyfree agree
Yeah... But that was Sully the great, allright
@@loelds4817 If the Korean news is telling people the wall complies with international standards then they are lying.
Such objects are not allowed to be near runways.
you recording this is really inappropriate
Bird strikes don’t disable flaps and landing gear. WTF?
Bird strikes can disable engines, and the hydraulics that drive the gear, flaps and flight controls are driven by the engines. There are backups, but with pilot mismanagement (shutting down the wrong engine is one possibility) the airplane can be crippled. There are MNAY more contributing factors, which is why it's going to take time to piece together a meaningful picture of how this happened.
@ thanks for your answer. I’m no expert… and am sincerely wondering how this could happen.
@@EthanDickenson Only time will tell, and to really know the answer we are all going to have to wait many months until the detailed investigation is complete. While waiting, we must accept the most likely causal scenario, which would imply that the flight crew reatced ineffectively to an in-flight emergency, making it much worse than it should have been on its own, until the situation became unrecoverable. It's very sad to say, but the end result is very likely to conclude that the pilots, not the bird, not the aircraft, and not the airport infrastructure caused this terrible tragedy.
Um a wall at the end of a runway? Who designed that airport??
A bird strike doesn't take out two engines of an Boeing 737 airplane.
Unlikely but a bird strike could just as one took out both engines on Sully's Airbus A320
It shouldn't take out two engines. Assuming that proper maintenance have taken place. Investigation will tell us the answers
How can you be so sure from your warm room
Hello..., Sully on the hudson, both engines choked out bird strike! But I agree, I don't think that this was the case in this situation.
It's a doubt existence of a maintenance team in South Korea's LCCs except for two big airport companies (Asiana Airlines and Korean Air).
This is so sad my heart breaks knowing so many people died. From Puerto Rico …our sincere condolences and payers to the families.😢
Why in 2025 are we still having bird strikes
Are birds extinct ❓🤔
because the skies actually belong to birds and airplanes are invasive to the skies if u really think about it
@@douglaspaterson5269seriously wtf lmao 😂
What a silly question.
It’s still 2024
Please understand that they landed from the WRONG direction!!! That runway is for landing from the opposite direction. The wall is not a factor at all in normal circumstances.
Prayers for all the victims and their dear loved ones!! 🙏💔😭
I know of another case and saw the consequences when a bomber, taking off at 300 km/h, smashed the control tower; at the end of the take off, the runway was covered with ice and the pilots were unable to control the plane. No one survived
Was this in Korea?
@@FlappyBelly No, near Alaska
She didn’t have to tell us that they throw frozen birds into the engines to test them.😩
Why not?
Well you know most people eat frozen birds all the time right? Especially for that holiday in November.
Why not, it is more assuring you know that a frozen bird thrown on an engine is survivable.. than not testing t all.
Your way too sensitive Jill. grow up
😅😅😅 urban legend. Birds don't fly around frozen. They do use chicken guns to fire at various engine components. Just not frozen.
When the expert said "it was survivable" that's just the most tragic part
How does a bird strike cause a landing gear failure?
Because they wanted a belly landing some say.
@@janebraun4482 I'm failing to understand why a belly landing would be preferable in any way.
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.
@@Rossjones66246 I may have missed those comments, but I haven't yet seen anyone saying bird strikes don't take down planes.
As a pilot it's critical on final approach two items, gear down flaps down. gear down flaps down, This is pilot error no doubt They might have been overwhelmed but you still have to get those two things down, and that's a fact
If the barrier wall was not there everyone would have survived
That is not given, there was a security wall beyond that and a roadway and then ocean. Likely more people would have survived but you can't be sure.
@@miguell2 security wall is not a big obstacle like concrete
@@psn3694 Yes but frigid water either way is not ideal, it could have killed people on the roadway beyond the security wall.
I read in NYT that the second wall was collapsible
not reinforced
@@marciaquarle8870 That would be a very poor security wall if that was the case. I'm more likely to believe that it's just likely to topple over due to it being a relatively small wall likely to just topple over by a large plane barreling through it but then again a car can punch through a brick wall.
Why didn’t the pilot land in the river along the airport? It has a much longer runway than that tiny airport.
Rest in peace 😢
Why wasn’t the landing gear down? Something’s not right
Why the manufacturer don’t install filter in front of the engine
That's actually a very good question!
It has been asked - and answered - many times, and if you search it you will find the answer.
The short answer is that the performance penalty on engine thrust would be unacceptable - but this is not something you can know without running the math on it.
That bird must be bigger and heavier than that plane.
I saw a jet barrelling down and crashing at reinforced concrete wall at over 150 mph and it’s not like the airport didn’t have space to make the area longer . This is not acceptable.
It actually is as though the airport didn't have the space to make it longer. Right behind the antenna you incorrectly refer to as a "wall" was a real wall - the concrete perimiter wall of the airport, and immediately behind that was a 4-lane road. It is indeed unacceptable to hit any of these immovable objects in an airplane at 150MPH, but any airport design issues will only be listed as "contributing factors" to the pilots' mismanagement of the emergency which should have been managable.
Even if that burm wasn't there the plane was traveling so fast it would have smashed into the outer airport security wall and the outcome would of been exactly the same. Let's stop talking about the ils antenna wall and really investigate and get into what the hell the pilots were doing and thinking and saying. This is clearly pilot error in the fact that they obviously handled the single engine bird strike issue poorly. Once the cockpit voice recorder data is extracted we will know exactly what happened.
As a mechanical engineer here is my 2 cents: The pilots did land the plane but without hydraulics no control of devices that slows down the plane- panicked forgetting you can manually lower the landing gear in a few steps; imo what caused the explosion the cement wall/mound- a piece of cement slab on a dirt mound that probably caused the plane to split in the tail( this is why the 2 crew in the end of the plane seated survived ; the localizer antenna and REIL- Runway ELECTRICAL Identifier Lights once it impacted the airplane caused the explosion from the high electrical force. To make a long story short almost all runways have these to support the landing/take-offs for the planes and are adjacent to the end of the runways. The wall is also a sound barrier for residental neighborhood and protection from roadside.The plane pretty much blows up
Very unfortunate an obstacle killed 179...
Airport says manual did not say concrete base is not allowed.
Korean here. Here’s a few answers from the korean news:
Q: Why not land in the sea?
A: it’s freezing cold in korea right now and muan airport is not in an urban area either. If the plane sank, passengers would have frozen to death in minutes.
Q: Why is korean media not talking about the wall?
A: We are talking about it non stop and questioning its purpose.
Q: why was there a wall?
The concrete wall/localizer was more than 1000ft/300meters from the end of the runway and it complies with international aviation law. Beyond the south end of the wall there is a ditch, a street and hotel buildings. So even if the wall wasn’t there, it would have still been a disaster.
Thank you.
Do you think maybe they should change the regulation and zoning rules? Or maybe something like this is so rare it doesn’t require a change.
You guys have had it tough lately :/ but I know you can handle it, I see something cool brewing over there with you folks. Things are hopefully all going to change for the better because it looks like people are just super active right now and take no bs
exactly, this is what i think about wall situation...
Thank you so much. Too many so-called experts talking without full knowledge of the situation.
It’s supposed to install something can slow down the plane like we see in aircraft carriers
I am tired of people saying Jee ju. It is pronounced Jay Ju. I was on a flight from Jeju City to Kimpo the day before. I keep wondering why they didn't at least open up the flaps to create drag to try to slow it down.
rest in peace
This accident is just too frustrating.Its going to come down to poor cockpit management rather than the aircraft.
Praying for the grate nation of South Korea 🇰🇷 🙏
great*
179 ppl died that’s just tragic ♥️🙏🏽
First: Condolences to all suffering from this tragedy.
Disclaimer: I am ~not~ an aviation expert by any stretch.
Observation: It is apparent that one line of inquiry by many seems to focus on why the landing gear ~wasn't~ deployed. It seems to me that by not having the landing gear deployed, the physics of friction between the aircraft and runway surface enables the forward velocity to DEcelerate. I have to wonder if that was the purposeful choice and well-meaning intent of the pilot(s), to try to slow down the aircraft as much as possible. Of course, had the belly-direct touch down been able to be started sooner (i.e., touched down more toward the front end of the runway instead of toward the back end of it), despite the fact that a cement barrier was at the end of the runway still in question as a possible design flaw, we might have had less or even the possibility of no casualties at the end of this tragic story.
Corollary: In the end, supposing all of that doesn't matter to the grieving families and loved ones; sadly, there were 179 souls lost.
#PrayersForPeace&Comfort
Metal is a poor friction material, its smooth and deflects to the surface its on. It's like those pucks you get to move furniture around without lifting, it glides more than brakes. Landing gear with rubber tires and brakes would be loads more effective. That piloted should have known that.
@@miguell2 Thank you. Good point, makes sense.
The other point of wondering is relative to the reports that the final fatal approach was actually after a go-around, where the primary planned approach would have been in the opposite direction on the runway. Then it begs the question, is there another (unexplained) concrete wall in that other opposite direction, too? At the end of the day, in any case, it seems that the existence of the concrete wall itself being there at all would be a -- if not ~the~ -- major point of inquiry by the investigators.
@@DrummerKK100 Yeah they did what is called a teardrop approach due to the path's appearance when drawn as a line. Normally go around would circle back to a predetermined holding pattern and then wait for clearance to attempt the approach again. In this instance the pilot had declared an emergency and went down in a hurry in the opposite direction than the original approach. This caused them to have a tailwind which means they were approaching at a faster speed relative to the ground because plants fly through the air and their speed is based on their speed through the air so to remain airborne with a headwind his relative speed would have been slower which would have helped things. It sounds to me like the panicked crew that skipped through checklists and just wanted down quickly.
No airport have a concrete wall.
I hope they didn’t hire a rookie for the budget airline, it’ll be interesting to see the pilots flight experience,
8000+ hours for both combined
From what was released, the FO is about a year old in his rank, promoted in 2023; just can't recall how many hours he had. The Captain was promoted in 2019 and has almost 10 thousand hours.
@@neljade3341 doesn’t the FO pull the strings manually on the landing gear in case of failure
@@GoodlifeInvestor good question. From yesterday's press briefing by SK Airport authorities, they stated that the Mayday call, and subsequent landing, crash occurred within six minutes. Unfortunately, they haven't released the ATC communications yet. Good news, they found the colored box.
@@neljade3341 let’s say everything failed & nothing functioned, one thing can’t be explained - why on earth did the pilot land 2/3rds down the runway; “too fast” to land before can’t be a valid argument,
Other question is why was the plane not maneuvered upon landing, if they were so far out and they could see the wall…from the look of things there was plenty of time to avert
Why isn’t the landing gear at least down then.
Landing in the water would've saved the majority if not all lives onboard. It's easy to speak on it from our phones and computers while we are home safe. The pilot panicked after the bird strike. The concrete wall certainly didn't need to be there. Condolences to the families of the deceased
Didn't you just say that there wasn't any power in the plane?
It looks to me that the those pilots were attempting to abort the landing when they suddenly realized that the landing gear was not deployed. That's why the plane had so much speed at landing. Landing gear did not malfunction, they could have used the emergency manual landing gear release lever and pull the cable to release the landing gear. They would have been able to engage the breaks of the plane was to fast to stop. It looks like there was miscommunication and poor coordination in the cockpit!👍🏽👍RIP, I'm pulling my ears to rethink what the heck the pilots were thinking. When you drugged the engines on the runway for too long, friction will generate heat and spark FIRES 🔥
They turned around and that got them pushed by tailwind, speeding them up.
Please read again what you have written. Your first few sentences don’t make sense bro. Jesus. ‘Attempting to land, but realizing no landing gear so they just landed?…
concrete wall? my heart goes out to the families
Poor relatives it must be so hard to bare.
And seems as though it would’ve been a different outcome without that wall imo.
bear*
no reverse thrust to slow the plane after landing????? why?
Boeing's problems started when they started to employ Indian engineers and bought supplies from India.
That isn't true
Racist
that plane landing without
flaps slats any landing gear deployed.I dont think any bird strike on one engine will kill all of redundancies.
That's what I'm so curious to know. If both engines failed. They were flying as if both engines had failed rather than one. It makes no sense.
@@bendyrland7213 yup.and even without engine,all landing gear can be deploy via electric power from RAT,Ram air turbine,or be deploy manually by releasing the lock or drop by gravity/gforce.That plane really land with zero landing configuration,except reverse thrust on engine2.
The belly of the plane is so low to the ground but the landing gear can’t stick out? My heart is broken by this tragic incident, it’t the worst nightmare to the victims and their families.
The remaining engine was still running full ticket as it was sliding down the runway .