Jeju Air Flight 2216 Crashes in South Korea

[Flyerwin]

Two plane crashes so close together… sad way to end the year… my thoughts are with the families.

 

[moa999]

masses at pprune scratching their collective heads

A lot of speculation and not a lot of facts.

Think the best comment I saw recalled the hull loss but successful landing of Ryanair 4102 in 2008 at Rome after up to 90 bird strikes with starlings damaged both engines and the landing gear.

Ryanair Flight 4102 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[DC3]

A lot of speculation and not a lot of facts …

 

[markis10]

Lots of focus on the raised llz antennas etc, which I think is a bit of a red herring. Airport designs have limits and risks are often assessed on the balance of probabilities. The probability of having an aircraft attempt a landing with no flaps with a touchdown point halfway down the runway would have to be so low, it would not be a consideration.

I don’t think it was actually trying to land, and given the nature of ATC communications being made on open, easily accessed radio frequencies, I am puzzled why they are not in the public domain.

 

[Nalliah Thayabharan]

Lots of focus on the raised llz antennas etc, which I think is a bit of a red herring. Airport designs have limits and risks are often assessed on the balance of probabilities. The probability of having an aircraft attempt a landing with no flaps with a touchdown point halfway down the runway would have to be so low, it would not be a consideration.

I don’t think it was actually trying to land, and given the nature of ATC communications being made on open, easily accessed radio frequencies, I am puzzled why they are not in the public domain.

MWX runway 19 has a Landing Distance 2800m. The end of RWY 19 is about 6 m below its threshold. The embankment is to raise the localizer array, to compensate for the runway slope. However, within the United States and Canada these would be required to be mounted on frangible support structures. You want the support structure to break-away and cause as minimal damage as possible in a scenario like this. You would not be allowed to construct an earth mound like this within 300m of runway/overruns. This localizer is about 150m off the overrun, which would violate North American Airfield criteria, but it's a Korean Airport so regulations are different.
-Nalliah Thayabharan

 

[jb747]

A lot of speculation and not a lot of facts.

Which is always the case, and is more or less the basis of prune. On the other hand, this accident appears to have attracted a lot less commentary than usual from non flyers, and there is plenty of reasonable discussion from people with lots of experience on the 737, know the airfield, or have done landings in reduced flap configurations. As usual, you pick through the weeds in search of the occasional gem.

Lots of focus on the raised llz antennas etc, which I think is a bit of a red herring. Airport designs have limits and risks are often assessed on the balance of probabilities. The probability of having an aircraft attempt a landing with no flaps with a touchdown point halfway down the runway would have to be so low, it would not be a consideration.

There are innumerable airports at which the overruns are filled with tank traps, but in general that’s because there is no alternative. This one does seem unnecessary, and it’s surprisingly close. In any event, it would seem to have been the main reason that virtually everyone has been killed.

I don’t think it was actually trying to land….

What do you think it was trying to do?

 

[markis10]

What do you think it was trying to do?

Go round, get a visual of damage from the ground, who knows? No live ATC coverage in Korea so the facts will take awhile as we rely on government sources,

 

[RooFlyer]

Welcome to AFF, @Nalliah Thayabharan

 

[Sprucegoose]

I saw the footage of the landing, and it looked pretty good. The pilot had issues, but he brought the plane down level. The fatal issue most probably was when the plane hit a hard structure at the end of the runway. If this was the case, it would be a serious design flaw of the airport.

We will wait for the offical report into the cause of these deaths however it would appear there are valuable lessons for airport designers here.

 

[flyer89]

Here’s another video of the landing from short final.

 

[Saab34]

That’s quite a video. It’s quite bizarre as they would have had time to gravity drop the gear.

Seems like a planned belly landing looking at that approach. Why wouldn’t you drop the gear though? Doing some research it appears it’s a small handle under a cover behind the First Officer’s seat, and as AV mentioned above, drops in a few seconds.

Mentioned in another video that a manoeuvre like this in this configuration isn’t exactly conducted in training so inexperience could play a part in why they arrived over the runway which excess speed.

 

[Quickstatus]

What was the elapsed time between end of ADS-B data at 23:58Z and crash?.

 

[flyer89]

Could this have been a ‘standard’ bird strike of the No. 2 which has turned into an AF447 moment?

 

[CaptainCurtis]

 

[jb747]

What was the elapsed time between end of ADS-B data at 23:58Z and crash?.

That is an extremely pertinent question. I was looking for any time stamps on the video, but haven't found any. The ADSB data ends at 8:58, and avherald has the accident happening at 09:05. If the window is truly that tight, then they've really been in a huge hurry to get down, and it does start to make you wonder about engines, rather than any other systems.

 

[Justinf]

This is going to sound completely ridiculous but is it possible that in the ‘panic’ of the bird strike, they just forgot about the landing gear?

 

[Quickstatus]

ADSB data ends at 8:58, and avherald has the accident happening at 09:05.

7 minutes... to do an initial approach then go around and approach and land from the opposite direction... is that enough time?
Compression of necessary tasks into a shortened time frame AKA rushed by something...
Aircraft attitude on final approach seems good and Thurst reverser on the right engine appear to have deployed so hydraulics in some form was working...

 

[flyer89]

This is going to sound completely ridiculous but is it possible that in the ‘panic’ of the bird strike, they just forgot about the landing gear?

Not at all ridiculous. There’s a number of incidents throughout history where similar has occurred. Even the supposed safety net of the aural warnings will go unnoticed in times of high stress.

 

[RooFlyer]

7 minutes... to do an initial approach then go around and approach and land from the opposite direction... is that enough time?
Compression of necessary tasks into a shortened time frame AKA rushed by something...
Aircraft attitude on final approach seems good and Thurst reverser on the right engine appear to have deployed so hydraulics in some form was working...

Have a look at the Juan Browne video posted by CaptainCurtis above. Covers all those issues, and more.

 

[jb747]

This is going to sound completely ridiculous but is it possible that in the ‘panic’ of the bird strike, they just forgot about the landing gear?

I doubt that there was panic. Birdstrike is a common event. Engine failure on the other hand, not so much. But, it's practiced multiple times every time you even go near the sim. But, yes, whilst anything is possible, I suspect that there was a lot more going on. Looking at the head on shots of the aircraft, the flying seems quite well judged. I'm very much leaning towards both the flap and landing gear configuration being chosen for drag reduction reasons. They didn't forget.

7 minutes... to do an initial approach then go around and approach and land from the opposite direction... is that enough time?
Compression of necessary tasks into a shortened time frame AKA rushed by something...
Aircraft attitude on final approach seems good and Thurst reverser on the right engine appear to have deployed so hydraulics in some form was working...

I don't know that I'd read all that much into the reverser position. If engines failed, I'd expect hydraulics to remain available as long as the IAS was kept reasonably high. The mechanical pumps would still be turning. AV could tell us more perhaps.

7 minutes is plenty of time for a circuit, or a circling approach (which is really just another form of circuit), but it seems quite rushed for an aircraft with issues. 7 minutes would give about 20nm of flight distance, from the point that the ADSB data ends, to the point of impact. That's basically just enough to fly to position near the end of downwind (for 19), and then to turn back to the airfield. But, you normally wouldn't be in a hurry to make that turn. If they were at 1,500' and about 200 knots at that position, they might just have enough energy to turn back on to the runway, as long as they remained clean.