Jeju Air Flight 2216 Crashes in South Korea

[I love to travel]

Another Jeju flight today needed to return to airport due to landing gear issue.

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Looking at that last clip it doesn’t appear the engine is on fire, or that there is smoke from that fire going into the cabin?

 

[nancypants]

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,

Bit of a weird one, looks like LiveATC used to have some South Korean channels but no longer

 

[markis10]

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?

It’s possible, I had to hit the crash button one night after a plane reported upon landing he had forgotten the gear, was not a pax flight but freight.

 

[Quickstatus]

I'd expect hydraulics to remain available as long as the IAS was kept reasonably high

It did manage to go around and approach from the opposite direction.

A windmilling fan in a dead engine would generate enough hydraulic pressure?

 

[Buzzard]

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?

Anything is possible, just think of incidents that should of never happened.

 

[jb747]

It did manage to go around and approach from the opposite direction.

Which means that at least one engine was running, at least for a while. Such a pity FR24 hasn't got any data around the base turn area.

A windmilling fan in a dead engine would generate enough hydraulic pressure?

Yep. Speed required will vary by aircraft, but probably down to 160 knots or so.

 

[markis10]

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.

The LLZ is actually 300m beyond the threshold. While concrete supported antennas are not normal, in an area subject to Typhoons they may make more sense. I haven’t a clue about North American standards, they are irrelevant in this context, ICAO requires a minimum RESA clearance of 240m to be compliant:

https://applications.icao.int/tools/RSP_ikit/story_content/external_files/ACI%20Runway%20Safety%20Handbook%202014%20v2%20low.pdf

There is no doubt the installation was responsible for such loss of life. Time will tell whether the ICAO standards need a rework (albeit a very expensive one on a world wide basis) or whether other factors played more of a role in the horrible outcome.

WLG recently upgraded their LLZ, it’s in a similar position but has a lot more concrete

 

[moa999]

is no doubt the installation was responsible for such loss of life.

Personally think at most the berm is responsible for additional loss of life. If the localizer was on top of breakaway poles, the aircraft would have hit a reinforced concrete wall some 50m beyond that, and if it got through that then ploughed into what looked like pretty rough terrain beyond the perimeter road.

Put simply if you are 200m beyond the runway end at almost any airport and still travelling at high speed, things aren't going to end well for many people.

The more unknown question is what was happening in the coughpit and if it was an attempted landing with known or suspected compromised retard devices (engine, flaps, landing gear and brakes) why they ended landing so long (even with possible ground effect) where there was minimal chance of stopping.

 

[RSD]

Anyone have any thoughts on what would have caused the ADSB data to stop transmitting? Did they take a bird into each engine and the systems started "load shedding"?

 

[tdimdad]

A question from a layman's armchair: this time (and seemingly often in comparable situations) the pilots attempt to land on the runway. What would happen if they landed on the nature strip / grassland? Wouldn't it provide a potentially softer terrain will less friction to reduce or slow the damage? Though, on balance of things, a grass fire is likely. In other words, what makes the hard surface the preferred landing location in cases like this?

 

[Scarlett]

A softer landing surface has the problem of the aircraft possibly ‘digging in’ whilst still at high speed and flipping/disintegrating. The hard (and importantly - uniform) surface is more predictable.

 

[DC3]

I would take a lot of the press reports with a grain of salt, too much doesn’t make sense.

Agree. Too much conjecture.

 

[flyer89]

Timeline released from transport ministry.


8:54L: Muan airport air traffic control clears the aircraft to land on runway 01

8:57L: Air traffic control broadcasts “caution - bird activity” advisory.

8:59L: Flight 7C-2216 pilot reports bird strike, declares emergency “Mayday Mayday Mayday” and “Bird strike, bird strike, go-around.”

9:00L: Flight 7C2216 initiates a go-around and requests authorisation to land on runway 19, which is by approach from the opposite end of the airport’s single runway.

9:01L: Air traffic control clears the aircraft to land on runway 19.

9:02L: Flight 7C-2216 touches down on the runway about 1,200m (3940 feet) down on the 2,800m (9184 feet) long runway.

9:02:34L: Air traffic control alerts “crash bell” at airport fire rescue unit.

9:02:55L: Airport fire rescue unit completes deploying fire rescue equipment.

9:03L: Flight 7C-2216 crashes into embankment after over-shooting the runway.

 

[Quickstatus]

2 minutes between initiating a GA and then landing on the opposite runway.

 

[jb747]

WLG recently upgraded their LLZ, it’s in a similar position but has a lot more concrete

That shot was taken during construction. Most of what you're looking at is now buried.

 

[jb747]

A question from a layman's armchair: this time (and seemingly often in comparable situations) the pilots attempt to land on the runway. What would happen if they landed on the nature strip / grassland? Wouldn't it provide a potentially softer terrain will less friction to reduce or slow the damage? Though, on balance of things, a grass fire is likely. In other words, what makes the hard surface the preferred landing location in cases like this?

It's a valid thought, and is where Sullenberger made his most important decision. There are certainly many cases where it won't work, but a look at the Muan area map is interesting.

 

[jb747]

2 minutes between initiating a GA and then landing on the opposite runway.

The timeline needs to go down to seconds. The 180º turn alone would have taken about a minute.

 

[markis10]

Don’t think that timeline matches reality.
1. Crash button should have been hit getting the ARFF rolling at the Mayday. Any Mayday is an immediate distress phase requiring maximum assistance.
2. ARFF completes deployment in 21 sec, probably translation but it’s likely to be they were rolling in 21 sec, even so that’s quick so I would suggest they were not deployed but alerted prior and were in their cabs
3. Aircraft touchdown to impact was a minute?? So 1900m in 60 seconds or an average 114kmh

 

[Quickstatus]

The 180º turn alone would have taken about a minute.

How long would checklists take to effect this under non emergency circumstances?.