Just a heartbreaking death for these poor people. Burned alive. FML.
Unless I am beyond mistaken, something bizarre must have gone on here. There was the reports of the potential for the bird strikes prior. Air Traffic Control approved the plane landing in the opposite direction so that wall would not normally be there as the planes would fly over it before landing.
If this was an emergency landing like we believe as a result of a bird strike, wouldn't the tower or emergency crews known that the landing gear wasn't down and radioed?
If this was indeed a landing gear failure, I find it shocking that the pilots, air traffic control, emergency crews and potentially the airlines emergency operations team would approve this option of sliding right into a known wall. South Korea is an advanced nation as well.
The likelihood of having both engines out, landing gear that didn't deploy seems exceedingly rare to the point where it may never have happened in modern aviation history. I believe landing gear can be manually lowered too.
Shocking, scary, tragic. Brutal all around
The Following User Says Thank You to curves2000 For This Useful Post:
I don't know a lot about aviation or what appropriate runway lengths should be, but YVR's runways are just slightly longer than 8,700 feet (Abbotsford's is around 9,700 feet). Pearson's longest runway is more than 11,000 feet. Calgary's longest is 14,000 feet. Just for comparison.
I guess it's just a luxury of having more available space.
Calgary goes long due to density altitude. Same with Denver.
The Following User Says Thank You to Bigtime For This Useful Post:
Just a heartbreaking death for these poor people. Burned alive. FML.
Unless I am beyond mistaken, something bizarre must have gone on here. There was the reports of the potential for the bird strikes prior. Air Traffic Control approved the plane landing in the opposite direction so that wall would not normally be there as the planes would fly over it before landing.
If this was an emergency landing like we believe as a result of a bird strike, wouldn't the tower or emergency crews known that the landing gear wasn't down and radioed?
If this was indeed a landing gear failure, I find it shocking that the pilots, air traffic control, emergency crews and potentially the airlines emergency operations team would approve this option of sliding right into a known wall. South Korea is an advanced nation as well.
The likelihood of having both engines out, landing gear that didn't deploy seems exceedingly rare to the point where it may never have happened in modern aviation history. I believe landing gear can be manually lowered too.
Shocking, scary, tragic. Brutal all around
There is a wall all around the airport, so both directions of the runway, about 200m from each end. Direction wouldn't matter in that regard.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
The wall likely protects a far greater amount of people then are on a plane
51M people in a 100 square Km area
Nope... it's in the middle of nowhere. Nice open field on the other side, couple trees but better than a 12 foot wall that immediately vaporized the entire airplane.
With how fast the plane was going it would have been bad no matter what it hit. And there’s a highway on the other side of the wall. That would have been much worse.
I see a very low traffic local road on the other side of the fence. The airplane perhaps does not stay intact after it goes through the exterior fence, but I fail to see how that is a worse alternative than the entire airplane being immediately obliterated by a solid berm.
There's also the fact that their stupid loc antenna is in direct contradiction of ICAO Annex 14 9.9.2 which says to not try to kill people with dumb loc antennas and instead mount them as low as possible. We'll see what the report says.
Last edited by Acey; 12-30-2024 at 01:15 AM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
Jeju Air flight that took off in South Korea on Monday has returned to the airport of departure due to the same landing gear issue that was found in a deadly crash involving a separate aircraft of the same model the previous day, according to industry sources.
Jeju Air Flight 7C101, which departed from Gimpo International Airport for Jeju at 6:37 a.m., detected an issue with its landing gear shortly after takeoff.
The airline informed the 161 passengers about the mechanical defect caused by the landing gear issue and subsequently returned the flight to Gimpo at 7:25 a.m.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
Is this a Boeing issue, or an issue with this specific companies ability to do maintence correctly? I'd think other airlines would run into it if it was Boeing.
It likely has nothing to do with what happened to the accident airplane. It looks to be a news story where any malfunction related the same airline or same aircraft type gets reported on.
I doubt they are even certain what happened in the fatal accident, never mind that it has any actual technical similarity to the other diverted airplane.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
Well, we do know the gear weren't deployed. Pilot error would be my first guess, but when a second plane from the same airline as issues, well, suspicions rise.
Just imagine all the planes of different models from different airlines that had minor gear issues in the last little while. And then connect them to an airplane that had a bird strike followed by a rushed landing with no flaps or gear and skidded off a runway. Makes for a news story I guess.
The Following User Says Thank You to Ryan Coke For This Useful Post:
They received an indication in the cockpit of a possible problem with the gear and returned to the airport. Likely a gear status indicator light and that's it, and something that is more common than you'd think. That article is falsely saying it had the same issue.
__________________
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BlackArcher101 For This Useful Post:
