IMPORTANT UPDATES:::::: Waiting for The new footage evidence 🚨 NEWEST UPDATE - 12/31/2024 🚨 ua-cam.com/video/WHgOvO-Cazo/v-deo.html PART 2 - THE MYSTERY OF RUNWAY 19 On behalf of Dr Gema Goeyardi,ATP
@@Antoinette14273 No its not. Regardless which engine is down, there is no correlation with landing gear. Hydraulics has a backup, and there is manual landing gear extension
One of the few who talk about the panicked direct landing without a go around as so many others are saying. Mind you the new narrative is this jet was a powerless glider with a double engine failure. Anyone who has watched and listened to the raw videos of this crash will know there was a engine roaring at full power and the jet was barely decelerating. No gear, no flaps, no slats and only one engine in reverse. A touchdown point in the final area of the runway sealed their fate
Many issues with your "analysis". First, the accident crew aborted the landing, went around and ended landing on runway 19 just 5 minutes after the bird strike. It is undisputable: the tower in the far side of the landing video. Second, the plane had flap and gear extended at the time of the bird strike. There are several photos and witnesses confirming this point. Third, the plane landed with significant power coming out from from the right engine. This can be seen clearly in the landing videos. Then this engine deploys the reverse as the radio altimeter pass 10 feet. No landing gear, no flaps and no leading edge slats. The plane was obviously under positive control by the crew and behaved normally. In my opinion what happened is: They struck birds, went around, gear up, flaps up, climb runway heading. Then they shut down the LEFT engine (this is unfortunately not uncommon at all). After realizing they were suddenly unable to climb they successfully performed the "impossible turn" and barrelled down on the runway from the north. Why no gear or flaps? Maybe they forgot (a la JK5022), or maybe they didn't want to stall in a glide approach. With no flaps, no slats, no spoilers and no gear, the plane floated hopelessly on ground effect and they overrun the runway.
Dear Labranca, Thank you for your valuable feedback and insight. I appreciate the time you took to engage with the video and share your thoughts. To clarify, the analysis presented is based on factual data and publicly available evidence. As mentioned, this is an evolving situation, and we welcome input from viewers like yourself to help refine and expand our understanding. Here’s our perspective so far: Based on your comments, we’re open to considering a second scenario - one that suggests the aircraft was fully configured for landing during the first approach but experienced an engine failure (RIGHT) due to a bird strike. Following this, the pilot executed a go-around but mistakenly secured (shut down) the LEFT engine. This led to dual hydraulic failure and loss of both engines, leaving little to no time to run checklists at such a low altitude. As a result, the crew may have attempted an impossible turn to land on Runway 19 - a clear human factor issue. That said, a few critical points remain: No ADS-B evidence confirms an approach to Runway 19. We need further data. Previous flights show ADS-B tracking all the way to the gate, suggesting the possibility of transponder failure-potentially caused by electrical loss due to both engines shutting down, leaving no time to start the APU or other systems. The aircraft did not appear to be under positive control. As highlighted in the video, the V/S (vertical speed) exceeded 1,100 feet per minute at 800 feet AGL, and the aircraft was unable to maintain a straight lateral path. We also acknowledge the possibility of poor CRM (Crew Resource Management), where the crew may not have properly adhered to PF (Pilot Flying) and PM (Pilot Monitoring) roles. A panic-induced state could have led to overlooking the landing gear, despite GPWS warnings. Your feedback adds valuable insight to this discussion. If you come across any additional evidence-be it video, ADS-B data, or photos-please don’t hesitate to share it with us at info@14daypilot.com. Thank you again for your input and support in contributing to safer skies.
Good points. I think they were incompetent pilots because they worked for a bargain airline. They panicked when an engine went out and smoke possibly filled the cabin and thinking the plane could catch fire, made a bad judgment to get the plane down as quickly as possible like you suggested. In addition, they possibly shut down the wrong engine and to top it off, forgot to put the landing gear down in the commotion. I'll throw this out there. Maybe there was smoke in the cockpit, making it even more chaoitic to the point they thought flaps were down or just forgot to put flaps down in the commotion and panic. 83% of people even if trained will choke in a very stressful situation.
So far I know , it is impossible for the thrust reverser being deployed when landing gear is not down as this has a safety features based on Weight on wheel sensors , so I assume agree that engine no 2 reverser as visually deployed probably damage by birds strike.
The worst part is that the passengers likely thought they were safe being on the ground but they did not realize the damn wall at the end of the runway.
No, the worst part is that it happened at all! If I had a loved one on that flight, I would be thankful that they would have had no idea there was a wall.
The pilot aborted landing on the main runway and turned 180’ onto runway 19 and also touched down way past the land spot, they know the Airport like the back of their hands, so knew the walk was there. But it something must have happened in the cabin for them to have not dropped the landing gear using the manual option. 😢
exactly - chain of events. There may be pilot fatigue too - I heard that this plane was flying constantly, only landing -refuel and turn around. Hopefully there were different crews flying and the various crews had enough rest, but we never know until something like this happens, then we find out all the details of wrong doing/rule breaking.
@@ThamiNdlalanethat still doesn’t explain why he didn’t go into a holding pattern to burn off fuel. I fly the PMDG 737 and if I should deploy the landing gear too late there is a loud too low and other alarms going off. Why didn’t they pull the manual landing gear levels etc etc. It’s getting a little difficult to respect the pilots when they could have done so much but did nothing??
5:53 Yes. The moment the plane touched the ground and nothing else can be done the pilot is bracing himself for the final impact when they realized they are sliding fast towards a solid wall. Everything else up to this point needs a lot of questioning.
Thank you for your brilliant and fascinating analysis. I must say the astounding genius of all the engineering details in aircraft design and construction, as highlighted by you, takes my breath away!
From all the evidence collected so far, including the second video released of the plane initially touching down on the runway, it appears the pilots accidentally turned off the working engine (left side) instead of the engine that encountered the bird strike (right side). This would have disabled both hydraulic systems, then the pilots panicked and had no time to either finish the complete go around or deploy the landing gear (even manually). The second released video of the plane initially landing clearly shows the right-side engine still running (even if damaged), while the left-side engine does not appear to be running at all. RIP.
That's truly terrible. Can't imagine being the pilot, realizing that you made a mistake, given hope of surviving by landing quite smoothly considering the situation... all of those only then to be sealed by the concrete wall. RIP.
There is also a 3rd hydraulic system for emergency even if both engines are gone. Plus the manual release for the gear. The approach video shows they definitely had control from hydraulics and crash video definitely has an engine at full throttle before hitting the berm. Unfortunately looks like the pilots really fked up bad
I have same view, they probably turned off the full functional engine - no. 1 instead of number 2. It can explain a lot. Disapearance of data on flightradar due to electric outage, no go around performed due to no thrust (or maybe partialy performed, that can also explain why they landed from opposite side of runway). Based on official ATC communication released today there was only 3 minute window since they declared mayday till touchdown. It is really tight time frame and I think they were under huge pressure- no engines, no hydraulics, no APU started, - definitely they didn't have time to go thru any emergency checklist within this time frame.
Can we take a moment to appreciate how the pilot managed to land the plane without causing any damage to it, keeping it balanced throughout the process? The tragedy was caused by the cement barrier.
Thanks for the video, it is very informative and raises many questions. One might also have to consider whether it was really necessary to install a massive wall at the end of the runway. A light fence with a little more run-off zone with possibly a gravel bed behind the runway could have mitigated the consequences of the accident.
It wasn't necessary. It was criminally negligent. This lesson had been learned decades ago, and such structures are allowed in the runway excursion zone in the U.S. Safe bet S. Korea will adopt similar measures now.
Everybody analyzing HOW the plane landed at Muan, but not WHY the plane landed at Muan. Muan has a 9000 foot runway with a concrete wall off the end of it. We can assume the pilots weren't aware of the concrete wall. But did the pilots also not know that ICN's 14000 foot runway was 20 minutes North of Muan? Will someone who is a pilot comment on why this flight was not diverted? If you are landing without thrust reversers and without wheel brakes, why would you not choose the longest runway available, as opposed to a close but short runway?
@@gundamnduke0………yes, there sure was no CRM on that flight deck. Seems more like total confusion, with nobody knowing what to CORRECTLY do………RIP all souls………
@@elizabethroberts6215 agreed on this one. There was probably a CRM meltdown inside the cockpit. The immediate TOGA could have been caused by training (or lack thereof) and given their lack of engine power, their fuel load is not enough for them to divert. They could have continued their approach and landing after the initial birdstrike but in their panic and disorientation, lots of checklists and procedural runs weren’t properly executed. This is a little similar to the British Midlands incident years ago where the wrong engine was shut off. RIP to all who passed :(
@@NocturnalCap17 ………am thinking of the QF32 situation ex SIN, with A380 uncontained #2 engine failure, where the PF, Capt Richard de Crespigny did exactly that, ie flew the jet (aviate). He got his FO to concentrate on flight computer outputs’, & the two Check Captains’ who were there as well, to assist, as required, ie communicate. CRM to the nth, & excellent degree. Summation: Aircraft landed safely, with 269 pax, & crew.
@ that is a perfect response to a failure. Absolute CRM display. I’m also thinking about what happened in KAL 801 and Air Florida 90 because societal and cultural norms are still big in SK despite the changing demographics. Challenging PIC/PF by the FO might have been difficult and pointing out or calling out mistakes made or called by PIC would be looked down upon because of the hierarchical dispositions.
My god you’re right the landing gear isn’t down. I feel so stupid thank you for clearing that up for us. I knew I forgot something. Give this man a cookie.
They shut down the wrong engine, engine 1. This led to immediate panic as they lost electronics and had insufficient altitude to restart 1 or the APU. That panic created a deadly cascade of failures, human failures. Sincerest condolences to all tragically affected. To add another layer of complexity, a new study out of S Korea shows a 53% increase in anxiety driven panic attacks in those who were injected, amongst other mental health related conditions. Pilots worldwide were forced to line up for that.
Probably true. The plane appears to have a bird strike in engine number 2 while overhead the airport. Yet, the shot of the plane sliding on the runway it appears the number two engine reverser is deployed while the number one is not.
Why assume the shutdown one engine? Until we get the official data from the black box, the main issue is the wall. No one mentions that he made a perfect belly landing
@@ThamiNdlalane Probably because he floated it halfway down the runway, leaving insufficient room for stopping. For me, the main issue was “why were they in such a hurry to land?”
Biggest issues are the landing gear & flaps weren't deployed & the concrete embankment after the end of the runway. In the haste to land, the flight ✈️ crew obviously messed up big time, dooming virtually everyone on board. Sad to see so many had to die because of this. 😢
In recent years UA-cam has many channels devoted to commercial aviation accidents. Usually these channels will emphasize that motor vehicle travel is less safe than air travel and statistically that’s correct. Most of these very unfortunate passengers on this Jeju Air 2216 must have felt quite safe although their safety depended on many variables such as whether or not the pilots made rational decisions. Statistics aren’t very meaningful if airline pilots are incompetent, impaired, troubled by personal issues or made foolish decisions because they were in a hurry. I don’t have much confidence in public transportation because my safety completely depends on the abilities of others. Also I feel much safer when I’m driving my own motor vehicle and not depending on another driver or the condition of another vehicle when I’m a passenger.
Excellent and thorough analysis. Thank you. Also, excellent point on the CRM. I didn't think of that. Here is my take: Situation: Redeye flight from Thailand to South Korea; both pilots tired/fatigued Theory: Bird strike; shut down wrong engine; forgot landing gear. 1. PIC asked for landing gear down 2. PM moved to lower landing gear 3. Bird strike Engine 2. 4. Both startled = PIC calls "bird strike" to ATC 5. Both forgot landing gear was not lowered. 6. Accidental shutdown of Engine 1 instead of Engine 2... 7. Minimal thrust only from Engine 2. 8. Pilot overload. 9. No time and too low to restart Engine 1...must do direct landing With Engine 1 off and Engine 2 not working, did they have hydraulic pressure to operate the flaps, or did they forget that? With flaps in the wrong position, they trouble hitting the runway at the right place (I've heard that it was 1000ft in). Maybe they thought they could still make it with max brake and thrust reversers. It appears that the thrust reverser on Engine 2 was activated (because thrust at idle and altimeter to ground was less than 10 feet, but it did not activate on Engine 1(?). With way too much speed and not enough runway and no brakes and no thrust reverser...hitting the concrete barrier (beacon?) at high speed was inevitable. --- You'll notice in one video (from the port side) that there is yaw as the plane is nearing the runway. The way the plane was flying suggests to me that Engine 2 (the right-side engine with bird strike) was still producing some thrust. THE OTHER ENGINE MUST BE OFF. If it was not off, there is no way the damaged Engine 2 would cause yaw to the left in that manner. --- Sorry, I'm just an aviation enthusiast. This is just my theory from what I have been able to gather and from I've seen in videos. I hope to fly one day and even get my own jet. In any case, they got the CDR and the (damaged) FDR. Hopefully, we'll get a better picture of what happened soon enough.
@@jimmyucla Correction. Apparently, the pilots attempted a go around after the bird strike. They were on descent (on the localizer?) with wheels down when the bird strike happened. They raised wheels and started go around. The rest of my theory stays the same... They turned off the wrong engine and realized that they would not be able to do a proper loop so decided to instead do a "tear drop" maneuver to try to land on the runway from the OTHER side... What they ran into at the end was the localizer towers that were on top of a concrete block wall. Other things that went wrong: 1. This airport was just recently cleared for international flights. They might not have prepped it properly. 2. There are FOUR bird "sanctuaries" around this airport...and this is migration season for them to be there. 3. Someone "stabilized" the localizer towers with concrete blocks. --- If BOTH engines were hit with birds during the descent with the wheels down...why would the pilots not just continue on to the runway and land? It might not be a perfect landing, but it's the best option. They could have tried to glide the plane in.
Donc si j’ai bien compris vous supposez qu’ils ont oublié de sortir le train puis qu’il y a eu l’impact d’oiseaux ensuite ce qui expliquerait effectivement que le train n’était bizarrement pas sorti ? Est ce qu’il n’y a pas une alarme dans le cockpit qui signale que le train n’est pas sorti alors que le sol n’est pas loin ?
@@samshare2146 that’s also what I’m wondering. Because if you have dual engine flameout/failure, standard procedures call for the pilots to extend the glide as long as possible and find a clear/safe area to land on if no airport in sight to divert. They could have theoretically just continued with their approach and landing, abandoned TOGA, and ended up on the runoff area at worst. CRM was just not there inside that cockpit brought about by fatigue and pressure and critical and crucial checklists and procedures were not followed leading to the unfortunate disaster. Quite possibly also, as mentioned in the video, societal norms could have played a factor like in the KAL accident in 97.
Dude, everything u said makes sense! U r the first to really provide the most possible reason for the crash! I am confident that the final findings will validate what u stated! Pilots F’d up! Even if they knew they could not engage the landing the gears, they floated above the runway way too far b4 touchdown giving them very limited runway left for a belly landing, did not have flaps down! They came in waaaaay too hot and fast! Also tower maybe shud have checked visually with binoculars to see if landing gears were down? BTW I JUST SUBSCRIBED TO UR CHANNEL!
I read that it could be double engine failure. Thus, best to glide in and don’t use flaps or landing gear down. Perhaps they overcompensated as they ended up in middle of runway.
There is a manual deployment option to release the landing gear. If landing gear is not functioning as expected, the only option is a belly landing. This where support from ATC should be relied on😢
Excellent point about the landing gear not being deployed at the moment of the bird strike. During final approach, at that altitude, landing gear is usually deployed.
Is it possible that the pilots decided not to lower the landing gear because of both engine failure (not just the right engine), they wanted to glide and to extend landing gears only at the final seconds before touchdown, but for some reason they failed to do that?
Pilot was skilled and having enough hours of flying. To me unfortunately both engines got bird hit and hence the message was May day. It's not at all pilot error
Thanks for the vid. One question: why on the initial landing did they not just complete the landing [even with the birdstrike]. Surely, the bird strike affects departing planes more than arriving planes.... the arriving plane can just continue to coast down after the strike, with the plane configured, with reduced speed and altitude, with falps set, and landing gear extended. The pilots should not have gone around/ re-launched the plane imo.
They decided to do a full go around but for whatever reason, they changed that and decided to land from the direction they came from, but now they were too high and fast and ended up touching down halfway along the runway, possibly at 250 knots. There was no time for checklist, or landing gear or flaps. There was also significant fuel onboard.
@@zeniktorres4320 Does not answer my question. The bird strike happened as they were coming in to land.... very near the runway as was recorded on a mobile phone near the runway. So why not continue to land - everything was configured, low speed, low altitude etc. By going around they just compounded their problems.
Newbie here because of Jeju air deadly crash 😢 im curious of what happened to the plane where infact they landed already. Good to hear a good explanation through this video..thank you sir!❤
Very good video, thank you. For this kind of videos, I would prefer if it were without background music. As a non-native speaker with no professional knowledge about flying, having no background music enhances my comprehension. Edit: it is way, way better listening with headphones.
Yes I also see that and believe both engines were hit. And maybe that cut them off from initial landing before they had extended the gear, and then they forgot about it in panic
Your video assumes he landed on 01, but actually he landed on 19er, so they had to go around even though the plane did not broadcast the data. The concrete barrier they hit is at the southern end of the runway.
Perhaps they had 1 engine down and the other engine took a hit and was showing abnormalities due to it getting bird striked as well and they assumed that engine was dying and rushed to land before it became a glider - maybe they had thoughts of the Hudson River plane from 2009.
They landed rwy 19. They did go around. This flightradar data is not the final approach to the crash. It probably shows the approach until the bird strike. The weird thing is they don´t seem to have the gear down less then 1nm final to rwy 01 when the bird hit.
@@14DAYPILOT Probably the bird strike affected the APU to power the transponder (not sure about electrical systems on airplanes) that disabled it. The government also said on the preliminary report that they radioed to ATC that they will attempt to land on the opposite side of the runway but did not mention if they gave the pilots clearance to land. I personally think that during the go around, they are not generating enough lift or maybe the engines are not getting enough thrust as they climb that's why they hurried to land the plane or they didn't want to go around to the same side of the runway because they might pass the area where there are many birds or maybe both. Not a pilot just a long time MSFS player
Can you tell me why the video camera that captured the emergency landing was PANNING so that the plane remained centered in the field of view all the time? Is it somehow standard practice in South Korea to have runway surveillance video cameras programmed to do so? Are those things even available on the market?
You mean the one that recorded the approach or the one from the west that caught the touchdown and impact? The one of the approach is credited to an individual and it seems to be handheld from outside the airport wall. He's further away than the restaurant owner who filmed from the other side, so he can make smoother movements to keep it in frame compared to the guy who was closer .
Fact if you have one working engine you follow the procedure climb to a safe altitude and prepare for a single engine landing you don't do a 180 turn and land down wind so what happens if you loose 2 engines an inadvertent shut down of the wrong engine then you are a glider limited hydraulics a slow moving emergency flaps switch a free fall gear system that takes time to complete time you don't have at low altitude.
I've followed many blogs, including pilot blogs on this mishap. Your explanation and analysis is the most illustrative and instructive. Thanks and best wishes. I thought straightaway from the description of the sequence of events that the pilots forgot they had retracted the landing gears on the tuenaround but from your video I've learned this could not happen on a boeing. Could it be then the instrumentations blacked out? Is that ever possible on a boeing?
The conditions for thrust reverser deployment as you correctly displayed are either 1) radio altitude less than 10 feet or 2) air/ground sensor in ground mode. Both conditions are not required, so the TR can be deployed before the aircraft touches down.
if they forgot to lower the gear, i think the no flap landing speed is like 190 knots! and also, if they lost all hydraulics, then they couldn't steer the aircraft! this crash is so weird...... don't make sense, unless maybe a fire in the cockpit/ cabin? that would make them want to land asap... but i just don't know....
What if.... there were more than one (for example two) birdstrikes and only second of them was filmed? I mean - that person who filmed the plane for some reason (maybe because he heard something unusual happening during plane approach...) and then after he started filming, he filmed issue with right engine.... but who said that this was the beginning of the issue?
Thanks for the video. What if they for whatever reason had a full power blackout? Complete loss of power, coupled with a very badly flown approach and last minute landing checklist?
My reasoning: flightradar track ends at 500 AGL. They decided to land with gear up. Also, the "bird" may not have been a bird. Make of that what you will.
I see your point regarding anomalies! However, the barrier at the end of the runway defies logic! I don’t think the PF nor the PM completed any checklist! Did potential smoke in the cockpit contributed to both pilots continuing the approach, after the bird strike. Maybe once noticing the reduced climbing performance following the bird strike, did they raised the landing gear but forgot to lowering again prior to the landing. Hopefully we can learn more from the CVR /blackboxes. Great analysis. I only fly single engine but you provided great advice, thank you!
@14daypilot The Flight Radar is wrong. I realized this early myself. The video was taken from the west of the airport. You can see the tower and the three mountains in the background. It hits a hill and concrete barrier with ILS atop which only exists on the south end of runway. The Pilot actually landed from North to south.
YES, we already know that. the plane did a go around. Flghtradar has all the incident data missing, most likely because there was no transponder working or no radar coverage below 500 feet.
The thrust reverser can be deployed when either radio altimeter senses less than 10 feet altitude, or when the air/ground safety sensor is in the ground mode. Movement of the reverse thrust levers is mechanically restricted until the forward thrust levers are in the idle position.
Why didn't they just land on first approach? After a catastrophic bird strike resulting in the loss of both engines shortly after take-off, Captain Sullivan landed his fully loaded plane safely on the river Hudson and there were no serious injuries although it did help that there was no concrete wall in the middle of it.
I'm looking at the this video of the compressor stall, and that's really close to the runway and I do not see any landing gear in that video. Maybe they were doing a go around trying to sort the landing gear issue and then lost engines. They did not have 6 miles of dredged straight river to land on. Have a look at all the small rocky islands and the very shallow water / marsh in between. This was not an optimal situation for trying to do what Sully did.
Now that I think about it more, I'm thinking they retracted the gear to do a go around after the first bird strike, and someone recorded the second bird strike. It would make sense that the sounds of the first incident prompted the person to record the plane and that what they recorded was a subsequent incident affecting the other engine. Sully's decision was clearer because he lost both engines at pretty much the same time. Also, as I said the local geography around Muan is not the same as the Hudson river.
@@jimbobeire No I'm not suggesting that they should have tried to land in the sea, I was suggesting that the faffing about with half assed go-around sealed their fate. They did not attempt to dump fuel, they came in far too fast, they overshot the landing zone by some distance, they could have lowered the landing gear manually or even tried gliding onto the grass which might have helped slow the plan down. I have a theory that the pilots were over tired and unprepared for the sudden increase in workload during the intensity of a final approach. RIP all onboard.
What do you think the appropriate action would have been if the pilots mistakenly shut down the left engine and were left under a thousand feet running on a single damaged engine? Wouldn’t the priority now be to get on the ground as checklists wouldn’t be able to completed if the damaged engine completely failed? And trying to maintain airspeed would explain the incorrect flap configuration and be a possible reason for not dropping the gear? We also don’t know if both engines ingested birds. Just because there is video of the right engine sputtering, doesn’t mean the right engine was unaffected.
just when we thought that the 737-800 was better than the disastrous suicidal 737 MAX, this horrifying incident happens, terrible for Koreans to lose their loved ones
The recent Jeju Air crash involving a 15-year-old Boeing 737-800 (Next Generation) should not automatically be attributed to Boeing or its design. Preliminary reports suggest a combination of pilot error during a high-stress situation and external factors, such as a poorly placed wall, played a significant role. Evidence indicates that the pilots may have inadvertently shut down the wrong engine following a bird strike, leading to the use of reverse thrust only on the impacted engine. Furthermore, the aircraft touched down at approximately 230+ knots which was excessively high for a standard landing configuration and even a clean configuration. It is essential to distinguish this incident from issues related to the Boeing 737 MAX, as the aircraft involved belongs to a different series with an established safety record. Blaming Boeing without understanding the nuances of the situation is not only unfair but also disrespectful to the investigation process and the aviation community. Just as we don't blame Airbus every time despite them previously having major issues with the A330 and other flaws, we should avoid letting media narratives mislead public perception. In aviation, informed and factual discussions are critical if you're not familiar with the facts, it's better to avoid making assumptions.
Could there have been a malfunction in which the pilots believe the landing gear has been deployed only realizing it hasn't been deployed when they don't touch down on the runway earlier
It is maddening, these youtubers with quite a heavy accent, hard(er) to understand their English, also having a sub-optimal microphone / acoustic / technique, then they moronically think its a good idea to add “music” under or over their voice making it even more frustrating to fillow what they are saying.
Something I don't see commentators considering is the mobile video showing the compressor stall could very possibly be inverted as is common with uploads of mobile videos, especially filmed in portrait mode. Secondly, several 800 pilots have said reversers can be activated with gear up... your graphic states 'either of the following conditions', thus any one, which was met regarding altitude. Very good video, better than most.
Somehow there was a problem with both engines, weather it was birds or something else we don't know. Its like they had the plane configured as if they thought they wouldn't make it to the runway
I see your point regarding anomalies! However, the barrier at the end of the runway defies logic! I don’t think the PF nor the PM completed any checklist! Did potential smoke in the cockpit contributed to both pilots continuing the approach, after the bird strike. Maybe once noticing the reduced climbing performance following the bird strike, did they raised the landing gear but forgot to lowering again prior to the landing. Hopefully we can learn more from the CVR /blackboxes.
Question, in the film where we se the bird strike, is the airplane on landing or did it justdo a go around. We cant se any gear down when the bird strike happened
The ground contact in the landing gear to enable the reverser is in the A320. the 737 uses the radio altimeter and that put the thrust leve into idle, and NOT the other way around.
Black box voice recorders aside, I wonder whether current technology can support cockpit camera recording which can record what the pilots were doing until the moment of the crash. This can pinpoint where actually the failure occurred to aid in post crash investigation.
The fact they land very far makes me think 2 possibilities: A- they thought the LG was down and then realize their mistake and therefore landed too long; B- the runway is actually not horizontal and goes up and down slightly (as I have seen on some analysts’ videos) and this played against them for extra glide which happens anyway in cases of belly landing.
Could they have lost the engine and in panic ignored the check list procedures and even forgot to lower the landing gear in haste to land. We can't judge those in their position given the stress they may have been under, but if seems they skipped procedures but for what reason if not panic?? We will find out soon. Sad for everyone involved.
Best analysis so far. It would be better to investigate everything about the pilots in these accident investigations. We always find out their errors but nothing about their personal history. I’ve quit watching crash analysis. The same lack of airmanship keeps rehappening.
I haven't seen any video of landing gear in the down locked position. During manual landing gear deploy it takes about 30 seconds from the time the handles pulled to the time the gear is down and locked. The simplest explanation is pilots didn't follow checklist, cut off fuel to the wrong engine, or double engine failure.
Smoke in the Cockpit and they panicked. Yes you may be able to fly a plane but that doesn't mean you can act in a crisis with a level head. And that ridiculous batrier at the end of the runway caused many to loose there life. So sad and avoidable.
IMPORTANT UPDATES::::::
Waiting for The new footage evidence
🚨 NEWEST UPDATE - 12/31/2024 🚨
ua-cam.com/video/WHgOvO-Cazo/v-deo.html
PART 2 - THE MYSTERY OF RUNWAY 19
On behalf of
Dr Gema Goeyardi,ATP
Could the video of the bird strike flame out be mirrored/reversed? And that was the Left Engine?
@@Antoinette14273 No its not. Regardless which engine is down, there is no correlation with landing gear. Hydraulics has a backup, and there is manual landing gear extension
Well, the link between birdstrike and no gear exists nonetheless, even if this link is human panic or error.
Localizer that they hit is at end of RWY 19
@@raptor1106so its not landing from runway 19??
One of the few who talk about the panicked direct landing without a go around as so many others are saying. Mind you the new narrative is this jet was a powerless glider with a double engine failure. Anyone who has watched and listened to the raw videos of this crash will know there was a engine roaring at full power and the jet was barely decelerating. No gear, no flaps, no slats and only one engine in reverse. A touchdown point in the final area of the runway sealed their fate
Too bad if this happened. No landing gear becoz of panicked
@@14DAYPILOT But even the belly landing would have been ok if they landed at the start of or even half way down the runway.
@@14DAYPILOTit appears that way.
@@14DAYPILOT But even with landing gear extended their fate would be the same. How would a functioning landing gear change anything?
@@omrit2 Brakes.
Many issues with your "analysis".
First, the accident crew aborted the landing, went around and ended landing on runway 19 just 5 minutes after the bird strike. It is undisputable: the tower in the far side of the landing video.
Second, the plane had flap and gear extended at the time of the bird strike. There are several photos and witnesses confirming this point.
Third, the plane landed with significant power coming out from from the right engine. This can be seen clearly in the landing videos. Then this engine deploys the reverse as the radio altimeter pass 10 feet. No landing gear, no flaps and no leading edge slats. The plane was obviously under positive control by the crew and behaved normally.
In my opinion what happened is: They struck birds, went around, gear up, flaps up, climb runway heading. Then they shut down the LEFT engine (this is unfortunately not uncommon at all). After realizing they were suddenly unable to climb they successfully performed the "impossible turn" and barrelled down on the runway from the north. Why no gear or flaps? Maybe they forgot (a la JK5022), or maybe they didn't want to stall in a glide approach.
With no flaps, no slats, no spoilers and no gear, the plane floated hopelessly on ground effect and they overrun the runway.
Dear Labranca,
Thank you for your valuable feedback and insight. I appreciate the time you took to engage with the video and share your thoughts.
To clarify, the analysis presented is based on factual data and publicly available evidence. As mentioned, this is an evolving situation, and we welcome input from viewers like yourself to help refine and expand our understanding. Here’s our perspective so far:
Based on your comments, we’re open to considering a second scenario - one that suggests the aircraft was fully configured for landing during the first approach but experienced an engine failure (RIGHT) due to a bird strike.
Following this, the pilot executed a go-around but mistakenly secured (shut down) the LEFT engine.
This led to dual hydraulic failure and loss of both engines, leaving little to no time to run checklists at such a low altitude. As a result, the crew may have attempted an impossible turn to land on Runway 19 - a clear human factor issue.
That said, a few critical points remain:
No ADS-B evidence confirms an approach to Runway 19. We need further data. Previous flights show ADS-B tracking all the way to the gate, suggesting the possibility of transponder failure-potentially caused by electrical loss due to both engines shutting down, leaving no time to start the APU or other systems.
The aircraft did not appear to be under positive control. As highlighted in the video, the V/S (vertical speed) exceeded 1,100 feet per minute at 800 feet AGL, and the aircraft was unable to maintain a straight lateral path.
We also acknowledge the possibility of poor CRM (Crew Resource Management), where the crew may not have properly adhered to PF (Pilot Flying) and PM (Pilot Monitoring) roles. A panic-induced state could have led to overlooking the landing gear, despite GPWS warnings.
Your feedback adds valuable insight to this discussion. If you come across any additional evidence-be it video, ADS-B data, or photos-please don’t hesitate to share it with us at info@14daypilot.com.
Thank you again for your input and support in contributing to safer skies.
Good points. I think they were incompetent pilots because they worked for a bargain airline. They panicked when an engine went out and smoke possibly filled the cabin and thinking the plane could catch fire, made a bad judgment to get the plane down as quickly as possible like you suggested. In addition, they possibly shut down the wrong engine and to top it off, forgot to put the landing gear down in the commotion. I'll throw this out there. Maybe there was smoke in the cockpit, making it even more chaoitic to the point they thought flaps were down or just forgot to put flaps down in the commotion and panic. 83% of people even if trained will choke in a very stressful situation.
@@PugFaceMediaThey wouldn’t be flying this type of aircraft with low ours so calling the pilots incompetent is just an insult towards them. RIP
So far I know , it is impossible for the thrust reverser being deployed when landing gear is not down as this has a safety features based on Weight on wheel sensors , so I assume agree that engine no 2 reverser as visually deployed probably damage by birds strike.
@@PugFaceMedia "bargain airline" you mean an airline that has operated for 20 years with no incidents.
The worst part is that the passengers likely thought they were safe being on the ground but they did not realize the damn wall at the end of the runway.
Damn wall is what I cry about. Damn damn wall
No, the worst part is that it happened at all! If I had a loved one on that flight, I would be thankful that they would have had no idea there was a wall.
idk how safe i would feel sitting in a tin can sliding 200 mph down a runway on its belly/engines
The pilot aborted landing on the main runway and turned 180’ onto runway 19 and also touched down way past the land spot, they know the Airport like the back of their hands, so knew the walk was there. But it something must have happened in the cabin for them to have not dropped the landing gear using the manual option. 😢
@@richard_M7116 Is it a case of the Pilot deliberately crashing the plane into the wall? Just wondering. Everything is just weird.
Great analysis and very convincing. I bet 100% that it was a pilot issue - lack of training leading to panicking and poor decision making in a crisis
I agree. These pilots lacked experience in such situation and tucked up big time. I hope I am wrong but let's wait for the black box data.
I'm pretty sure that this was a veteran pilot. Most are thinking that the main cause of death are the birds and poor construction of the airport.
Background music makes it impossible to hear you, please don't add music.
Its pretty loud though. I dont know what speaker are you using.
You must be deaf.
@14DAYPILOT It doesn't make it impossible to hear you. However it is annoying and kind of distracting.
yes the music is distractracting
Agreed, the music adds nothing to the video. Just distracts from the information
Bird strike+ pilot panic+ concrete barrier= fatal crash
exactly - chain of events. There may be pilot fatigue too - I heard that this plane was flying constantly, only landing -refuel and turn around. Hopefully there were different crews flying and the various crews had enough rest, but we never know until something like this happens, then we find out all the details of wrong doing/rule breaking.
Panic and perfect belly landing don't make sense. Respect the pilot
@@ThamiNdlalanethat still doesn’t explain why he didn’t go into a holding pattern to burn off fuel. I fly the PMDG 737 and if I should deploy the landing gear too late there is a loud too low and other alarms going off.
Why didn’t they pull the manual landing gear levels etc etc.
It’s getting a little difficult to respect the pilots when they could have done so much but did nothing??
5:53 Yes. The moment the plane touched the ground and nothing else can be done the pilot is bracing himself for the final impact when they realized they are sliding fast towards a solid wall. Everything else up to this point needs a lot of questioning.
Not necessarily. Ground Effect is what kept them sliding too far. Only way to stop is wing down which could be catastrophic as well.
Thank you for your brilliant and fascinating analysis. I must say the astounding genius of all the engineering details in aircraft design and construction, as highlighted by you, takes my breath away!
From all the evidence collected so far, including the second video released of the plane initially touching down on the runway, it appears the pilots accidentally turned off the working engine (left side) instead of the engine that encountered the bird strike (right side). This would have disabled both hydraulic systems, then the pilots panicked and had no time to either finish the complete go around or deploy the landing gear (even manually). The second released video of the plane initially landing clearly shows the right-side engine still running (even if damaged), while the left-side engine does not appear to be running at all. RIP.
That's truly terrible.
Can't imagine being the pilot, realizing that you made a mistake, given hope of surviving by landing quite smoothly considering the situation... all of those only then to be sealed by the concrete wall.
RIP.
@@VelocityTube-c7e that sounds quite plausible unfortunately
There is also a 3rd hydraulic system for emergency even if both engines are gone. Plus the manual release for the gear. The approach video shows they definitely had control from hydraulics and crash video definitely has an engine at full throttle before hitting the berm. Unfortunately looks like the pilots really fked up bad
Can they reignite the engine #1?
I have same view, they probably turned off the full functional engine - no. 1 instead of number 2. It can explain a lot. Disapearance of data on flightradar due to electric outage, no go around performed due to no thrust (or maybe partialy performed, that can also explain why they landed from opposite side of runway). Based on official ATC communication released today there was only 3 minute window since they declared mayday till touchdown. It is really tight time frame and I think they were under huge pressure- no engines, no hydraulics, no APU started, - definitely they didn't have time to go thru any emergency checklist within this time frame.
Can we take a moment to appreciate how the pilot managed to land the plane without causing any damage to it, keeping it balanced throughout the process? The tragedy was caused by the cement barrier.
with a declared mayday the airport operator didnt allow anything, thats not how it works. the pilot has complete authority
With no flaps, gear, and floating over 1/2 the runway??? PLEASE!
@@allgrainbrewer10 Imagine. these brave pilots actually did it.
That landing would need another 10000 feet to make a safe landing the wall was just the 1st obstical
Thanks for the video, it is very informative and raises many questions.
One might also have to consider whether it was really necessary to install a massive wall at the end of the runway.
A light fence with a little more run-off zone with possibly a gravel bed behind the runway could have mitigated the consequences of the accident.
I agree. The airport design was bad
It wasn't necessary. It was criminally negligent. This lesson had been learned decades ago, and such structures are allowed in the runway excursion zone in the U.S. Safe bet S. Korea will adopt similar measures now.
Music far too loud and distracting !!
🙄
The music is not that loud. Calm down
And totally unnecessary.
Turn your hearing aid down
Why do we need music?
Everybody analyzing HOW the plane landed at Muan, but not WHY the plane landed at Muan. Muan has a 9000 foot runway with a concrete wall off the end of it. We can assume the pilots weren't aware of the concrete wall. But did the pilots also not know that ICN's 14000 foot runway was 20 minutes North of Muan? Will someone who is a pilot comment on why this flight was not diverted? If you are landing without thrust reversers and without wheel brakes, why would you not choose the longest runway available, as opposed to a close but short runway?
the pilots didn't even bother going around and perform a checklist, what makes you think they would divert?
@@gundamnduke0………yes, there sure was no CRM on that flight deck. Seems more like total confusion, with nobody knowing what to CORRECTLY do………RIP all souls………
@@elizabethroberts6215 agreed on this one. There was probably a CRM meltdown inside the cockpit. The immediate TOGA could have been caused by training (or lack thereof) and given their lack of engine power, their fuel load is not enough for them to divert. They could have continued their approach and landing after the initial birdstrike but in their panic and disorientation, lots of checklists and procedural runs weren’t properly executed.
This is a little similar to the British Midlands incident years ago where the wrong engine was shut off. RIP to all who passed :(
@@NocturnalCap17 ………am thinking of the QF32 situation ex SIN, with A380 uncontained #2 engine failure, where the PF, Capt Richard de Crespigny did exactly that, ie flew the jet (aviate). He got his FO to concentrate on flight computer outputs’, & the two Check Captains’ who were there as well, to assist, as required, ie communicate. CRM to the nth, & excellent degree.
Summation: Aircraft landed safely, with 269 pax, & crew.
@ that is a perfect response to a failure. Absolute CRM display.
I’m also thinking about what happened in KAL 801 and Air Florida 90 because societal and cultural norms are still big in SK despite the changing demographics. Challenging PIC/PF by the FO might have been difficult and pointing out or calling out mistakes made or called by PIC would be looked down upon because of the hierarchical dispositions.
My god you’re right the landing gear isn’t down. I feel so stupid thank you for clearing that up for us. I knew I forgot something. Give this man a cookie.
Your competence is much appreciated, thank you so much👍
Ive watched about 4 videos from commercial pilots on this disaster- this was by far the best one. No beating around the bush. Just heartbreaking 🙏🏼😔
They shut down the wrong engine, engine 1. This led to immediate panic as they lost electronics and had insufficient altitude to restart 1 or the APU. That panic created a deadly cascade of failures, human failures. Sincerest condolences to all tragically affected. To add another layer of complexity, a new study out of S Korea shows a 53% increase in anxiety driven panic attacks in those who were injected, amongst other mental health related conditions. Pilots worldwide were forced to line up for that.
Total conjecture of course, but your theory answers a LOT of questions. They will be easily able to figure it out if this is what happened.
Probably true. The plane appears to have a bird strike in engine number 2 while overhead the airport. Yet, the shot of the plane sliding on the runway it appears the number two engine reverser is deployed while the number one is not.
Can we see engine number one?@@robertrobarjr7483
Why assume the shutdown one engine? Until we get the official data from the black box, the main issue is the wall. No one mentions that he made a perfect belly landing
@@ThamiNdlalane Probably because he floated it halfway down the runway, leaving insufficient room for stopping. For me, the main issue was “why were they in such a hurry to land?”
Biggest issues are the landing gear & flaps weren't deployed & the concrete embankment after the end of the runway. In the haste to land, the flight ✈️ crew obviously messed up big time, dooming virtually everyone on board. Sad to see so many had to die because of this. 😢
In recent years UA-cam has many channels devoted to commercial aviation accidents. Usually these channels will emphasize that motor vehicle travel is less safe than air travel and statistically that’s correct. Most of these very unfortunate passengers on this Jeju Air 2216 must have felt quite safe although their safety depended on many variables such as whether or not the pilots made rational decisions. Statistics aren’t very meaningful if airline pilots are incompetent, impaired, troubled by personal issues or made foolish decisions because they were in a hurry. I don’t have much confidence in public transportation because my safety completely depends on the abilities of others. Also I feel much safer when I’m driving my own motor vehicle and not depending on another driver or the condition of another vehicle when I’m a passenger.
I think panic took over and procedures failed. Concrete walls are a bad idea in run off areas.
Excellent and thorough analysis. Thank you.
Also, excellent point on the CRM. I didn't think of that.
Here is my take:
Situation: Redeye flight from Thailand to South Korea; both pilots tired/fatigued
Theory: Bird strike; shut down wrong engine; forgot landing gear.
1. PIC asked for landing gear down
2. PM moved to lower landing gear
3. Bird strike Engine 2.
4. Both startled = PIC calls "bird strike" to ATC
5. Both forgot landing gear was not lowered.
6. Accidental shutdown of Engine 1 instead of Engine 2...
7. Minimal thrust only from Engine 2.
8. Pilot overload.
9. No time and too low to restart Engine 1...must do direct landing
With Engine 1 off and Engine 2 not working, did they have hydraulic pressure to operate the flaps, or did they forget that?
With flaps in the wrong position, they trouble hitting the runway at the right place (I've heard that it was 1000ft in). Maybe they thought they could still make it with max brake and thrust reversers. It appears that the thrust reverser on Engine 2 was activated (because thrust at idle and altimeter to ground was less than 10 feet, but it did not activate on Engine 1(?).
With way too much speed and not enough runway and no brakes and no thrust reverser...hitting the concrete barrier (beacon?) at high speed was inevitable.
---
You'll notice in one video (from the port side) that there is yaw as the plane is nearing the runway. The way the plane was flying suggests to me that Engine 2 (the right-side engine with bird strike) was still producing some thrust. THE OTHER ENGINE MUST BE OFF. If it was not off, there is no way the damaged Engine 2 would cause yaw to the left in that manner.
---
Sorry, I'm just an aviation enthusiast. This is just my theory from what I have been able to gather and from I've seen in videos. I hope to fly one day and even get my own jet.
In any case, they got the CDR and the (damaged) FDR. Hopefully, we'll get a better picture of what happened soon enough.
Good analysis, I hope you get that dream of flying and owning. The passion is definitely there.
@@jimmyucla Correction.
Apparently, the pilots attempted a go around after the bird strike.
They were on descent (on the localizer?) with wheels down when the bird strike happened.
They raised wheels and started go around.
The rest of my theory stays the same...
They turned off the wrong engine and realized that they would not be able to do a proper loop so decided to instead do a "tear drop" maneuver to try to land on the runway from the OTHER side...
What they ran into at the end was the localizer towers that were on top of a concrete block wall.
Other things that went wrong:
1. This airport was just recently cleared for international flights. They might not have prepped it properly.
2. There are FOUR bird "sanctuaries" around this airport...and this is migration season for them to be there.
3. Someone "stabilized" the localizer towers with concrete blocks.
---
If BOTH engines were hit with birds during the descent with the wheels down...why would the pilots not just continue on to the runway and land? It might not be a perfect landing, but it's the best option. They could have tried to glide the plane in.
Why do you need back ground music??
Donc si j’ai bien compris vous supposez qu’ils ont oublié de sortir le train puis qu’il y a eu l’impact d’oiseaux ensuite ce qui expliquerait effectivement que le train n’était bizarrement pas sorti ? Est ce qu’il n’y a pas une alarme dans le cockpit qui signale que le train n’est pas sorti alors que le sol n’est pas loin ?
@@samshare2146 that’s also what I’m wondering. Because if you have dual engine flameout/failure, standard procedures call for the pilots to extend the glide as long as possible and find a clear/safe area to land on if no airport in sight to divert. They could have theoretically just continued with their approach and landing, abandoned TOGA, and ended up on the runoff area at worst.
CRM was just not there inside that cockpit brought about by fatigue and pressure and critical and crucial checklists and procedures were not followed leading to the unfortunate disaster. Quite possibly also, as mentioned in the video, societal norms could have played a factor like in the KAL accident in 97.
A very welcome analysis. Thank you and Happy New Year.
Dude, everything u said makes sense! U r the first to really provide the most possible reason for the crash! I am confident that the final findings will validate what u stated! Pilots F’d up! Even if they knew they could not engage the landing the gears, they floated above the runway way too far b4 touchdown giving them very limited runway left for a belly landing, did not have flaps down! They came in waaaaay too hot and fast! Also tower maybe shud have checked visually with binoculars to see if landing gears were down? BTW I JUST SUBSCRIBED TO UR CHANNEL!
Very informative video. Best I’ve seen so far on this horrendous crash.
Excellent overview.. thank you
This was the best analysis I have seen by far to date.
Thank you sir. Share more updates pls
I read that it could be double engine failure. Thus, best to glide in and don’t use flaps or landing gear down. Perhaps they overcompensated as they ended up in middle of runway.
There is a manual deployment option to release the landing gear. If landing gear is not functioning as expected, the only option is a belly landing. This where support from ATC should be relied on😢
Excellent point about the landing gear not being deployed at the moment of the bird strike. During final approach, at that altitude, landing gear is usually deployed.
Solid reasoning skills. Definitely helps understanding better what may have happened.
Poor sound quality and annoying, distracting, and unnecessary background music caused me to stop listening after a couple of minutes.
Is it possible that the pilots decided not to lower the landing gear because of both engine failure (not just the right engine), they wanted to glide and to extend landing gears only at the final seconds before touchdown, but for some reason they failed to do that?
What a great explanation very informative
They shut down the wrong engine, and forgot to redeploy gear in the panic.
All survivable but the choice of runway finished them 😢
I don't think it was a bird strike. I didn't see any birds in that video. Maybe an engine and electrical and hydraulic failure?
Pilot was skilled and having enough hours of flying. To me unfortunately both engines got bird hit and hence the message was May day. It's not at all pilot error
Thanks for the vid. One question: why on the initial landing did they not just complete the landing [even with the birdstrike]. Surely, the bird strike affects departing planes more than arriving planes.... the arriving plane can just continue to coast down after the strike, with the plane configured, with reduced speed and altitude, with falps set, and landing gear extended. The pilots should not have gone around/ re-launched the plane imo.
They decided to do a full go around but for whatever reason, they changed that and decided to land from the direction they came from, but now they were too high and fast and ended up touching down halfway along the runway, possibly at 250 knots. There was no time for checklist, or landing gear or flaps. There was also significant fuel onboard.
@@zeniktorres4320 Does not answer my question. The bird strike happened as they were coming in to land.... very near the runway as was recorded on a mobile phone near the runway. So why not continue to land - everything was configured, low speed, low altitude etc. By going around they just compounded their problems.
Newbie here because of Jeju air deadly crash 😢 im curious of what happened to the plane where infact they landed already. Good to hear a good explanation through this video..thank you sir!❤
Excellent analysis! Thank you
excellent analysis. Thank you.
Outstanding report ................Human factors for sure....
Very comprehensive explanation what happened. Thank you and see you soon.
Great detail!
It’s a human factor, Pilots’ 💯 % fault/error!
My favorite part was showing the junk on the cockpit floor covering the hidy-door….
Very good video, thank you. For this kind of videos, I would prefer if it were without background music.
As a non-native speaker with no professional knowledge about flying, having no background music enhances my comprehension.
Edit: it is way, way better listening with headphones.
Great report...thanks!
Clearly analysis. Thank you.
1:12 - Oh, yeah? What's the survival rate compared to other modes of travel?
Very high
1-1.2million chance
Short vid showing engine #2 flameout, also shows a small puff of smoke coming from engine #1
Yes I also see that and believe both engines were hit. And maybe that cut them off from initial landing before they had extended the gear, and then they forgot about it in panic
Your video assumes he landed on 01, but actually he landed on 19er, so they had to go around even though the plane did not broadcast the data. The concrete barrier they hit is at the southern end of the runway.
This is true… read the pinned comment
Pilots rushed to land, I can see just two reasons for that: fire or smoke in the cabin
Perhaps they had 1 engine down and the other engine took a hit and was showing abnormalities due to it getting bird striked as well and they assumed that engine was dying and rushed to land before it became a glider - maybe they had thoughts of the Hudson River plane from 2009.
They landed rwy 19. They did go around. This flightradar data is not the final approach to the crash. It probably shows the approach until the bird strike. The weird thing is they don´t seem to have the gear down less then 1nm final to rwy 01 when the bird hit.
This is a great Information.
Why the Adsb stop there was the big question mark.
@@14DAYPILOT Probably the bird strike affected the APU to power the transponder (not sure about electrical systems on airplanes) that disabled it. The government also said on the preliminary report that they radioed to ATC that they will attempt to land on the opposite side of the runway but did not mention if they gave the pilots clearance to land. I personally think that during the go around, they are not generating enough lift or maybe the engines are not getting enough thrust as they climb that's why they hurried to land the plane or they didn't want to go around to the same side of the runway because they might pass the area where there are many birds or maybe both.
Not a pilot just a long time MSFS player
Can you tell me why the video camera that captured the emergency landing was PANNING so that the plane remained centered in the field of view all the time? Is it somehow standard practice in South Korea to have runway surveillance video cameras programmed to do so? Are those things even available on the market?
You mean the one that recorded the approach or the one from the west that caught the touchdown and impact? The one of the approach is credited to an individual and it seems to be handheld from outside the airport wall. He's further away than the restaurant owner who filmed from the other side, so he can make smoother movements to keep it in frame compared to the guy who was closer .
@@jimbobeire Thank you, appreciate it.
Fact if you have one working engine you follow the procedure climb to a safe altitude and prepare for a single engine landing you don't do a 180 turn and land down wind so what happens if you loose 2 engines an inadvertent shut down of the wrong engine then you are a glider limited hydraulics a slow moving emergency flaps switch a free fall gear system that takes time to complete time you don't have at low altitude.
I've followed many blogs, including pilot blogs on this mishap. Your explanation and analysis is the most illustrative and instructive. Thanks and best wishes.
I thought straightaway from the description of the sequence of events that the pilots
forgot they had retracted the landing gears on the tuenaround but from your video I've learned this could not happen on a boeing. Could it be then the instrumentations blacked out? Is that ever possible on a boeing?
Appreciate ya. Thanks for sharing.
The conditions for thrust reverser deployment as you correctly displayed are either 1) radio altitude less than 10 feet or 2) air/ground sensor in ground mode. Both conditions are not required, so the TR can be deployed before the aircraft touches down.
if they forgot to lower the gear, i think the no flap landing speed is like 190 knots! and also, if they lost all hydraulics, then they couldn't steer the aircraft! this crash is so weird...... don't make sense, unless maybe a fire in the cockpit/ cabin? that would make them want to land asap... but i just don't know....
Maybe
What if.... there were more than one (for example two) birdstrikes and only second of them was filmed? I mean - that person who filmed the plane for some reason (maybe because he heard something unusual happening during plane approach...) and then after he started filming, he filmed issue with right engine.... but who said that this was the beginning of the issue?
Thanks for the video. What if they for whatever reason had a full power blackout? Complete loss of power, coupled with a very badly flown approach and last minute landing checklist?
My reasoning: flightradar track ends at 500 AGL. They decided to land with gear up. Also, the "bird" may not have been a bird. Make of that what you will.
@@zmack862thats really2 well said. Something was really wrong
Thats a negative.. We can hear engines running on video.. And also opened trust reverser.. So engine was on..
I see your point regarding anomalies! However, the barrier at the end of the runway defies logic! I don’t think the PF nor the PM completed any checklist! Did potential smoke in the cockpit contributed to both pilots continuing the approach, after the bird strike. Maybe once noticing the reduced climbing performance following the bird strike, did they raised the landing gear but forgot to lowering again prior to the landing. Hopefully we can learn more from the CVR /blackboxes. Great analysis. I only fly single engine but you provided great advice, thank you!
@14daypilot The Flight Radar is wrong. I realized this early myself. The video was taken from the west of the airport. You can see the tower and the three mountains in the background. It hits a hill and concrete barrier with ILS atop which only exists on the south end of runway. The Pilot actually landed from North to south.
He reversed direction after the bird strike genius.
YES, we already know that. the plane did a go around. Flghtradar has all the incident data missing, most likely because there was no transponder working or no radar coverage below 500 feet.
The thrust reverser can be deployed when either radio altimeter senses less than 10 feet altitude, or when the air/ground safety sensor is in the ground mode. Movement of the reverse thrust levers is mechanically restricted until the forward thrust levers are in the idle position.
one comment from me , interesting discussion and this an expert & detail explanation , success always to pak Gema's pilot training School,
I womder if the thrust reverse was actually working or if it was pulled open by the ground. Didn't jear the usual engine rev up during thrust reverse
“You can always go around” is my new life motto for 2025. Thank you, sir!
Something went seriously wrong in that cockpit. Every tenant of aviation procedures went out the window.
I agree 100%. Its a huge anomaly
Maybe their lost checklist?..
Maybe even literally.
Why didn't they just land on first approach? After a catastrophic bird strike resulting in the loss of both engines shortly after take-off, Captain Sullivan landed his fully loaded plane safely on the river Hudson and there were no serious injuries although it did help that there was no concrete wall in the middle of it.
makes me wonder if they cut off power to the wrong engine and then the pilot panicked.
I'm looking at the this video of the compressor stall, and that's really close to the runway and I do not see any landing gear in that video. Maybe they were doing a go around trying to sort the landing gear issue and then lost engines.
They did not have 6 miles of dredged straight river to land on. Have a look at all the small rocky islands and the very shallow water / marsh in between. This was not an optimal situation for trying to do what Sully did.
Now that I think about it more, I'm thinking they retracted the gear to do a go around after the first bird strike, and someone recorded the second bird strike. It would make sense that the sounds of the first incident prompted the person to record the plane and that what they recorded was a subsequent incident affecting the other engine.
Sully's decision was clearer because he lost both engines at pretty much the same time. Also, as I said the local geography around Muan is not the same as the Hudson river.
@@jimbobeire the problem is at least one engine is shown to be still working when the plane belly landed
@@jimbobeire No I'm not suggesting that they should have tried to land in the sea, I was suggesting that the faffing about with half assed go-around sealed their fate. They did not attempt to dump fuel, they came in far too fast, they overshot the landing zone by some distance, they could have lowered the landing gear manually or even tried gliding onto the grass which might have helped slow the plan down. I have a theory that the pilots were over tired and unprepared for the sudden increase in workload during the intensity of a final approach. RIP all onboard.
What do you think the appropriate action would have been if the pilots mistakenly shut down the left engine and were left under a thousand feet running on a single damaged engine?
Wouldn’t the priority now be to get on the ground as checklists wouldn’t be able to completed if the damaged engine completely failed?
And trying to maintain airspeed would explain the incorrect flap configuration and be a possible reason for not dropping the gear?
We also don’t know if both engines ingested birds. Just because there is video of the right engine sputtering, doesn’t mean the right engine was unaffected.
just when we thought that the 737-800 was better than the disastrous suicidal 737 MAX, this horrifying incident happens, terrible for Koreans to lose their loved ones
This accident probably had nothing to with an aircraft failure. Highly likely the pilots didn't follow the correct checklists.
@@gerhardbenade5869maybe. Maybe not
The recent Jeju Air crash involving a 15-year-old Boeing 737-800 (Next Generation) should not automatically be attributed to Boeing or its design. Preliminary reports suggest a combination of pilot error during a high-stress situation and external factors, such as a poorly placed wall, played a significant role. Evidence indicates that the pilots may have inadvertently shut down the wrong engine following a bird strike, leading to the use of reverse thrust only on the impacted engine. Furthermore, the aircraft touched down at approximately 230+ knots which was excessively high for a standard landing configuration and even a clean configuration.
It is essential to distinguish this incident from issues related to the Boeing 737 MAX, as the aircraft involved belongs to a different series with an established safety record. Blaming Boeing without understanding the nuances of the situation is not only unfair but also disrespectful to the investigation process and the aviation community. Just as we don't blame Airbus every time despite them previously having major issues with the A330 and other flaws, we should avoid letting media narratives mislead public perception. In aviation, informed and factual discussions are critical if you're not familiar with the facts, it's better to avoid making assumptions.
Could there have been a malfunction in which the pilots believe the landing gear has been deployed only realizing it hasn't been deployed when they don't touch down on the runway earlier
My thoughts as well. The bird strike distracted them at gear-down moment, tech issue or not.
It is maddening, these youtubers with quite a heavy accent, hard(er) to understand their English, also having a sub-optimal microphone / acoustic / technique, then they moronically think its a good idea to add “music” under or over their voice making it even more frustrating to fillow what they are saying.
I'm not native English speaker and I understood him very well.
Something I don't see commentators considering is the mobile video showing the compressor stall could very possibly be inverted as is common with uploads of mobile videos, especially filmed in portrait mode.
Secondly, several 800 pilots have said reversers can be activated with gear up... your graphic states 'either of the following conditions', thus any one, which was met regarding altitude.
Very good video, better than most.
Google earth shows the video is not inverted. Do some research b4 blabbing easily refutable suggestions.
@BoxerEngineSounds Absolutely no need for that kinda response man, but if it makes you feel good, the then good for you 👍
Somehow there was a problem with both engines, weather it was birds or something else we don't know. Its like they had the plane configured as if they thought they wouldn't make it to the runway
excelent explamation, congrats
The wall is to be blamed.
you forgott:; They do a go around, makes a u turn and land in the opposite direction!
Read our pin comment
Wall first.That’s the reason for this catastrophe.
With the growings tensions between the North and the South, I would also consider the scenario that this was maybe not an accident.
I see your point regarding anomalies! However, the barrier at the end of the runway defies logic! I don’t think the PF nor the PM completed any checklist! Did potential smoke in the cockpit contributed to both pilots continuing the approach, after the bird strike. Maybe once noticing the reduced climbing performance following the bird strike, did they raised the landing gear but forgot to lowering again prior to the landing. Hopefully we can learn more from the CVR /blackboxes.
Question, in the film where we se the bird strike, is the airplane on landing or did it justdo a go around. We cant se any gear down when the bird strike happened
Greatly appreciate your insight on understanding the fatality. Are your anomalies answered if you assume pilot's terror?
We wait the final investigation
The bird strike just added to the stress in the cockpit
What stress? Should have been a routine landing prior to bird strike.
the pilot lands the airplane perfectly the only one thing to be considered here is the unexpected barrier that is constructed towards the runway...
The ground contact in the landing gear to enable the reverser is in the A320. the 737 uses the radio altimeter and that put the thrust leve into idle, and NOT the other way around.
Possible the pilot panic and just want land as fast as possible I wonder how many years of each pilot experienced
Your analysis was good, but you didn’t mention that the pilot did not slow down or shut off the engines after touching down.
@@jcqs12 check the second video sir. With possibility engine both loss
Black box voice recorders aside, I wonder whether current technology can support cockpit camera recording which can record what the pilots were doing until the moment of the crash. This can pinpoint where actually the failure occurred to aid in post crash investigation.
The fact they land very far makes me think 2 possibilities: A- they thought the LG was down and then realize their mistake and therefore landed too long; B- the runway is actually not horizontal and goes up and down slightly (as I have seen on some analysts’ videos) and this played against them for extra glide which happens anyway in cases of belly landing.
Could they have lost the engine and in panic ignored the check list procedures and even forgot to lower the landing gear in haste to land. We can't judge those in their position given the stress they may have been under, but if seems they skipped procedures but for what reason if not panic?? We will find out soon. Sad for everyone involved.
Best analysis so far. It would be better to investigate everything about the pilots in these accident investigations. We always find out their errors but nothing about their personal history. I’ve quit watching crash analysis. The same lack of airmanship keeps rehappening.
Your reviews are makes sense.
Why commecial aircraft don't have a Drag chute in the tail section as a last resort to slow down....i will never know...🤨😐🤨
because in the event of accidental deployment it could have disastrous consequences.
New subscriber here 😢
Its really weird how they missed the first approach and did a 180 to come right back.
I haven't seen any video of landing gear in the down locked position. During manual landing gear deploy it takes about 30 seconds from the time the handles pulled to the time the gear is down and locked. The simplest explanation is pilots didn't follow checklist, cut off fuel to the wrong engine, or double engine failure.
Perhaps half-engine situation with one engine going out completely, and with the other engine half stalling? Both engines hit by birds?
It seemed to me that the JeJu B737 came in much too fast. Am I mistaken, or was the speed on the runway significantly too high?
Smoke in the Cockpit and they panicked. Yes you may be able to fly a plane but that doesn't mean you can act in a crisis with a level head. And that ridiculous batrier at the end of the runway caused many to loose there life. So sad and avoidable.