South Korea is in mourning following the tragic plane crash that took the lives of 179 individuals, marking it as the deadliest plane crash in the country’s history. With only two crew members surviving the disaster, the nation has come together to pay their respects at a memorial in the city of Muan, where the plane went down. Acting president of South Korea has also attended the ceremony to honor the victims.
As investigators work tirelessly to analyze flight data and sift through the wreckage in search of answers, some experts have raised concerns about the airport’s construction. Criticism has been directed towards the solid wall at the end of the runway, prompting further scrutiny into the circumstances surrounding the crash.
The devastating incident has left the nation reeling, with questions lingering about what led to the tragic event and how similar disasters can be prevented in the future. As South Korea grapples with the aftermath of this heartbreaking tragedy, the focus remains on honoring the memory of those lost and seeking justice for the victims.
Watch the video by DW News
Video “South Korea plane crash: What do the experts say? | DW News” was uploaded on 12/30/2024 to Youtube Channel DW News
Foul play , suspicious
The airport is definitely complicit entirely. Not only did the airport not provide a safety barrier at the end of the runway which would have prevented an impact such as this. But the airport should’ve been prepared for an emergency landing, spreading foam or some other type of material to slow the plane down.
It's entirely possible that the pilots simply forgot that they raised the gear and flaps after the go-around.
They shut off the wrong engine after compressor stall. The choice to go around was not necessary. They forgot to lower the landing gear manually. The barrier was absolutely unnecessary. These are the main themes
The airport infrastructure was not designed for this type of emergency…the pilots did their best. Koreans should learn to build better airports
I imagine what happened was that someone put out a design spec for the Instrument Landing System antennas, saying they had to be a certain height above the ground, and the engineering contractor built it to the required constraints using the antennas on hand. They have extremely good engineers, so they probably overengineered the platform. It's only when viewed appropriately from the broader holistic safety of the airport that this was a bad idea. Modern practice is to have a run off ditch where you sink into it like mud.
Hard wall. Not not brightest idea.
Capt hindsight and his trusty sidekicks: shoulda, coulda, and woulda
Journalist Jen Moon, your response sounds AI generated. Did you feed the questions through an AI and read off the answers?
What was the need of a wall they could used soft mud
Also pilot should be trained use rudder to turn around ( at least) when it is eminent that it would hit wall had they tried the plane would hit sideways or if managed to turn around this disaster could be avoided
That's what I'm thinking why there's a wall at the end of a runway? If it has enough space to for the plane to continue running til it stop, possibly saved all the passengers.
what hits me is that they were on land , if there were no wall the poilot probably could slow down the speed and stop the plane , no?
My questions at the moment;
– Did the bird strike damage one engine or both engines? (seemingly only one)
– Can a bird strike completely disable the hydro system of the plane?
– Why did the pilots need to immediately try to land after go around without even deploying the landing gears either normally or manually?
I first thought they got both engines damaged by the bird strike after the go around so they needed to land immediately by gliding the plane while not deploying the gears nor flaps to gain enough distance to reach runway. But that seems not to be the case as the plane went go around after the bird strike, which means at least one engine was working.
The person who designed that wall should be jailed. The wall killed everyone.
When we die , the one who love us will miss us! 😢🙏🏻
These aircraft are going too fast. They are too heavy.
I understand the current incredulity about the wall being at the end of the runway. What was on the other side of the wall at the time of airport construction? Houses, a hospital, something that had to be shielded at the time or later? Surely this information could be obtained from the local city office planning department archives?
No flaps, no spoilers, no landing gear suggest hydraulic failure and with one engine working full trust on the other to prevent dropping out of the skies. Runway excursion is expected in any belly landing but the wall was the no no.
It wasn't a wall people, it was an earth mound that contained partially buried concrete that extended above ground with a radar array on top. It should not have been there at all. It was a complete screw up for them to even think that that was a good idea
The airport is not safe for the plane landing without landing gear as the runway is not long enough
Muan Airport is relatively a smaller airport but good enough for 737 landing.
However several issues remain unresolved:
1) pilot had reported mayday at least 5 minutes before the 2nd attempt landing, yet no fire engine arrived.
2) pilot had a choice to fly to several nearby larger airports
3) no excuse to blame hydraulic pump isn't functioning because they're normally 3 hydraulic pumps to function.
4) no correlation hitting bird will cause landing gear to fail in airplane design and none in aviation history
its a military airport, also that wall is not a wall its a instruments array for landing which was supposed to be the approach end but the plane landed the wrong orientation with so much speed not even the whole runway is enough with that much speed….. its the speed that killed them.
the wall at the end of the runway is to prevent a runaway aircraft from falling into the pond further down the end of the runway . . . the wall could have done with a soft sandy embankment that would have absorbed the impact force to some extent . . . instead of the solid wall . . .
The tragedy his " The Wall " and the people whith a short ingenering mind 💀
You didn't answer why.
By watching the video, they could have made it or with little casualty if theres no wall there.
So, where were the answers?? 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
What's tragic is that they probably would have been fine if it wasn't for that structure in their way
DW and the lady journalist may be providing wrong information. Apparently there was no problem with a previous aircraft.
Now west will blame Russia..
"According to an unconfirmed account, there was originally no mound or wall at the site. An airport official who worked there stated that, after the ILS antennaes collapsed during a typhoon, the airport president at the time ordered it to be reinforced with a berm and concrete."
It's actually an embankment that the plane hit, which is sturdier than a wall.
Many lingering questions remain:
– why they didn't spray the foam on the runway?
– why the fire rescue came out too late?
– and why did they built an embankment at the end of the runway, instead of runoff area?
Main cause was landing at too high speed within around the last 1/3 of the runway without help of both reverse trusters and spoliers. That is a recipe for disaster at almost any airport. Landing was attempted only within 9 minutes from the bird strike, so unlikely all the check lists done to configure jet correctly for landing.
Bottom line is, the pilots for whatever reason dropped the plane onto the runway halfway down the runway.
If they had dropped the plane onto the runway at the beginning of the runway, the plane would have skidded to a stop on its belly and no one would have perished.
Aircraft did not hit a reinforced concrete wall, but a dirt mould that was built up in front of the landing aids. The wall you are talking about is behind the landing aids and aircraft never got that far. The aircraft hit the dirt mould at approx 150 m.p.h. in part because the even though the runway was long enough, without landing gear it would appear that ground affect caused the aircraft to touch down too far down the run way. Note the pilots could have dropped the landing gear manually and the crash happened on their 2nd attempt as they had tried landing from the opposite direction, but went around and came in again from the other direction. If they had the control of the aircraft and the engine power to do this, this crash does not make any sense except for the part that the dirt mould should not have been there. The plane, at that speed, would have still hit the concrete wall, but make have smashed though that with less lose of life.
I'm in S. Korea. Sometimes I don't understand why they cut cost to bypass safety measures. This comes from politicians and in-fighting.
The democrats or Opposition Party is trying to subdue the president and his administration from allocating funds for safety and infrastructure
work to lower his rating and for the public to hate him. Many in S. Korea have wisened up now and blaming the democrats to continually impeach
the president's cabinet members.
Building a wall there is murder !
It wasnt a wall, its worse. Its an earthen burm supporting the radio navigation system for landing, 150m from the end of the runway.
In modern airports these aerials are level with the ground, and specifically constructed to tear out with minimal resistance – exactly so this doesnt happen.
SK WILL try to blame the pilots but incidents like this shouldn't turn into disasters.
No that may have caused the emergency landing….but the wall caused the crash..ive seen vids on here where experts said that wall should be collapse-able not be solid and have no give
South Korea don’t even have a president ? Wtf is going on in the world.