Jeju Air, South Korea

Reporting is that there was a go-around before the ill-fated landing due to the gear not deploying.
If the possible bird strike was prior to the belly landing,it was unrelated to the gear problem.

Still doesn't explain why fuel wasn't burned off or dumped IF the plane was otherwise without issue when the gear didn't deploy and the plane went around- nor why it wasn't configured properly for the gear-up belly flop. If there was a bird strike earlier on just before they would have dropped flaps, reduced speed etc- perhaps there was task oversaturation having to deal with both of those (maybe more) issues. It will be interesting to see what's on the CVR.
 
tobnpr said:
Reporting is that there was a go-around before the ill-fated landing due to the gear not deploying.
If the possible bird strike was prior to the belly landing,it was unrelated to the gear problem.

Still doesn't explain why fuel wasn't burned off or dumped IF the plane was otherwise without issue when the gear didn't deploy and the plane went around- nor why it wasn't configured properly for the gear-up belly flop. If there was a bird strike earlier on just before they would have dropped flaps, reduced speed etc- perhaps there was task oversaturation having to deal with both of those (maybe more) issues. It will be interesting to see what's on the CVR.
Click to expand...
tobnpr said:
Reporting is that there was a go-around before the ill-fated landing due to the gear not deploying.
If the possible bird strike was prior to the belly landing,it was unrelated to the gear problem.

Still doesn't explain why fuel wasn't burned off or dumped IF the plane was otherwise without issue when the gear didn't deploy and the plane went around- nor why it wasn't configured properly for the gear-up belly flop. If there was a bird strike earlier on just before they would have dropped flaps, reduced speed etc- perhaps there was task oversaturation having to deal with both of those (maybe more) issues. It will be interesting to see what's on the CVR.
Click to expand...

Could a bird penetrate the hull and take out the hydraulics? Just seemed that they held it in a flair forever. Doing a gear up pluck it down and hold on. Ground loop it if you have to.
 
Practically all transport category training is based on the premise that multiple failures CANNOT occur.

If there were multiple systems failures, as could occur with battle damage (a bird strike applies possibly), ALL BETS are off.

If you diagnose incorrectly, and you apply procedures that now don’t apply, and rightfully don’t then give expected results… without A LOT of APPROPRIATE experience, you’re done. You won’t be able to tell me your birthday in the heat of that battle.

What you’re going to hear on the CVR is confusion. And alarms, lots of alarms.
 
When at Braniff, 727 training, we did all the gear not down practice in simulator. Nose gear only, no nose gear, only one main etc. I believe it was Continental some where in Texas with one main gear not down. Then the jet blue nose wheel turned 90 degrees.
 
Is it possible that at the last minute they realized that the gear was not down, so they raised the flaps, closed spoilers and applied full power to go around, but the downward momentum was too big?
 
MackMooney said:
i know the angle isn't perfect and video isn't the absolute best, that plane didn't appear to be slowing? wth
Click to expand...
No brakes, and the coefficient of friction between aluminum and concrete isn't very high.
mandm said:
I guess we do need to see the experience level of those pilots, crap happens, but way too much automation in these things that makes it difficult to fly when an issue does occur? I was also thinking that culturally, many pilots here have their own airplane and keep more involved with aviation on their time off.
Click to expand...
There's something to this, even here.

I once looked into a whole bunch of crashes where the outcome was far better than might have been expected based on the circumstances. In every single case, there was someone on the flight deck who had ratings they didn't need to have to get into an airliner. For example, Sully was a glider pilot. I think one of the Gimli Glider guys was an actual glider pilot, Denny Fitch or Al Haynes maybe had a seaplane rating or something like that... But it was very interesting to see how having someone who was clearly either an aviation enthusiast or had lifelong exposure to non-airline flying made the outcomes so much better.
Mooney Fan said:
On the flipside, the flaps also don't seem to be deployed? It's hard to tell from the crappy video, but that could lend to the idea of hydraulic problems. The video starts pretty late in the process, but it looks like the aircraft probably was coming in much too high and fast, based on how fast it seemed to be moving so close to the end of the runway.
Click to expand...
If you look at a 737 funny, the flaps get stuck. At least, it sure seems that way. I've seen two no-flap landings of 737s in the same week, at times where I just happened to be at the airport (same airport) AND on frequency.

Now, in this case that probably wasn't what was happening. Too much other stuff not happening: No gear, probable bird strike, etc...

It'll be VERY interesting to see what happened here. It looks like a perfectly normal flight, then a bird strike and all hell breaking loose. https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/JJA2216/history/20241228/1840Z/VTBS/RKJB

While the track appears to show a straight in approach to the north, looking at the relationship of the control tower to the airplane, the accident occurred while landing to the south.

RKJB 290100Z 21002KT 9999 FEW045 06/M02 Q1028 NOSIG
RKJB 290000Z 11002KT 9000 FEW045 02/M00 Q1028 NOSIG
RKJB 282300Z 10004KT 9000 FEW045 M00/M01 Q1027 NOSIG

So maybe they went around, and flew to a runway they hadn't briefed... But still, it seems like it would have been smart to slow down and brief how they were going to handle things.

I'd like to know where the bird strike video was taken, and it'd sure be nice if there were video of that first approach and go-around.

The CVR/FDR are going to be very interesting on this one.
 
Nothing about this makes any sense. Botched go around is close but still...
 
Pinecone said:
Over on BT, Capt has 9800 hours.

Someone analyzed the video and thinks touchdown was about 4200 feet down a 9100 foot runway at about 190 knots. Still doing 150 when ran off the end of the runway.
Click to expand...
So only slowed 40kts of metal grinding for 4900'? They almost had to be at takeoff thrust for that.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
No brakes, and the coefficient of friction between aluminum and concrete isn't very high.

There's something to this, even here.

I once looked into a whole bunch of crashes where the outcome was far better than might have been expected based on the circumstances. In every single case, there was someone on the flight deck who had ratings they didn't need to have to get into an airliner. For example, Sully was a glider pilot. I think one of the Gimli Glider guys was an actual glider pilot, Denny Fitch or Al Haynes maybe had a seaplane rating or something like that... But it was very interesting to see how having someone who was clearly either an aviation enthusiast or had lifelong exposure to non-airline flying made the outcomes so much better.

If you look at a 737 funny, the flaps get stuck. At least, it sure seems that way. I've seen two no-flap landings of 737s in the same week, at times where I just happened to be at the airport (same airport) AND on frequency.

Now, in this case that probably wasn't what was happening. Too much other stuff not happening: No gear, probable bird strike, etc...

It'll be VERY interesting to see what happened here. It looks like a perfectly normal flight, then a bird strike and all hell breaking loose. https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/JJA2216/history/20241228/1840Z/VTBS/RKJB

While the track appears to show a straight in approach to the north, looking at the relationship of the control tower to the airplane, the accident occurred while landing to the south.

RKJB 290100Z 21002KT 9999 FEW045 06/M02 Q1028 NOSIG
RKJB 290000Z 11002KT 9000 FEW045 02/M00 Q1028 NOSIG
RKJB 282300Z 10004KT 9000 FEW045 M00/M01 Q1027 NOSIG

So maybe they went around, and flew to a runway they hadn't briefed... But still, it seems like it would have been smart to slow down and brief how they were going to handle things.

I'd like to know where the bird strike video was taken, and it'd sure be nice if there were video of that first approach and go-around.

The CVR/FDR are going to be very interesting on this one.
Click to expand...
it's not that low either, looks to me like the plane is at power.
 
MackMooney said:
it's not that low either, looks to me like the plane is at power.
Click to expand...
How do you come to that conclusion?

If anything, it seems like it *isn't*. :dunno: The reverser is out on the right engine, which presumably failed as a result of eating a bird, so it likely wasn't providing much reverse or thrust, but if the left engine was at full power I'd expect there would be noticeable left rudder deflection to keep it going right down the runway like it was. What am I missing?
 
flyingcheesehead said:
For example, Sully was a glider pilot.
Click to expand...

Sully was also an F-4 pilot, so it's safe to say he had much more exposure to airmanship than the typical puppy mill graduate.

I love this quote from him:

"One way of looking at this might be that for 42 years, I've been making small, regular deposits in this bank of experience, education and training. And on January 15, the balance was sufficient so that I could make a very large withdrawal."
 
Ed Haywood said:
Sully was also an F-4 pilot, so it's safe to say he had much more exposure to airmanship than the typical puppy mill graduate.

I love this quote from him:

"One way of looking at this might be that for 42 years, I've been making small, regular deposits in this bank of experience, education and training. And on January 15, the balance was sufficient so that I could make a very large withdrawal."
Click to expand...


Don’t underestimate Skiles, either. He grew up in a flying family, he flew recreationally (still does, AFAIK), was active in EAA, had flown a wide variety of aircraft, and had more hours than Sully.

The experience level in that cockpit dwarfed anything possible in non-US carriers, and probably most other US cockpits, for that matter.
 
Pinecone said:
Someone analyzed the video and thinks touchdown was about 4200 feet down a 9100 foot runway at about 190 knots. Still doing 150 when ran off the end of the runway.
Click to expand...
Wanna bet the flight crew was standing on the brakes the whole way....?

I wouldn't blame them, either. Natural reaction to a runaway airplane, on its wheels or no.

Ron Wanttaja
 
If the right engine has thrust reversed then power makes sense there. But I don’t see dust being kicked up. I don’t really see the left engine with reverser deployed.
 
Last edited:
wanttaja said:
Wanna bet the flight crew was standing on the brakes the whole way....?
Click to expand...

I don't know squat about flying big iron, but as an airline passenger I've always been impressed by the effect of reverse thrusters after touching down. Would bird ingestion disable that capability?
 
Ed Haywood said:
I don't know squat about flying big iron, but as an airline passenger I've always been impressed by the effect of reverse thrusters after touching down. Would bird ingestion disable that capability?
Click to expand...


It’s more about the possibilities that the bird takes out the engine. I would be quite impressed if a bird could disable the thrust reverse system.
 
I always thought thrust reversers were locked out until the weight- on- wheels sensors told the plane it was on the ground?
 
Nope.

All these jets are certified without reversers. They basically save brakes. More advanced jets modulate the brakes inversely to the reversers…

One out and one not is usually sporty. Irrelevant in this case….

There’s a learnable point WAAAY before the approach and landing. About everything after that, makes ya go “hmmmm” but isn’t very interesting from a safety perspective.

Watching a hapless tot tumble down a staircase is traumatic, but useless… figuring out how they got to where they could fall is relevant and actionable.
 
Ed Haywood said:
I don't know squat about flying big iron, but as an airline passenger I've always been impressed by the effect of reverse thrusters after touching down. Would bird ingestion disable that capability?
Click to expand...
Can the thrust reversers physically open if the plane is sitting on the nacelles?

Ron Wanttaja
 
Tools said:
Watching a hapless tot tumble down a staircase is traumatic, but useless… figuring out how they got to where they could fall is relevant and actionable.
Click to expand...
right, but that's called talking about fight club, and you know what they say about that. Any time you start on the human factors bit, expect a rabid, apologetics-ridden, tone-policing, tribal fight. For higher-level-pattern-seeking apes as we purport ourselves to be, we sure are banally predictable on that blind spot.

Btw, 'tis a conversation that isn't easily allowed for Frontier 1326 either mind you; and I add that before the reductive mob tries to strawman this away as "another bigoted Westerner" throwing unwarranted shade at Neo-Confucian culture Countries.
 
wanttaja said:
Can the thrust reversers physically open if the plane is sitting on the nacelles?

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...
I can see that being a factor.
Crew puts the engines in reverse, they spool up but reversers are mostly stuck and all that thrust keeps the plane going fast.
 
I think ground effect bit them in the *** along with a bunch of Swiss cheese.

I rode 5' off the deck at 120kts in Florida once for a few minutes in an H3. Wow
 
Ashara Keliyn said:
Is it possible that at the last minute they realized that the gear was not down, so they raised the flaps, closed spoilers and applied full power to go around, but the downward momentum was too big?
Click to expand...
Engine damage might have come into play here- maybe not enough thrust, maybe they mixed up which engine was good and advanced the wrong throttle. Then some indecision as to whether or not to try to stick the landing or continue the go-around and ate up all their time/safety margins.

I think the flight recorders are gonna be interesting here.
 
As often, Juan Browne (blancolirio) has some perceptive comments. I think not mentioned til now is that they landed at high speed and may not have anticipated ground effect; and indeed the video suggests the plane really was half airborne during the first several seconds after touchdown. He also describes the atypical elevation of the ILS antennae on a high berm. Because of high landing speed, ground effect, and touchdown two thirds of the way down the runway, Juan calculates the speed was still 150 kt (or MPH?) when it struck the berm.


HHH

Screen Shot Airports Landed.png
 
bonefishpete said:
Could a bird penetrate the hull and take out the hydraulics? Just seemed that they held it in a flair forever. Doing a gear up pluck it down and hold on. Ground loop it if you have to.
Click to expand...
bonefishpete, I read an article that said a passenger on board the 737 texted a friend (family?)
that he saw a bird embedded into the wing on his side of the plane. That unfortunate passenger
also wondered (in the text) if he had any more time on this earth after seeing that bird embedded
into the wing. The article also said that there was a major flock of birds around the airport arrival.
It looks like that 737 could have hit a big flock of birds that caused more havoc for the pilots than
many of us can imagine. There's also a video where the right engine (I think) shows flames coming
out the back - which is indicative of a bird strike. So, to me, it looks like a lot of birds hit that plane.

Rest in peace - this sucks for the victims and their families.
 
Hunter Handsfield said:
As often, Juan Browne (blancolirio) has some perceptive comments. I think not mentioned til now is that they landed at high speed and may not have anticipated ground effect; and indeed the video suggests the plane really was half airborne during the first several seconds after touchdown. He also describes the atypical elevation of the ILS antennae on a high berm. Because of high landing speed, ground effect, and touchdown two thirds of the way down the runway, Juan calculates the speed was still 150 kt (or MPH?) when it struck the berm.
Click to expand...
Interesting stuff in there about the hydraulic systems and fire handles. As he notes, though, we're gonna need the CVR on this one. I wonder how long that will take to come out? I would imagine the NTSB has probably sent a team, given that it's a Boeing product.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Interesting stuff in there about the hydraulic systems and fire handles. As he notes, though, we're gonna need the CVR on this one. I wonder how long that will take to come out? I would imagine the NTSB has probably sent a team, given that it's a Boeing product.
Click to expand...
As usual, the CVR and FDR indeed will be crucial. And perhaps tower or other ATC communications, not yet public. Also maybe useful info from the two surviving flight attendants; news reports say at least one of them is conscious, presumably without life threatening injuries. Whatever turns up, this may turn out to be one of the more interesting -- i.e. unusual and unique -- accidents in recent years.

HHH

Screen Shot Airports Landed.png
 
Last edited:
kyleb said:
Shrapnel damaged aluminum, bent at a wonky angle could easily fool a passenger. The shrapnel damage on the empennage means the aircraft would have to have been hit by a missile AND a bird if there was bird damage. I'm betting no on that. Could be wrong of course. Could have been hit by lightning too, or a meteor, but I doubt that as well...
Click to expand...
Are you still talking about the same accident? What shrapnel damage on the empennage???

FWIW, There have been THREE airline crashes just in the last few days:

1) Azerbaijan Airlines 8243, E190 near UATE, shot down by a Russian missile on 12/25, 38 killed/29 survivors <--- This is the one you appear to be talking about @kyleb
www.pilotsofamerica.com

Azerbaijan Airliner Down near Kazakhstan, 12/25, fatalities

There is video available; it's reminiscent of the Sioux City crash. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/azerbaijani-airliner-with-67-people-onboard-crashes-in-kazakhstan-leaving-32-survivors/ar-AA1wsOsB?ocid=BingNewsSerp
www.pilotsofamerica.com www.pilotsofamerica.com

2) Jeju Air 2216, B737-800 near RKJB, Bird strike/gear up landing followed by striking a berm on 12/28, 179 killed/2 survivors <--- This is the one this thread is about

3) PAL Airlines 2259, Dash 8 Q400 at CYHZ, Left MLG collapse resulting in wing/engine fire on landing on 12/28, 77 occupants all survived. (No thread yet.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top