Strange plane crash - poor Boeing.

MacDoc

MacDoc

Well-known member
Site Supporter
Last edited:
Bad place for a solid wall to be built.

RIP to the victims, GWS to the survivors and hopefully we figure this one quick.
 
It's been a bad end to the year for aviation.
RIP to the victims and GWS to the survivors.
 
I'll be very interested to hear the report on this one, belly landing a jetliner doesn't happen without a lot of things going very wrong. I heard an initial report that they had to do a go-around on a first approach, declared a mayday shortly after, then this.

RIP to all those who lost their lives.
 
I was there along the 401 when that French aircraft skidded past the runway and caught fire in the gully.
90 second evacuation - that was very impressive. A wall there would have killed them all.
It burned for a long time.
Looking at what's left its hard to believe no one was killed, only twelve with serious injuries
pilot error in this case...came in too hot, too long in wild weather, could have gone around. did not :mad:
1735540556309.png
en.wikipedia.org

Air France Flight 358 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
I did not see the crash ....I saw the smoke billowing up ( we lived on the flight path ) and rode the motorcycle quite close. Did not see the evacuation but did see the plane burning.
 
Last edited:
mimico_polak said:
Bad place for a solid wall to be built.

RIP to the victims, GWS to the survivors and hopefully we figure this one quick.
Click to expand...
Crash walls are to protect the innocent, not punish the distressed. Unless there was a hospital or school at the end of the runway the wall is unneccesary. It wasn't needed for the localizer mounts.

I don't know what beyong the runway. There was talk of bird strikes, hydraulic damage, and the wheels being up was obvious. Last I heard only two survivors, condition unknown.

Good people.
 
nobbie48 said:
Crash walls are to protect the innocent, not punish the distressed. Unless there was a hospital or school at the end of the runway the wall is unneccesary. It wasn't needed for the localizer mounts.

I don't know what beyong the runway. There was talk of bird strikes, hydraulic damage, and the wheels being up was obvious. Last I heard only two survivors, condition unknown.

Good people.
Click to expand...

Looking at the satellite view of this runway, that wall may have indeed served some purposes. To the south, a highway, and ocean. To the north, what shows as vacant (but clearly under construction) land at the time the image was captured, so who knows, perhaps hospitals or a school or what indeed may have been there now.

1735592907153.jpeg

I only see the localizer hardware on the south end of the runway so I’m guessing the landing was that direction. So that barrier protects a highway, some buildings, and eventually ending up in the water I guess. This plane would have carried enough speed to go through all of that and into the water.

1735593144795.jpeg

The barrier is right under the blue “airport” logo. It obscures it at this zoom level but it’s there.

1735593235673.jpeg
 
I'm guessisng a 9000 foot runway. Under ideal conditions what length would be needed for a belly landing. There are questions about flap and air brake deployments what was the touch down point etc.

In hindsight, where we are all geniuses, diverting to a more suitable airport would have been a better option. Not all the facts are in.
 
nobbie48 said:
Under ideal conditions what length would be needed for a belly landing
Click to expand...

A lot more than 9000 feet. An aluminum object weighing over 100,000 pounds on asphalt, travelling at hundreds of miles an hour isn't going to slow down fast. No flaps were deployed so landing speed was also very very high.

No landing gear and no flaps deployed points towards a hydraulic system failure however. Apparently they had a bird strike a short time before this all happened so fingers are starting to point towards this bird strike somehow crippling something critical in the hydraulic systems.

All guesses at this point however of course.

From a laypersons and "hindsight is 20/20" perspective however, it sure seems to me like a water landing would have been far preferable, and perhaps more survivable had they been able to maintain enough control to get it down as soft as possible, ie Sully on the Hudson type thing.
 
maps.app.goo.gl

Jeju International Airport · 2 Gonghang-ro, 특별자치도, Jeju-si, Jeju-do, South Korea

★★★★☆ · International airport
maps.app.goo.gl maps.app.goo.gl

End of runway looks like castle wall ffs.
Screen Shot 2025-01-01 at Jan, 1 2025 1.55.59 AM.jpg
view from the road....immovable object
Screen Shot 2025-01-01 at Jan, 1 2025 1.54.56 AM.jpg

Looking around on GoogleEarth it looks like the entire airport has a stone base then fencing on top - like they put in a deep base of stone to raise the area of the airport a few meters above sealevel
www.channelnewsasia.com

South Korean airport embankment in focus after deadly Jeju Air crash

SEOUL: South Korea ramped up investigations on Tuesday (Dec 31) into the cause of its deadliest domestic air accident as police scrambled to identify victims, while families of those killed in
www.channelnewsasia.com www.channelnewsasia.com


Google Earth

earth.google.com earth.google.com

Water landing less catastrophic...the island is intensely populated...would be seriously difficult at either end to extend runouts,
A tunnel for the ring road to go under a longer run out and then if the plane is still moving too fast it plunks in the bay ala New York
Screen Shot 2025-01-01 at Jan, 1 2025 2.32.33 AM.jpg
 
Last edited:
Defininately a blast deflection type setup in addition to stopping overrun situations.

Without the blast wall, you get this. St Maartens famous beach airport.

 
Pulling the slingshot a little further back. A few on that beach up for early hearing aid intervention. :eek:
I think the Korean airport runway is several meters above the surround roads. It would allow for a tunnel.
 
GreyGhost said:
That may be the longest I have every seen a jet spooled up and waiting to release the brakes.
Click to expand...

When doing a short field takeoff where the engines are spooled up to high power before the brakes are released they have to wait for all of the gauges to be in the right spots before committing to the roll. If one of the engines is a little bit laggy I can take a few extra seconds.

Even on a normal takeoff you’ll notice that the pilot will advance the throttle to a lower stabilization setting, start the roll, and then once the turbines have all stabilized, rapidly advance them to takeoff power.
 
Last edited:
nobbie48 said:
Just a thought but if the runways are iffy maybe you're using the wrong airplane.
Click to expand...

There's thousands of airports around the world like this which are perfectly safe (if not sometimes more challenging than others) in normal operations. Everything goes out the window when something mechanical fails however, or there's human error. Even the biggest and best Airports are not immune to accidents and overrun situations, ie Air France in 2005 in Toronto.

1735749590457.png
Forum Sponsor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom