December 29th, 2024

Jeju Air Jet Crashes in South Korea With Over 170 Dead or Missing

A Jeju Air flight crashed at Muan International Airport, resulting in over 170 people dead or missing, with 85 confirmed fatalities. Only two individuals were rescued from the wreckage.

Read original articleLink Icon
Jeju Air Jet Crashes in South Korea With Over 170 Dead or Missing

A Jeju Air plane crashed while landing at Muan International Airport in South Korea, resulting in a tragic incident with over 170 people dead or missing. The aircraft, Flight 2216, was arriving from Bangkok and had 175 passengers and 6 crew members on board. Reports indicate that the plane veered off the runway and caught fire upon landing. While two individuals were rescued, 85 fatalities have been confirmed, and the status of the remaining passengers and crew is currently unaccounted for. This incident is being described as potentially the worst passenger air disaster in South Korea in decades.

- Jeju Air Flight 2216 crashed at Muan International Airport.

- The flight was carrying 175 passengers and 6 crew members from Bangkok.

- Over 170 people are dead or missing, with 85 confirmed fatalities.

- Only two individuals were rescued from the wreckage.

- This incident may be South Korea's worst air disaster in decades.

Link Icon 33 comments
By @toomuchtodo - 4 months
By @cyberlimerence - 4 months
Tragically it appears that out of 181 onboard only two have survived. If true, this would be South Korea’s worst domestic civil aviation disaster. [1][2]

[1] https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20241229001054315 [2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/dec/29/south-kor...

By @ajb - 4 months
Discussion on prune (professional pilots rumour network): https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/663324-jeju-737...
By @denysvitali - 4 months
The article doesn't mention it, but there are videos [1] on the internet where the landing gear is clearly missing / not open. Some sources report that the landing gear broke because of an impact with some birds.

[1]: https://x.com/BNONews/status/1873174704720425440

By @supernova87a - 4 months
In this video of the plane going along the runway, it just seems to me it's going very fast well into a no-gear landing. Like they didn't set it down for more than half the runway (and the runway was 9200 feet)

https://x.com/BNONews/status/1873174704720425440

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muan_International_Airport

The thrust reversers are open though? (maybe?)

By @lawgimenez - 4 months
> The plane appears to have hit a concrete wall, according to the photos.

Can anybody point out why there is a concrete wall at the end of the runway?

By @tedd4u - 4 months
Birdstrike #2 engine possibly captured on video:

https://x.com/Global_Mil_Info/status/1873181671375421703

By @verdverm - 4 months
Quite a bit of links, information, and speculation on r/aviation

https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1holbp4/jeju_air_...

By @brunohaid - 4 months
Wow, that is indeed quite strange - that’s a very high speed for having scraped along a 9000 foot runway.

They either landed extremely long or it rhymes a bit with the Pakistani Airlines accident of an attempted gear-up landing go around a couple of years back, both not implausible in the context of already dealing with a bird strike. There are also edge cases where the plane won’t yell Landing Gear at you, and it‘s really really hard to get a 737 to a point where you can’t lower the gear anymore (multiple hydraulic systems failing, gravity pins and pulleys as well, Stig Aviation did a great video on that.)

Pretty sure there was no EMAS, as the plane dips down into the dirt at the end of the runway right away, ie not that much lift, and EMAS would do orders of magnitude more arresting.

By @amazingamazing - 4 months
I’d be very curious to know where the survivors were seated on the plane.

It’s a miracle anyone survived.

By @eggy - 4 months
An informed take on what may or may not have happended:

https://youtu.be/w1r8dl4RqMw?si=BzEnCzbgv7oYNNwe

Only one engine was in reverse, and flaps were not down. The YT video also excerpts manuals and diagrams to good effect for a lay person who is not a pilot. Video of engine failing near airport may have been bird strike. They were in flight 4+ hours, so fuel should have been used to an extent, but don't they dump fuel when they are going to land in an emergency like this? The fireball was big, and they should have shut fuel pumps before flare up of reversing engines on runway.

The 1-foot-thick concrete wall for the atenna array seems to have caused it to impact hard enough to cause the most damage and fireball. The video points out there are lots of these with less robust structures at most airports.

By @Animats - 4 months
Give this a day to settle. There's a lot of misinformation out there.

NYT: "Its landing gear appeared not to have dropped down from under the plane, and the flaps on its wings apparently were not activated for landing, Mr. Tonkin added. “The aircraft was essentially in a flying configuration,” he said. That meant the plane was likely “flying faster than it would normally be in a landing situation.”"

That's consistent with the video. The aircraft is sliding down the runway, lined up with the runway, going too fast, wheels up, flaps up, possibly still under power.

"Why" is days away.

By @throwaway290 - 4 months
The same plane was in the news a couple of days earlier. Not a technical issue but medical emergency, probably coincidence https://www.ekn.kr/web/view.php?key=20241228028449548
By @cakealert - 4 months
The extended footage shows that the plane was not slowing down much.
By @blueflow - 4 months
By @toomuchtodo - 4 months
By @stogot - 4 months
CNN initially reported 170, then changed it to 47 and now reports 170 again. I was hoping the 170 was a mistaken report
By @blindriver - 4 months
Is there a reason why a runway landing was preferred over a water landing?
By @shepherdjerred - 4 months
Is flying getting less safe, or are incidents just getting more attention?
By @tennisflyi - 4 months
What does the QRH say to do in this circumstance?
By @byyoung3 - 4 months
bird strikes dont prevent you from deploying a landing gear
By @nikolay - 4 months
Why didn't they land on water?!
By @mikequinlan - 4 months
https://www.hankookilbo.com/News/Read/A2024122913460001941?_...

Translation from Korean…

>Article

>The Korea Times

>Plane carrying 175 people crashes while landing at Muan Airport

>Reporter Park Kyung-woo

>Passenger KakaoTalk, control tower communication contents, etc. confirmed.

>Engine flames during circling for second landing, fuselage landing attempted at an urgent moment KakaoTalk conversation of a Jeju Air passenger who crashed at Muan Airport. He told an acquaintance that he could not land due to a flock of birds.

>KakaoTalk conversation of a Jeju Air passenger who crashed at Muan Airport. He told an acquaintance that he could not land due to a flock of birds.

>The Jeju Air passenger plane that crashed after straying from the runway while landing at Muan International Airport was confirmed to have collided with a flock of birds while approaching the airport. This caused a fire in the engine, and smoke and toxic gases entered the aircraft, causing the plane to attempt a hasty landing.

>According to a comprehensive report by the Hankook Ilbo on the 29th, the accident passenger plane was scheduled to land at Muan Airport at 8:30 AM that day. However, while approaching the airport while lowering its altitude for landing, a flock of birds struck the right wing and engine at an altitude of 200 meters.

>The passenger plane gave up landing and raised its nose. It seems that they judged that landing would be difficult. The Muan Airport control tower received this report from the captain. The captain then communicated with the control tower that he would attempt a second landing and circled over the airport, but in the meantime, flames broke out in the engine. An official familiar with the communication said, "Despite the sufficient runway length, smoke and toxic gases entered the aircraft, and an emergency landing was made without time to take measures such as draining fuel." "It seems that the engine system deteriorated, so the electronics and hydraulic systems did not work, and that is why the landing gear did not come down."

>In an emergency, the control tower reportedly had a dedicated fire brigade on standby near the runway. An airport official said, "If we had known about the landing gear failure earlier, we could have dumped all the fuel (remaining in the aircraft) and applied a substance to the runway floor that could increase the coefficient of friction and cool the flames. However, time was of the essence."

>During the second landing attempt, the runway approach and landing angle were good, and the captain switched to manual control. An airport official said, "After landing on the runway, we had no choice but to rely on wing (engine) reverse thrust to decelerate," and "Since steering was also impossible, we collided with the outer wall at the end of the runway."

>A KakaoTalk message from a passenger on the accident plane was also confirmed, suggesting a bird strike just before landing. According to the message, at exactly 9 o'clock, a passenger told an acquaintance, "A bird got caught on my wing, so I can't land."

By @s5300 - 4 months
Maybe the end of an airport runway should be some form of elastic plane-load rated material & not essentially a solid wall.
By @deadbabe - 4 months
It’s been a very deadly year for airplane safety?
By @eddywebs - 4 months
Whats up with all the plane crashes lately blaming bird hits.
By @tw1984 - 4 months
WTF, why they have to put a wall at the end of the runway? so sad. that is 170 real lives that could have been mostly saved without that fxxking wall.