Brutal video. Sorry for the victims and their families.

torrid said:

---

I figure they would have burned off/dumped all excess fuel before attempting this. The sudden explosion surprised me a bit.

edit - The whole plane seems to stop moving too. Did it reach the end of the runway and hit something on the ground?

---

They'd have to burn it off. I don't think 737s can dump fuel. They are small enough to where MTOW is close to max landing weight so you don't have to burn much to land. (Or something like that)

NYTimes: "One of the two crew members rescued told investigators that one of the plane’s engines exploded with smoke as it approached the airport for landing, according to the local daily Hankyoreh newspaper...Footage broadcast by MBC-TV showed one of the engines briefly…

— Steve Lookner (@lookner) December 29, 2024

Hondo. said:

---

Max?

---

Question answered in another post. Aircraft was originally built for Irish budget airline Ryanair.

Longer video of the approach and crash.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-29/live-updates-plane-crashes-south-korean-muan-airport/104769186#live-blog-post-142633

Yeah, I think the vast number of those they are calling unaccounted for will turn into DOS unfortunately.

GUMPS?

Rapier108 said:

---

Longer video of the approach and crash.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-29/live-updates-plane-crashes-south-korean-muan-airport/104769186#live-blog-post-142633

---

Oh wow. I think the poster above is correct. Looks like they may have throttled up for reverse thrusters but they weren't going to operate as normal.

That plane touches down but seems like it didn't slow down at all.

Rapier108 said:

---

Longer video of the approach and crash.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-29/live-updates-plane-crashes-south-korean-muan-airport/104769186#live-blog-post-142633

---

Looks like he was way long when it first made contact with the runway. So damn fast too, looks like flaps 0 and no spoilers. I have seen two TA-4J's make a gear up landing. One caught the field gear and came to a stop quickly. The other missed the gear and went a pretty good ways on its drop tanks, reminds me of this as the nose never touched the ground. God bless those poor people.

Looks to me like a 3 gear up landing. I don't think thrust reverses are deployed because they can only deploy once there is weight on wheels. If the gear was still up, weight on wheels switch wasn't activated.

To me, the picture in the video of the #2 engine is not the reverser deployed, it was the fan cowl that became dislodged due to impact with the ground.

I can't tell if flaps and slats were extended. He was screaming down the runway pretty fast. If it was a hydraulic issue, I thought there is electric backup for at least the flaps. I see no spoilers either but video is grainy and I have a small phone.

So much to unpack here. So sorry for the lives lost and l hope they figure it out quickly.

I don't know anything about the configuration of the airport, but I'm guessing that there is residential development and/or a highway beyond the runway.

I wonder if a crash basin or a longer stretch of undeveloped land beyond the runway would have saved a number of lives.

YokelRidesAgain said:

---

I don't know anything about the configuration of the airport, but I'm guessing that there is residential development and/or a highway beyond the runway.

I wonder if a crash basin or a longer stretch of undeveloped land beyond the runway would have saved a number of lives.

---

Not much of anything around the airport but water.

Why not a water landing?



https://www.google.com/maps/place/Muan+International+Airport/@34.9932832,126.3940856,9351m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m6!3m5!1s0x3573c6fb31b5332d:0x470efa2446f23cc4!8m2!3d34.9935753!4d126.3878557!16s%2Fm%2F03bxw30!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTIxMS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

From Google Satellite, there doesn't seem to be a barrier on the north end of the field.

The "bird strike" video seems to be taken from a Hotel on the beach to the south. That would indicate plane was approaching from the south.

If no barrier on the north end, then must have been forced into a downwind approach from the north

frankm01 said:

---

Looks to me like a 3 gear up landing. I don't think thrust reverses are deployed because they can only deploy once there is weight on wheels. If the gear was still up, weight on wheels switch wasn't activated.

To me, the picture in the video of the #2 engine is not the reverser deployed, it was the fan cowl that became dislodged due to impact with the ground.

I can't tell if flaps and slats were extended. He was screaming down the runway pretty fast. If it was a hydraulic issue, I thought there is electric backup for at least the flaps. I see no spoilers either but video is grainy and I have a small phone.

So much to unpack here. So sorry for the lives lost and l hope they figure it out quickly.

---

After looking at this picture which shows a different angle and taking the WOW issue into it, you are right. The port engine reverser does not seem to be deployed.



Also the starboard engine looks to have taken the bird strike. Looks like there is some flap out in this picture.

Seems like the crew should have dropped down to just above stall and set her down at the edge of the runway.

South Korean authorities report that they expect the two survivors to be the only ones.

One male and one female, both cabin crew were seated at the back of the plane.

Im not a pilot, but that aircraft was not decelerating, or even attempting to do so.

Those engines were still hooting.

Going to be interesting to see why.

What an odd statement…

JFABNRGR said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

I can't speak to the Korean carrier here but landing gear up in a 737 generally calls for shutting the engines down on touchdown. Trying to use reverse thrust could result in extending the landing distance after the reversers deploy and and are ripped off and the engine hypothetically remains at a higher rpm

---

I think you have something here. If they weren't attempting TOGA, this might explain the nose staying up the entire time.

---

Just a thought, maybe the gear wasnt down because in the course of the emergency, they forgot to lower it. Hence the TOGA attempt with no gear.

Would not be the first time failure of CRM, checklist discipline and over task saturation has lead to or worsened
an accident.

Not that familiar with 737, but gear can be lowered manually if hydraulics are out, correct? And even if they forgot, wouldn't the tower warn them?

fc2112 said:

---

Not that familiar with 737, but gear can be lowered manually if hydraulics are out, correct? And even if they forgot, wouldn't the tower warn them?

---

Dont know about the 737 in commercial use, but AgNav has indicated that it can be in the old USAF training versions. Would assume the same in civ versions...but did they practice? Training and practice can save the day...

Yes, tower would normally have warned them, but who knows what was happening in the cockpit or the tower. Everyone could have been on the wrong freq...

Additionally, landing way down the runway and hot may indicate they werent prepared to land and got themselves commited to a touchdown regardless.

From Bloomberg article. They have the black boxes so we should get a better idea of what was going on in the cockpit and with the plane.

"The pilot issued a mayday emergency call minutes before landing after the plane suffered a bird strike, official said. The aircraft aborted a first landing attempt and then touched down without its landing gear deployed, sliding down the runway at high speed before hitting a wall at the end of the strip and exploding into flames.

Muan's control tower had warned of the risk of a bird strike at 8:57 a.m., about two minutes before the pilot declared an emergency, transport officials said in a briefing. Minutes later, the crash occurred.

The pilot in control of the aircraft had 6,800 hours of experience, a typical level for cockpit crew.

The 15-year-old aircraft, registered HL8088, entered service with Jeju Air in 2017."

Horrific crash. Not an expert but I'd question the placement of a big berm wall to support ILS or some sort of signaling equipment right at the end of the runway.

USA*** said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Not that familiar with 737, but gear can be lowered manually if hydraulics are out, correct? And even if they forgot, wouldn't the tower warn them?

---

Dont know about the 737 in commercial use, but AgNav has indicated that it can be in the old USAF training versions. Would assume the same in civ versions...but did they practice? Training and practice can save the day...

Yes, tower would normally have warned them, but who knows what was happening in the cockpit or the tower. Everyone could have been on the wrong freq...

Additionally, landing way down the runway and hot may indicate they werent prepared to land and got themselves commited to a touchdown regardless.

---

I was on a United flight a few months ago where the pilots announced that emergency crews would be meeting us at the runway and not to be alarmed. Come to find out later it's because landing gear hydraulics went out but they were able to get them down manually, so I'm pretty confident this is an option on 737s in the civilian space (but maybe not all models?)

The chain of failures that have been presented so far point to a set of major mistakes by the crew.

IMO there is nothing wrong with the hydraulic system. Flight radar shows their initial approach from south to North but we know they landed north to south. The berm is only on the south. So initial approach is aborted after bird strike and they don't go all the way around, instead turn tight and land to the south, landing level and on the runway which would have been damn near impossible with full loss of hydraulics.

The flight radar track is missing the last 1000' or so of data.
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=71c088

Concise info on Hydraulic system redundancy in the 737-800.
https://www.johanpercherin.info/airline-pilot-training/boeing-737-800-loss-of-hydraulic-system-b/

I think the biggest issue is they landed LONG only using about 40% of the runway. The reason they landed long is probably a bunch of things task saturation being a big one. I think the Captain had over 6000 hours, will be interesting to know his culture or adherence to CRM (crew resource management).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crew_resource_management

I cant imagine looking out the window thinking awesome pilots got this and then poof your kneeling before God.

fire09 said:

---

The chain of failures that have been presented so far point to a set of major mistakes by the crew.

---

Yup. I wouldn't be shocked if they were in landing config and realized the gear weren't down, tried to go around at the last moment but raised the flaps.

Otherwise it doesn't make sense why they'd be approaching without flaps or landing gear. I know someone said a 737 would warn them, but maybe the bird strike caused a bunch of audible alarms and they turned them off/down?

I first found this guy with his analysis of the Azerbaijan Airlines crash a few days ago. In it he has more questions than answers, but I think very good questions.