[Hogmann]

Originally Posted by SoCal Rich ↗

Small body fragments

There's nothing there but gristle and fat!

[xvxchronoxvx]

Originally Posted by commondenom ↗

they "landed" facing the wrong way on the runway. So the antenna and the mound it's built on is actually positioned at the beginning on the runway

There is no "wrong" way on the runway....any runway...Runways are designed to aim into the prevailing wind at the location and time the runway was built. In calm winds the runway is generally dealers choice be it a controller or the pilot if no tower exists or is open.

[xvxchronoxvx]

Originally Posted by newjerseydeevil ↗

No speed brakes ? And these things should be visible on airport map before landing ?

Pilot error.

I'm sure they were well aware that the ILS on a runway they just used has an ILS antenna array at the opposite end. Why would that be on a map?? The pilot error you assigned to that question should be reassigned to something far more likely and not any better....They probably lost an engine and then accidentally shut down the good one. No engines (and no APU) means no hydraulics. Which means no gear, no flaps and no speed brakes.

[xvxchronoxvx]

Originally Posted by Hogmann ↗

Once you're on final approach (3ish miles out) the landing gear should already be down.

Said someone who has never flown one second in an airplane as a pilot. Go arounds and aborted landings usually call for gear up and flaps up. If they lost hydraulics after a go around that would explain why they were not deployed. Do you really think they landed with gear up no flaps or speed brakes while still traveling at over 160 knots simply because "DOH we forgot the gear"?

[akham]

Originally Posted by xvxchronoxvx ↗

I'm sure they were well aware that the ILS on a runway they just used has an ILS antenna array at the opposite end. Why would that be on a map??

The ILS localizer (ILS LOC) transmitters at each end of the runway were marked on the official airport diagram. See the first page of the PDF attached to my post earlier in this thread:

https://www.documentingreality.com/f...ml#post8346263

The pilot error you assigned to that question should be reassigned to something far more likely and not any better....They probably lost an engine and then accidentally shut down the good one.

This does seem likely, based on what we know at present.

No engines (and no APU) means no hydraulics. Which means no gear, no flaps and no speed brakes.

Not true. The landing gear can be lowered using gravity even with no hydraulics. However, if the pilots thought they had no working engines then they may have decided not to lower landing gear because that would cause drag and reduce the distance the aircraft could glide.

The most important question, in my opinion, is why didn't the pilots just land after the birdstrike? Seems to me that the decision to go around was what put them on a fatal course...

[akham]

Originally Posted by xvxchronoxvx ↗

Said someone who has never flown one second in an airplane as a pilot.

How do you know? Or are you just making assumptions about people?

The statement you quoted (that gear should be down before 3 miles) is correct. Gear should be down before 3nm. For example the Ryanair procedure for the 737-800 requires gear down at 5nm.

Go arounds and aborted landings usually call for gear up and flaps up. If they lost hydraulics after a go around that would explain why they were not deployed.

If you lose hydraulics you can still put the gear down if you want to. That's basic aircraft systems, you should know that before critisising other peoples' knowledge.

Do you really think they landed with gear up no flaps or speed brakes while still traveling at over 160 knots simply because "DOH we forgot the gear"?

Who knows. There's strong indications of some pilot error in this incident - why didn't they land instead of going around? Why was the No 1 engine not running at landing? Why did they touch down so late? (Yes, I've flown aircraft myself and I know about and have experienced ground effect, but why did the crew not anticipate that and account for it?).

You can't rule out that the crew made mistakes, including (in this high pressure situation) forgetting to lower gear. You've already suggested the crew might have shut down a working engine.

It is not unheard of for pilots of jet aircraft to forget to lower landing gear. Have you forgotten about the infamous PIA accident a few years back? Also, I've seen a (privately owned) military jet land when the pilot forgot to lower gear - leaving two deep grooves down the runway.

[kellyhound]

Another aviation analyst agreed. Captain Ross Aimer, chief executive of Aero Consulting Experts, told Reuters news agency: "Unfortunately, that thing was the reason that everybody got killed, because they literally hit a concrete structure. It shouldn't have been there."

Christian Beckert, a Lufthansa pilot based in Munich, called the concrete structure "unusual", saying: "Normally, on an airport with a runway at the end, you don't have a wall."

The concrete structure holds a navigation system that assists aircraft landings - known as a localiser - according to South Korea's Yonhap News Agency.

At 4m high, it is covered with dirt and was raised to keep the localiser level with the runway to ensure it functions properly, Yonhap reported.

South Korea's transport ministry has said that other airports in the country and some overseas have the equipment installed with concrete structures. However officials will examine whether it should have been made with lighter materials that would break more easily upon impact.

Chris Kingswood, a pilot with 48 years' experience who has flown the same type of aircraft involved in the crash, told BBC News: "Obstacles within a certain range and distance of the runway are required to be frangible, which means that if an aircraft strikes them that they do break.

"It does seem unusual that it's such a rigid thing. The aircraft, from what I understand, was travelling very fast, landed a long way down the runway, so it will have gone a long way past the end of the runway... so where will you draw the line with that? That's certainly something that will be investigated.

"Aeroplanes are not strong structures - they are, by design, light to make them efficient in flight. They're not really designed to go high-speed on its belly so any kind of structure could cause the fuselage to break up and then be catastrophic.

A pre-flight inspection of a Jeju Air passenger plane hours before it crashed in South Korea, killing 179 people, found "no issues", the airline has said.

"Nothing abnormal was noted with the landing gear," the airline's CEO Kim Yi-bae told a news conference in Seoul, as investigations continue into why the wheels were not down when it performed an emergency landing.

Choi said “a comprehensive analysis of the aircraft, black box data and other factors will ultimately reveal the cause” of the accident, which officials have said may have involved a bird strike, an issue with the deployment of landing gear or problems with other control systems.

South Korean investigators are converting data extracted from the cockpit voice recorder into audio files, the transport ministry said Wednesday, a process that could take about two days.

While rescuers quickly recovered the two black boxes, the flight data recorder was damaged and investigators were unable to retrieve its data domestically, the ministry said. It will thus be sent to the U.S. for analysis.

The U.S. team in South Korea includes representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board as well as Boeing, the aircraft’s manufacturer, and CFM International, the engine manufacturer.

[DarkSighted]

SkiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiidPIFF! *snap* 179 dead, near-complete RUD/total party death. Yes, looks like surface effect (the thing that keeps an ikranoplan 'afloat') may have worked against them. SO many things went wrong, so fast: imagine being in the cockpit, perhaps thinking: "We're down! We've got this!..... uh, we DON'T got this...." I wonder if, on this whole site, there is another (non-war) vid where MORE people died in less than a second, and it wasn't a lucky catch sudden, shaky, out-of-focus vid.

"If God wanted us to fly, he wouldn't have invented spectacular crashing!" - United States of Tara

[Hogmann]

Originally Posted by xvxchronoxvx ↗

Said someone who has never flown one second in an airplane as a pilot. Go arounds and aborted landings usually call for gear up and flaps up. If they lost hydraulics after a go around that would explain why they were not deployed. Do you really think they landed with gear up no flaps or speed brakes while still traveling at over 160 knots simply because "DOH we forgot the gear"?

Under normal circumstances the gear should be down by then, it's called a stabilized approach. So if you hit birds on final approach 3ish miles out you are already configured to land with the gear down.
That's what I was talking about.

I am a professional pilot and instructor pilot for a 135 operator. Why you feel the need to be so rude when you know shit about me. Stop being such a blowhard.

[akham]

Originally Posted by Hogmann ↗

Under normal circumstances the gear should be down by then, it's called a stabilized approach.

Exactly. For most jet aircraft 3nm is roughly 1 minute before touchdown. A bit late, IMO, to be introducing a whole lot of extra drag into a stabilized approach.

I am a professional pilot and instructor pilot for a 135 operator. Why you feel the need to be so rude when you know shit about me. Stop being such a blowhard.

(They might not be smart enough to know what Part 135 means...)