Experts BAFFLED by fireball plane crash & cast doubt on 'confusing' theory

[@craig7350]

These experts have no clue. The plane didn't pivot, it didn't veer right, it went straight. Into the wall.

[@ffukamizu]

Also he says he suspected the airplane would burst into flames as it landed, when in fact every airliner is made to belly land without any issue in case of a no gear landing.

[@geoffshaw8053]

Agreed, he doesnt know what he is talking about.

[@toothlessseer3153]

02:29 The former pilot Marco Chan was talking rubbish about the strike hitting the (deployed) landing gear causing it to fail. 1. The landing undercarriage doors were all SHUT as per the video. So the landing gear was not yet opened 2. Even if the landing gear were damaged, it would deploy via gravity (it is designed to just fall down, so would deploy even if there were a power failure)

[@tomjones4093]

NO... it did slide to the right. NO airport in the world has a barrier at the end of their runway. If you would have paid attention to the video, you will see the opposite direction approach lights off the left wing... inline with the runway the plane slid off of. Pay attention.

[@Lyle-In-NO]

It's nice to see so many experts on the internet here all in one place.

[@chrisweir762]

What's unusual and utterly absurd is having a concrete wall in the runoff area!

[@neiltaylor4777]

Ever seen Midway airport?

[@TheSateef]

international airport design rules say the ILS antennas at the end of the runway should be able to break off without significant damage to the plane

[@CaptainRon1913]

That wasn't a concrete wall it hit. It was the ILS localizer antennas a few hundred feet past the end of the runway. Those antennas were mounted on top of an earthen berm or hill. Normally, the localizer antennas would be mounted on a flush to the ground flat concrete slab, and made to break off in the case of an aircraft runway overrun. The airport perimeter concrete wall was never touched.

[@kathygriffin9465]

Shear stupidity to 1) have a concrete barrier and....2) if the pilot knew that putting the jet down the wrong direction after a pull up after the first attempt to land that there was a concrete barrier at that wrong end it was suicidal for sure.

[@danielch6662]

​@@kathygriffin9465 the plane didn't hit the concrete wall at the airport perimeter. Because it hit the base of the ILS just before it. Though if the ILS weren't there, it would have definitely hit the wall with the same result. There was no concrete barrier. The ILS is mounted in concrete because they needed to be precisely aligned. If they were just stuck in the sand, they'd tilt and cause other accidents because planes rely on them to determine their landing line. Normally the concrete base is flush with the ground, but here they appeared to be raised. Or possibly the ground around it lowered. There is construction/maintenance work going at the airport. Don't know for sure. I'm not Korean and don't live there. These aren't the problem. The problem is as the video show. The plane landed at the end of the runway. The FAR end, at very high speed.

[@FeatheringWalthamstones]

Plane landed late on the runway leaving little room to stop. No flaps deployed. No landing gear deployed even with emergency gravity system. Plane did not hit a regular wall, it hit the localizer antenna that was built on an unreasonably large and reinforced concrete slab on top of a sorry mount, rather than a normal strut tower. There was no veering right, the localizer antenna is in line with the runway. You can speculate all you want, but don't tell me lies as of they're facts.

[@zaratrusta79]

The only thing more appalling than this catastrophe is its media coverage

[@gazza2933]

It wasn't a normal landing. It was a fast landing and I agree flapless. Hydraulic problems.

[@rajeendraperera8786]

What I can hear is the engines are revving like the plane is about to take off. I do not hear the usual reverse trust to slow down. It lands almost at the end of the runway and pilots may have thought to abort the landing and take off. Just thought.

[@isilder]

Yes, they touched down far from the earliest touch down mark. this is probably due to their high speed, the ground effect was stronger, the pilot was not expecting that... he didnt realise his speed was so high... or for some reason thought he had to land anyway ???? when he had a flying plane and the Sea of Japan was just here over the fence.. he could have just cruised over the sea, knowing that if the plane did start losing air speed and dropping, well thats what he needs right, he absolutely needs to lose speed, so thats good, and the sea is just there a few seconds away so even if it develops the problem quickly...its got to be better to "fly the plane" than assume they must crash land.

[@stevenv2190]

@@gazza2933 Interesting to have control of the aircraft on that belly landing. Ground effect delayed the contact with the runway.

[@ParvezKhan-wb5qb]

How can they build brick/concrete wall in front of the runway. This is absolutely stupid and crazy. The airplane landed perfectly it shows the pilot was highly experienced. If it wasn't for the wall there would have been less death. All other airports around the world shuld be inspected for safty.

[@Obiter3]

That is pretty dumb. Short sighted doesn't quite say it

[@juneduffy4502]

It had no deploy flaps and no wheels 🛞

[@awuma]

There are also airports with a big gully at the end of the runway, e.g. Pearson International at Toronto, whose gully has swallowed two jetliners.

[@spilot1016]

Korean engineering at its finest. I live and South Korea and I see stupid things like that on daily basis. Education is very poor here.

[@MrUranium238]

The wall did its job

[@mike73ng]

Wow. I’ve never heard so many “experts” that are so wrong about almost every aspect of this incident.

[@georgemurray2901]

So speaks the expert?

[@GHOST-hd4wm]

Because they know exactly what happened but they don't want the public to find out as it would lead to worldwide panic and civil unrest. Do you understand?

[@mike73ng]

@ Yes. I am an expert.

[@johnsmith8410]

@@mike73ng 73ng, what do you think was the main factor for the overrun

[@maxbootstrap7397]

@@johnsmith8410 : The pilot could have landed a bit shorter, but that isn't the main problem. The main problem is ... the airplane flaps were not lowered (which presumably was caused by destruction of hydraulics when bird strike caused engine to explode in an unfortunate manner). Plus presumably the landing gear could not be lowered for the same reason --- totally screwed hydraulic system. *HOWEVER* ... it is extremely unusual that both flaps and landing gear were both damaged by any kind of non-massive event ... *ESPECIALLY* when obviously the ailerons were not damaged (the evidence of that being the pilot was able to line up the approach and landing direction *EXACTLY* with the runway direction and center-line. Some very strange coincidences here. Also, the pilots *AND* the controllers were *CRAZY* to land in the direction they did, since (according to my google-earth display) there is no re-inforced concrete wall at the other end of the runway *AND* there is a quite a long distance of nearly empty ground past the end of the runway in that other direction. They also could have landed in the bay --- remember all those lessons from "the miracle on the Hudson". PS: Also note that there is also a backup *MANUAL* landing-gear lowering system in that airplane ... so how *ALL* the landing gear could not be lowered is extremely difficult to understand or even imagine.

[@Tom_Hadler]

This makes no sense. Even if we assume a birdstrike takes out not just an engine, but hydraulics to the landing gear...I thought they could deploy that manually, and aerodynamic forces and gravity help. Then do we have flap failure too? But the most egregious failure is a concrete wall at the end of a runway. Because of that, about 180 people died, instead of, quite realistically nobody.

[@trilight3597]

There are 3 hydraulic systems. They would've had two more. With manual extension as an option. Without egregious and multiple mistakes; this doesn't make sense.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

And speedbrake failure too? 3 redundant hydraulic systems - somehow are 3 are lost? Yes walls on runways have no place being there - but people forget. The airport is surrounded by levees. Just past that wall, was an earthen wall. The damned airport is in a bowl. Why not fill it in, and have NO walls of any kind around a runway? Just fields?

[@ModernVintage31]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking This is a dual purpose civilian/military airport which would explain a solid perimeter wall. That said, that still does not explain why the ILS antenna array had to be mounted atop what is essentially a reinforced earth and concrete bunker 😢 There’s a lot of weirdness to unpack from this accident.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

@@ModernVintage31 Thank you for replying. I have an ez solution tho - fill in the ground in between the levees, next, put multiple fences of razer wire at the base. It would be a hill any intruders would have to climb, and they'd be obvious. Mount cams on the fences. Planes would slide down the levees, and the fences would give way. Heck, make the end of the runway a marsh, as that's the natural habitat. Swamps are known to cushion the landing of aircraft, like in the Tri-Star Florida crash. A bog would keep out most intruders too. The solid walls are only necessary for noise abatement on the N/S because for some reason, homes and businesses are there. So sad. :(

[@hb1338]

Suppose both engines fail at 200 feet. You do NOT have time to start fiddling with manual gear levers. Not every system has its' own distinct and isolated hydraulic system. I don't know any details (I am a pilot, not an engineer) but it is possible that the landing gear and flaps were affected by a single hydraulic failure. There are reports that a passenger texted that there was a bird "stuck in the wing".

[@schao7555]

The wall at the end of the runway was the reason for the deaths, the pilots did land that plane exceptionally Well.

[@alanstevens1296]

2/3 the way down the runway? The most useless thing to a pilot is the runway behind you.

[@odie1170]

@@alanstevens1296 There probably was a good reason he didn't go for a full go around. Probably no engine power left

[@Benjamin-em4nh]

No gear down? No flaps? Both have manual systems in emergency situations.

[@prestwickpioneer3474]

@@schao7555 no, if they had touched down in the actual TDZ they might have walked away.

[@abcdjkx]

They landed too far down the runway though, not leaving enough room to stop.

[@Miata822]

"Textbook" except for high speed, no flaps, no spoilers, no thrust reverse on port engine... other than that and un-alive-ing all the pax while totalling the plane it was darned near perfect.

[@thefpvlife7785]

Given those failure the landing was textbook.

[@Ryan_Christopher]

How do you deploy Thrust Reversers if the Engine is already scraping the ground? Doesn’t the mechanism deploy Up-Down and not Left-Right?

[@DavidK-Delta]

The plane exploded on impact with the wall... No emergency runoff area which all other airports have !!! CRIMINAL !!

[@MA-yl1er]

No landing gear is the worst problem.

[@jbin2424]

You can literally see the flaps up in this footage.

[@hokeypokeypots]

Nothing to be baffled about. The pilot made a safe landing, going from north to south so as not to crash into any populated areas or buildings...but the plane exploded when it crashed into the cement wall at the end of the runway. If that wall hadn't been there, most likely everyone would have survived.

[@ElectricBlade-m]

No atleast 50 would have still died unfortunately since people die with INTACT FULLY INTACT planes

[@MA-yl1er]

Yeah no he did not make a safe landing at all.

[@richardwillson101]

With the speed the aircraft touched down, and the distance down the runway, that was going to be a majorly fatal accident regardless. The difference is, without the wall, the break up might have been at a slightly slower speed and more MIGHT have escaped. But don't be fooled, it WOULD have broken up and turned into a fireball. That's far too fast and too late for it to have ended any other way with the gear up.

[@vitek924]

@@MA-yl1er did a safe landing dude with no landing gears hello do you have brains?

[@prestwickpioneer3474]

Nothing safe about this landing at all.

[@wizardchairman3691]

Landing gear can come down without ANY engines working. What about the flaps? Someone activated the wrong engine fire extinguisher, and did not deploy the landing gear, the flaps, and was going way to fast..

[@johnsmith8410]

Better go and tell that to all the aircrew that have had to land undercarriage up then

[@ThePowell3000]

Yeps. Pilot panicked and made multiple errors...

[@CH-tp4wz]

That landing gear switch seams to be in a really awkward place maybe they weren't able to reach it and open it's all speculation at the moment.

[@Miata822]

I should have read your before posting. Yes, lots of confused and uninformed news outlets quoting each other's theories this morning.

[@JimboJimbo-i4i]

People making all sorts of assumptions here based on nothing, wait for the evidence. Also would have helped if there wasn’t a bloody cement block in the way

[@csadler]

" BAFFLED" It hit a reinforced concrete wall!!!!!! It's actually criminal that it happened.

[@CheryleeWilcox]

Exactly

[@msimms-lp5qw]

Why have a concrete wall , why not an earth or sand bank

[@cristianstaicu1521]

It desintegrates on impact with that wall. And the speed the plane had😢

[@awuma]

@@msimms-lp5qw It should have no wall or bank. Just lights on masts.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

Just behind that wall, was an earthen levee. Same result at that speed. Stupid to put a landing strip in a bowl! Why not fill in the bowl with earth, then planes would slide down the hill at the end...let it be a bog down there. Would cushion the landing. Everything is so dumb here. Yes, criminally stupid.

[@eugene5275]

The question we should be asking is, why did the air traffic controller directed the airplane to land in this direction? When fully aware that there was a big wall.

[@paulelliott3613]

In an emergency ATC will defer to the pilots. For example if both engines failed. Seconds count. And was the ILS localiser at the other end similarly built?

[@jeanmcguinness3297]

Horrendous... Who builds a wall on a runway

[@robmoore1672]

There is no wall

[@andrewhotston983]

​@@robmoore1672Yes there is.

[@michaelb2388]

It wasn't on the runway

[@ronniekray6918]

A bricklayer

[@MidlandsAviation]

​@@michaelb2388200metres from end ILS antennas are always put up at ground level, not in the over run

[@rongt859]

The second guy with the fact there is no foam sprayed on the runway for a belly landing is a good point , as if they were not expecting a wheels up landing

[@InletMark]

Large airports should be required to have sand pits at the end of their runways and a safe zone that prevents roads and building for a required amount of distance from the end of these runways. Thankfully air travel is mostly safe for large commercial airliners. The airline had a good safety record but it sure looks like the pilot mistakenly didn't manually deploy the landing gear.

[@johnsmith8410]

This one did, the aircraft went through it

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

@@johnsmith8410 If they existed, they're at the North end. The plane landed the wrong direction, and went to the south end.

[@paulelliott3613]

My input is it looks like the aircraft was "floating" therefore a very late "touchdown" and high speed. But the ILS localiser built on reinforced concrete was lethal. Should be a frangible structure if I remember my ATC terminology correctly.

[@neilfoster814]

Road signs are designed the same way, to collapse when hit by a car.

[@hb1338]

It started life as a military airport.

[@YortOK]

Or even arrestors

[@derricksteed3466]

No undercarriage results in failure to deploy the lift dumpers and the wing still flying in ground effect which results in zero braking and aircraft runs the whole length of the runway at near the speed at the beginning of the landing run.

[@ramkold]

If i’m captain, we aren’t going to even attempt landing without landing gear on ground. We are doing a belly landing on water.

[@traceycharles4910]

That's my thoughts too

[@jimmyucla]

Furthermore with all that grass/dirt why choose the concrete 🙄

[@shreyansh_shrivastva]

That's why you are not the captain. Landing in water is much more difficult as you have to align the aircraft along the direction of the waves which constantly changes. Plus there is no simulator training for landing in water. There will be a lack of emergency services as well which is available at the airport. And there have been multiple successful attempts on concrete and this one landed successfully as well but carried too much speed.

[@paulelliott3613]

Far safer to land on concrete, have you seen the Ethiopian 767 video landing on water?

[@hannahkushan175]

Pilot managed to land the plane safely and all he needed was a longer runway without that stupid wall 😢

[@puru6739]

The fact: the concrete wall is clearly an additional part of the whole equation - any pilot is supposed to negotiate the bizarre obstacle as well during any emergency landing. That is why I ditched my Korean car long ago.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

They make "airplane stops" like they do for runaway big rig trucks that lose their brakes. All it takes is deep gravel! But hey, let's build a runway in a bowl, and have concrete and earthen walls at the end. great idea!

[@kenho-wr5ul2rh7m]

quite obvious pilot failed the pre-landing check list

[@Teolulz]

@@puru6739 this is why I never bought any Korean car and will never fly Korean.

[@andymurdoch1346]

The 'wall' was steel reinforced concrete to mount the localiser antenna array on. This could have easily been a collapsable alloy structure. The perimter wall was simple blocks that would've done lesser damage

[@rickfeng4466]

The ILS-LOC array Air Canada 624 crashed through was collapsible and only ripped the landing gear off, so there were no fatalities. It’s really upsetting to know this could have been a non fatal accident.😢

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

@@rickfeng4466 Slamming into he earthen levee behind it would be the same result. I'm angry they allow runways to be built in a bowl! PDX is like that too. Deathtrap.

[@rkan2]

​@@rickfeng4466It was still going like 100 knots to the wall, thus it probably would have continued way past the perimeter wall and likely catched fire regardless. Probably more surviors still though...

[@ObscuritiesByJude]

Yes, I kept saying turn right, turn right, onto the grass and dirt and whatever fencing stuff was there. But so easy to speculate from a screen. I could never be a pilot, not a commercial pilot - so many lives in your hands.

[@tomjones4093]

As a retired professional flight engineer off the Boeing 747, I'm fully aware of emergency procedures associated with component failures. The 737-800 doesn't really have a manual flap extension procedure. Depending on the amount of HYD failure, which was not a total failure since the CA was still able to preform a controlled landing, it's quite possibly, like the 747, that each wing's flap systems are controlled by separate HYD systems. There may not be any kind of interconnect between systems to prevent complete HYD systems failure. Which, in my opinion, is why the flaps were not extended.

[@Kenzothebully]

Deploying manual mechanics has been questioned so much recently and found not to be mandatory in modern day aviation licenses! How after the napoleon accident have these not been addressed?? funny how this comes a couple of days after Russia getting accused of shooting one down! very suspicious! Two planes in less than a week! its absurd

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

Thank you for your input. Can you watch the 'Pilot Blog' video, he's a 737 captain, and comment about his take? He explains the hydro systems and the manual procedure, with pictures. He shows the manual levers, and how they are gravity-assisted. He has diagrams. He's really puzzled. Also - I wonder if the pilots could have been unaware somehow the gear was up. If they're not asking ATC about it - ATC wouldn't likely be commenting. (In time.) Could there have been some sort of system failure that knocks out cockpit lights and indicators?

[@rogerrose8220]

Also looks like the spoilers weren't deployed.

[@azfinctrsaazvaat4568]

Once the aircraft started dragging down the runway due to the landing gear being in the up position, the PIC should have been pushing the aircraft nose down to increase the decel rate. The video looks to me like he was attempting to rotate which allowed it to skid off the end and into the barrier.

[@hb1338]

@@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking Landing gear indication systems are fail safe. There are always three separate and independent indicators, one for each leg of the landing gear. Each indicator light is normally off; when you pull the lever to lower the gear, the light shows red and it goes green ONLY if/when the relevant leg is locked correctly in position. The probability of a false positive (green light when the leg is not correctly locked) is incredibly low, effectively zero. Unless you see three greens when you lower the landing gear, you have a big problem, which is obviously both important and urgent. In normal circumstances, you abandon the attempt to land - this is known as a missed approach or a go-round depending on how close to the ground you are when you quit. If a bulb fails or there is a power failure, you don't have three greens and you abort the landing - this is the fail-safe aspect. Normal procedure (assuming that you can control the aircraft properly) is to abandon the landing, fly away, try several times to lower the gear and return to the airport. If you cannot get three greens, you fly low and slow along the runway and someone in the tower checks whether or not the gear is deployed. The rescue service then puts foam down on the runway, partly to slow you down and partly to prevent sparks which might cause a fire, and you then land on the foam. You execute this procedure ONLY if you have sufficient control of the aircraft and sufficient time to do the go-round safely. Ignore (unless we hear otherwise) the possibility that the crew lost their minds. The safest assumption _at the moment_ is that the pilots *chose* to land without landing gear. They might do this if they did not have sufficient control of the aircraft to execute a go-round safely e.g both engines out. The absence of foam on the runway suggests that there was not enough time to put it down; I worked at Heathrow for a number of years and it took about 15-20 minutes to put down sufficient foam. One HYPOTHESIS which fits the evidence (gear up landing, no foam, no apparent manual deployment of the gear) is that the aircraft lost both engines very late in its' approach and the crew decided that an immediate landing was the least risky or only option. If you are at 100 feet and you lose power, you do *NOT* fiddle about with manual levers, you concentrate on putting your plane down safely.

[@Ryanjoned163]

Deepest condolences to the family, 😢

[@Arthurbracegirdleesq]

2025 gonna be worse imo I hope not though the good old days are long gone I fear

[@Ryanjoned163]

​@Arthurbracegirdleesq yes definitely, more bad News is on the way its not going to get better, 😢

[@Jaevwyn]

Which one?

[@Ryanjoned163]

​@Jaevwyn your dads boyfriend

[@flightsimdev]

This is a case of too fast speed, aircraft not ready to land, and no preparation from emergency service on ground like foam etc, I am going to blame the pilots for this tragedy.

[@schao7555]

Sure, but the pilots did land that plane perfectly with no landing gear, it was a perfect belly landing of a commercial jet

[@kenthompson5723]

I am going to blame the pilots for this tragedy. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- That seems more reasonable than what the media is already blaming >>> the birds.

[@jrtstrategicapital560]

Why arent you guys reporting the KLM crash in Norway which crashed without its landing gear due to hydraulic failure too! Everyone survived, yet its another Boeing.

[@mvl6827]

I heard about that. KLM sending another plane to Oslo to pick up stranded passengers as we-speak. In short, it's not the best time to fly....

[@zaratrusta79]

what was the HYD failure cause on the KLM?

[@apoloniuszy]

Również w Kanadzie.

[@davidlawrence3230]

that one definitely had the gear down.

[@awuma]

My hypothesis: the pilots turned off No. 2 instead of No. 1 after the bird strike. When they realised their mistake, they performed a desperate teardrop manouever and had no time to re-deploy undercarriage and flaps, as well as lacking power (no time to power up the APU). They executed the manouever perfectly, which actually was their undoing.

[@KathrynsWorldWildfireTracking]

"I thought YOU put the gear back down!?"

[@zaratrusta79]

Is it plausible they mistakenly turn off no.2 after already one landing attempt? Just curious

[@jamesm568]

They had engine power as the type of approach that they did required engine power.

[@gazza2933]

The guy at the beginning said that it was their second approach. Time couldn't have been an issue.

[@1947dave]

@@zaratrusta79 That's happened before, for example at Kegworth UK in 1989. Shut down wrong engine. Crashed short of runway onto a motorway. But who knows? Far too soon to know. Misinformation in this Sun video though. Media nonsense.

[@reality6756]

Veered right? The wall with the localizer antennas was centered on the runway and the plane went right through the center, maybe slightly right of center, of the wall. Physical and visual proof it didn’t veer right much. This theory is a no go. This is why the FAA in the US has Runway Safety Areas with requirements to be graded level in order to prevent this exact scenario.

[@dianaosafo7449]

So sorry, my deepest condolences to the families who lost their loved ones. May their souls rest in peace.

[@tomjones4093]

Why... did they not pull the manual gear extension handles located behind the FO's seat? If HYD A fails or the gear fails to extend with the gear handle, there is a checklist to run for manual gear extension. I'm really curious to find in the reports if they emergency procedure was run by the crew.

[@jessh5310]

Exactly. my thoughts as well. Where were flaps? spoilers?

[@bombacimulayim1453]

Simply they forgot.

[@강민주-v8e]

한국언론에서는 랜딩기어작동시킬시간이 1분30초는 필요한데, 사고는 2분후에 났다고 합니다. 그니까 시간이 없었던거라고도 봅니다.

[@tomjones4093]

@@bombacimulayim1453 ... you are obviously not a trained commercial airline pilot with comments like that.

[@tomjones4093]

@@jessh5310 ... due to HYD failure from on the loss of #2 engine... and the fact that there are not interconnect valves between HYD systems to prevent total fluid loss, the flaps and spoilers would become asymmetrical and you can't fly that way.

[@boosterhuiz2779]

Landing gear was down on the first attempt

[@MA-yl1er]

My guess is they forgot the gear.

[@RobertRobert-d2r]

Expert? This man is no expert. Why would he have expected the plane to have burst into flames earlier while executing a belly landing? This simply never happens. No veering. It travelled in a straight line as one [but not our "expert"] would expect. Where do they get these idiots? Didn't hit the concrete wall but the berm the ILS antennas were mounted on, as pointed out by other viewers. Why was the gear not down and flaps, spoilers not deployed? Mechanical fault? Unlikely, due to the multiple redundancy in the hydraulics systems and electric and manual options to lower gear. Pilot decision or error? Almost certainly. Why? 8 minutes from last data on first approach, where the compression stall is observed to impact seems a very short time to run checklists and set up for a stabilized approach. Most pilots would gain altitude and take the time circle around to set up for similar approach from same direction unless there was some catastrophic reason to land immediately, like a fire on board. Was this the case or did they just panic? Time will tell.

[@christopherrobinson7541]

My guess, a first bird strike and one engine lost, resulting in a go around and the another bird strike and the loss of another engine.

[@jerryyu5122]

The airport concrete structure is a stupid design. It chould have saved many life, if the concrete wall is fragile by design.

[@riz4141]

This plane eventually will hit something with that speed, wall or not

[@TherealPeekaboo-007]

There shouldn't be any structures at the ends of runways.

[@zaratrusta79]

@@riz4141 nope. this plane will exponentially and eventually lose all speed and come to halt, like many other cases of safe belly landings with no fatalities. This plane is designed to do just that. It is probably even designed to hit frangible structures without fatal damage. What it is not designed is to hit a reinforced concrete wall right in front of the runway.

[@adamyusuf3361]

The wall at the end of the runway shouldn’t be there

[@johnmurphy618]

Perfect textbook landing? It looks like he didn’t put it down until he was at least halfway up the runway. With no brakes there’s no way he would stop in time.

[@tompoki]

The wheel were not out in the first place , what do you expect smartass??

[@TheSateef]

that close to the ground at that speed you get ground effect lift so the plane doesn't want to land

[@kiezzamore95]

Should just wait for the people that do the aircrash investigating instead of all the bullshiting

[@reubensandwich9249]

The real cause is what lead up to this attempted landing.

[@aranykert]

just try to find it out man! Why it is BS-ing???

[@sunside79334]

dear me, you could actually spot the passengers sent flying after impact with the concrete slab... RIP to those poor 179 souls.

[@zaratrusta79]

Not so sure about that, but then again I've seen so many bodies flying after an explosion in 2024 that it became the new normal.

[@kennethlee4894]

I didn't see anything like that.

[@Karma_andSage]

You're right

[@andyb2515]

This is a typical 'Swiss cheese' accident, a number of issues prior to landing that contributed to the disaster Engine/compressor stall - on first approach - why did they not continue to land? Rushed approach to land on the opposite runway - why change runways? Unstable approach, too fast, no gear, no flaps, a bird strike would not have caused all these to fail? Way too fast a landing and ground effect float (estimated 200 mph landing) ? What is South Koreas policy on runway Runway End Safety Area (RESA), Stopway clearway? Is it ICAO compliant, was the structure 'deleathalised'? The final 'hole in the cheese' was the ILS localiser structure Flight crew error? Was the Airport Certificated to ICAO SARPs? Tragic accident that could have been avoided at a number of points before the final impact

[@darekdzikens5772]

Around 13 years ago in Warsaw in Poland. Polish pilot land safely with no gear

[@neilfoster814]

Yes! That was a perfect wheels up landing, everyone survived!

[@cd3949]

Bet he didn't have a wall at the end of the runway.

[@moefuggerr2970]

All those chumps claiming to know what happened when they have not even gone there to investigate.

[@johnsmith8410]

Do you want to ask your expert as to why he thinks this is a perfect textbook landing when the touchdown markers and threshold markers appear just seconds after touchdown for the reciprocal runway the aircraft is landing on

[@mike73ng]

All these experts are idiots.

[@johnsmith8410]

@@mike73ng Do you agree with what I think I saw an he was far too far down the runway at time of touch down.

[@mike73ng]

@@johnsmith8410 yes. It looks like he was around 6000 down a 9000 runway.

[@johnsmith8410]

@@mike73ng Yeah I think that's bottom line, what ever led up to it didn't create the final result sadly, but always easier in an armchair, have a good one

[@rxsyete]

At that speed rudders would still be effective even on touchdown.

[@MA-yl1er]

The second " expert " is completely clueless.

[@metrikmechanik]

And he is a former pilot😮

[@MA-yl1er]

@metrikmechanik makes you glad he is a " former " pilot .

[@metrikmechanik]

Maybe for a reason😂

[@metrikmechanik]

Looks like they messed up the go around, cockpit task overload, bad crm, very sad

[@MA-yl1er]

@metrikmechanik I agree.

[@Rah84eem]

No wheels no flaps Pilot should have bought it in at stall speed

[@jeffreyw1640]

"There was a wall there." end of story

[@dianeunderhill8506]

Yes there was a wall there but why did the plane hit it. No flaps, no landing gear, high speed? Landing too far along the runway!

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

@@dianeunderhill8506 The same thing happened in Jamaica in 2007, everyone survived because there was no wall.

[@2richants]

​@@lawrencedavidson6195even if the wall wasn't there they landed too far down the runway and couldn't reduce the speed so would of got ugly at some stage but would not have been so final and had some sort of chance of survival.

[@dianeunderhill8506]

@@lawrencedavidson6195 Yes I agree the wall caused the fatalities but what happened to the plane to cause it to hit the wall. As I said the plane had no flaps, landed at too high a speed and too far along the runway. Of course it was crazy to have a concrete wall at the end of the runway but the plane should have been able to stop before hitting it We must await the results of the investigation.

[@AllAboutFlight]

Doesn't look like the flaps are extended either

[@fatalradius]

This isn’t even a training issue. This pilot stuck the landing perfectly with no landing gear. The concrete wall was the issue.

[@Kaz590]

So landing long and keeping the nose up had nothing to do with it

[@johnsmith8410]

Bullcrap. he landed with most of the runway behind him

[@blacksquid270]

Landed perfectly my ass, he had the nose up the entire time, it almost looks like they were accelerating.

[@DavidK-Delta]

Agree, the wall was the cause of the death of the passengers. This will go to court and I can tell you now the cause of death was the impact of the plane with the wall. The full unedited footage clearly shows that. !!!

[@zaratrusta79]

@@blacksquid270 that's my theory! Series of bad decisions due to bird strike/engine malfunction, and the "second attempt" was actually a failed TOGA. Still strange even if they were attempting to accelerate, it should have only taken a second to realize they had no gear. Only explanation is the crew went into panic mode.

[@markmartin9346]

It hit the concrete wall at 150 mph. He covered the 466 feet of the dirt off the end of the runway to the wall in 2 seconds.

[@TheSateef]

that's normal touchdown speed so didn't slow at all

[@markmartin9346]

Yep, and the nose was still in the air when he left the runway

[@georgesontag2192]

Who puts a wall up at the end of a runway ? The pilot can lower the gear manually if power is lost.

[@JamesCook-u9h]

They landed going the wrong way. The wall was at the beginning of the runway.

[@maxbootstrap7397]

#1: Whoever designed that airport (with an absolutely unnecessary reinforced concrete wall at the end of the runway) is *totally incompetent and HAD NO EXCUSE.* #2: They should have landed in the bay ... take the lesson from the "miracle on the Hudson" river landing --- where everyone survived. #3: If they didn't want to land in the bay ... they should have landed in the opposite direction ... because there's no reinforced concrete wall at the other end of the runway. #4: It is very strange that they could not lower flaps *AND* could not lower landing gear. Even if hydraulics were damaged, they had manual landing-gear control backups. #5: Unless they were very low on fuel they could have taken lots more time to consider all the dangers of every approach to the landing process. Did they? Don't think so. Note: Antenna and wires needed at the end of the runway for ILS/etc can be light-weight thin-wall plastic/aluminum tubes & metal framework. Massive walls not needed.

[@CL-yp1bs]

No, they had a lot of fuel on board that’s why I burst into flames very large flames

[@crinolynneendymion8755]

You have absolutely no idea nor clue as to the purpose of that wall. Your kind of assumptions are what get people killed. YOU ARE TOTALLY INCOMPETENT.

[@maxbootstrap7397]

@@CL-yp1bs : True. Which means they should have taken a lot more time to brainstorm and consider dangers and options before they tried to land. Unless they were having problems controlling the airplane, which they did not seem to have given they landed on the runway going exactly in the direction of the runway.

[@maxbootstrap7397]

@@crinolynneendymion8755 : I know what the purpose of the gizmos at the end of the runway are ... they are antennae and wires for the airport ILS system (ILS == instrument landing system). But these gizmos are usually inside relatively small light-weight plastic or metal tubes and structures. I have *NEVER* seen an reinforced concrete walls holding these ILS gizmos before ... or at least I never recall seeing them. And it is completely obvious to me that nobody in their right mind would put a reinforced concrete wall [inside a big, honking thick dirt mound] past the end of an airport runway. That's just flat out *STUPID* and I'll bet you anything that is what reports say soon. That barrier ... and the fact they didn't land the opposite direction or in the bay ... are the main reason that so many people died. Why the flaps and landing gear were not working is a different issue, one that is more difficult to figure so far.

[@KaziKozak]

My condolences...

[@s16sharath]

I don't understand, why the hell that airport is blocked by that damn wall. It's easy to blame it all on the de@d.

[@robbedontuesday]

Everything is suspicious... Even the video capturing the moment of the bird ingestion... how so? And then nothing makes sense anymore.

[@tomjones4318]

As if towers don't warn that there's no gear. Not much here but chatter. "Bird strike", "Bird strike", "Bird strike". Just go along with it. No, prove it. Until then it's only apparent. And to me there appeared to be no decrease in speed while skidding. Very strange all around.

[@washburnb1]

Being stupid in an emergency is no suspicious

[@empressmanchae]

i saw someone posted that this is distraction from the current political situation in SKorea, sad that lives were lost, almost like they are collateral damage if this is the case.

[@ninakhan3803]

Good to hear that he talked about the plane and all that might have gone wrong than blaming all on that poor wall which had been sitting quietly there for ages.

[@jrtstrategicapital560]

WITHIN A 24hr period..3 planes have crashed due to landing gear failure ..So Korean, KLM and Canada.!

[@JD.Knight]

This old bloke needs a new job. Aviation expert isnt for him.

[@lindaallen2989]

The pilot made an absolutely perfect belly landing -- it's clear the hydraulics were out and they had no time to manually lower the landing gear and the flaps weren't working either. So sad that if not for the concrete barrier many more would have survived this accident.

[@Patricia-k3w4q]

Exactly 🅱️

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

I suspect everyone would have survived if not for the wall.

[@Julie-hf4ch]

the gear is usually lowered 10 min before landing, if it was an emergency why landing so late in the opposite direction, so fast, no foam and no services to act asap, the gear being the least fatal issue of all?

[@isilder]

But he didnt have to put down ! he had water in front of him, the entire Sea of Japan was available to him to get the air speed down to a survivable figure. the pilot clearly put down when he did not have to. He had just turned quite alright, he had lined up, perfect. He had altitude pretty much right, or probably would have been but speed was just far too high and ground effect meant he landed long, and he held it straight , centered, and nose pitched up quite fine.. why didn't he just keep on flying over the Sea of Japan, the 1st pilot must have thought he had speed under control and landing gear down !!! 2nd pilot .. what is he doing ? nothing gets done. stuck trying to fix one thing and didn't move on to the other things ? they broke the first rule, fly the plane, do not just land, if you can fly , buy some time and prepare for landing calmly

[@Diandredofus]

It's not a "perfect" belly landing. Other angles show the plane floating down the runway and only touching halfway through. It was also going at LEAST 150 knots if not more. Typical YT experts talking outta their ass, as usual.

[@LowGearHiker]

Was that the longest runaway available? Shouldn't the plane had been redirected to the longest runway available. How could the landing gear and flaps be so heavily damaged by a bird strike? Seems like a common occurence that should be designed for.

[@adienowed6366]

Far too many completely ignorant armchair pilots on here,pontificating about matters they know nothing about.

[@MetPass]

What are you on about? Delta two bravo over and out.

[@adienowed6366]

@ Quite clear what I said-try reading again. If still in doubt,appreciate the experts are those of the accident investigation branches and not uninformed speculators sat in armchairs at home and who have zero expertise on anything to do with aviation matters.

[@neilfoster814]

And us REAL pilots DO know what we are talking about!

[@zaratrusta79]

@@adienowed6366 apparently one of those "speculators sat in armchairs" (@PilotBlogDenys , for instance) can get a lot more facts straight than all these "experts on the accident investigation branches". Just like the "experts" on the "lets put a kamikaze death trap concrete wall perfectly aligned with this runway and wait to see what happens" branches.

[@toothlessseer3153]

*MY THEORY ON THE ACCIDENT...* 1. As the pilot was coming in on final approach (just BEFORE deploying his landing gear and full flaps) his right engine (#2) got hit by a bird-strike 2. The pilot panicked and simply put the plane down, forgetting to deploy the landing gear and flaps 3. And not dumping fuel before the landing guaranteed a fireball when the plane crashed into the (badly designed) wall holding the antennae

[@seanjxmes]

Remember they came in to land on their second approach apparently though not sure if this happened on first or second approach.

[@54spatula]

Why would a pilot panic to the point of forgetting to put the gear down tho. Everyone knows planes can land with one engine

[@andymurdoch1346]

There are 2 highly trained Pilots on board. Forgetting to put the gear down is highly unlikely. The control tower should have alerted him that the gear was up. Also flaps were not deployed. Hydraulic failure from a single engine bird strike is also low possibility as 2 other systems are available. Finally, the gear can be deployed by releasing the up-locks and the weight drops the gear down

[@nicowrathz2243]

Yeah idk why i have the same feeling, pilot panicked. It makes almost no sense, even tho i believe human error is the highest % of cases in plane accidents, but that's my feeling atm.. or since they were panicking they thought landing gear was deployed but it wasn't also could explain why one engine is on reverse thrust and the one wasn't, wanted to just land the damn plane completely forgot all emergency procedures. Sad story.

[@jimmyucla]

Not likely low terrain gear warning would be alerted

[@sjm18pars]

I'm not a pilot. They were stable for landing on runway 01 then went around and attempted the failed landing on runway 19. Why not climb to a safe altitude after the go around and do some troubleshooting?

[@neilfoster814]

For a non pilot, that's a pretty fair assessment. As a pilot, that's what I would do (unless my plane was actually falling apart in the air)

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

@@neilfoster814 possibly smoke filled cockpit from bird ingestion?

[@rgr331]

The engine that suffered damage does not provide air to the cockpit, only the cabin. Could have produced smoke in the cabin, but not the cockpit. If thats the case (big if), the checklist will tell you to shut the air conditioning pack off.

[@Sean-xg3wv]

Blancolirio has the best explanation of this incident.

[@davemeyrick7115]

What i cant understand is why was the landing gear raised if it just had to go round one more time.

[@Gilesiscool69420]

It’s because the landing gear failed to extend due to them having no hydraulic power

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

That's standard procedure to raise the gear on a go around.

[@rgr331]

Hydraulic power is not needed to lower the landing gear.

[@Gilesiscool69420]

@@rgr331 You’re talking about gravity dropping the gear? Oh yeah mb

[@ChaJ67]

I think the one thing that can be honestly said is there is a whole lot wrong with this landing. Once we get the report out from this, I suspect there is going to be a lot of updates needed in order to not have so much go wrong again. Some things to consider: 1. Bird strike on one engine should not break the hydraulics on the plane. Single engine failure should mean a second engine running they can fly on, hydraulics, electric motor backup, etc. 2. Flight data coming off of plane apparently stopped before landing. They should have had at least one engine providing power to transmit this data. Did they shut off the wrong engine? 3. They should have had plenty of time to fly on one engine in the event of an engine failure to go through check lists, diagnose the problem, configure the plane for a landing with any redundant systems still available in case the primaries weren't working, etc. They didn't take the time to do this. It doesn't make any sense. I suppose this leads to the notion that they shut down the wrong engine if they rushed back to the airport and didn't even turn on their APU. As with other dual engine failures, you can still have basic flight controls with both engines out and the APU off. It depends on the plane how exactly this goes down. Often a RAT will deploy, but nothing like this was seen in the video. Maybe someone can chime in here. 4. They came in with flaps up and gear up. This is just extremely odd, especially considering the backup systems available, granted time to go through the checklists to deploy these. 5. They touched down at over 200 MPH and slammed into that wall for the localizer antennae that never should have been there at ~150 MPH. It was a long runway and they should have been able to pull this off. It just doesn't make any sense. If they had no engines, it is possible they came in high, got in the ground effect, and landed long, giving the plane very little time to slow down.

[@fdeguilla]

737 doesn’t have a RAT

[@fdeguilla]

Regardless, just as blancolirio channel said, he must have had hydraulics to be able to fly and do a go around and line up perfectly with the runway

[@jessh5310]

Why were the wheels not deployed manually? where were the flaps? where were the spoilers? Engine reverse? Were the original crew still in charge? It seems a bit fishy if they were.

[@isag.7468]

The so-called bird strike looks like a shiny object to me, like a plane part falling

[@Doc1868cram]

Why did it land gear up?

[@FrankWay-cx2pb]

What happened? An airplane went into a 12" thick concrete wall at 70 mph. Who put that wall there?

[@Cedric_Harris]

It was going twice that speed. You're not supposed to be doing that at the end of the runway under the worst circumstances.

[@TheSateef]

its for the ILS antennas, but they should be built in a way that they break off without destroying the plane

[@thomasmorin749]

Landing gears can be lowered manually in an emergency.

[@jimmyucla]

Yes with gravity but not easy

[@DerekWilliamsMusic]

The built a solid, reinforced steel concrete wall IN THE PATH OF A PLANE on a RUNWAY. I rest my case.

[@rawux1228]

Stupid question: why there is no cameras in cockpit so we all could see what pilots did and experienced?

[@Nixuz2]

There's a black box.

[@trilight3597]

1. Unnecessary and likely wouldn't be released to the public. 2. "Blackbox" 1 would be the FDR records all the data of the flight and what they do. 3. "Blackbox" 2 would be the CVR records all the voices of the flight and what they say as well as the alarms.

[@thewaterstone9079]

There is a flight log stored on the plane that is designed to survive a collision like this but it is currently buried under several tonnes of fire, fuselage and bodies so it will take some time to recover it.

[@tommysonnier9848]

Great pilot but sad ending. I'm sure if he could he would have deployed flaps.

[@taproom113]

The crew of the Embraer flight that just crashed in Kazakhstan also reported they suspected a 'bird strike' situation. They also had multiple systems negatively effected ... 🤔

[@johnc2438]

But they had the landing gear deployed. On the long flight across the Caspian Sea, they lost all hydraulic fluid and thus had no control of the aircraft.

[@nakedbeekeeper9610]

I suspect drone shenanigans. We will eventually regret inventing them. Just look at how they're used in the Ukraine conflict. Disgusting.

[@johanstruwig3815]

Lets not bother waiting for the NTSB and Boeing's investigation, that may take them up to 2 years to complete. So many "experts" below with so many opinions based only on short video material, already decided what the issues were that caused the pilots to declare an emergency, and why the plane landed without the landing gear being deployed, etc..... I have forwarded all your comments below to the NTSB and Boeing; the accident report will be ready tomorrow when the investigators finished copying and pasting your comments into the report template. Case closed. thank you for your contribution.

[@edwardtran1974]

The wall is there for maximum damage

[@zaratrusta79]

The wall is there as a redundant system to ensure maximum kill rate in case the pilot forgets to extend landing gear

[@kskeel1124]

Cement wall at the end of the runway is what killed all those people...

[@maccodj]

This guy has no idea what he is talking about

[@msimms-lp5qw]

Whats he got wrong?

[@amgpower213]

Experts my arse

[@MidlandsAviation]

"A perfect textbook landing" 🙄 What is this guy waffling on about

[@tonygarforth539]

there should not have been a big brick wall mr experts

[@MA-yl1er]

My guess is pilots forgot the gear.

[@paullane9240]

Lots of incorrect statements…. 737 main gear has no “ gear bay doors” (except nose gear), hydraulic pressure and electrical wiring not required to extend gear - fully manual reversion provided…… video looks like “2 engine thrust reverser deployed but #1 not. With no gear and no effective lateral control once the rudder becomes ineffective (below 80 knots) the aircraft will veer off towards the engine in reverse.

[@ramkold]

Don’t forget no flaps on either AND coming in too hot.

[@martinluke9470]

No engine power?

[@joasmat1990]

13 years ago at Warsaw's Okęcie airport, Captain Tadeusz Wrona landed a Boeing without landing gear, saving the lives of passengers and crew. On 1st November 2011, at exactly 1:39 p.m. at Okęcie airport, a Boeing 767 flying from Newark made an emergency landing without landing gear. There were 221 passengers and 10 crew members on board. No one was hurt.

[@leechilds3725]

No wall no damage

[@darko11221]

Ci piloci to się akurat nie popisali, przeoczyli bezpiecznik od awaryjnego otwierania podwozia mimo, że obsługa z ziemi zalecała im aby go sprawdzić okazało się, że drugi pilot omyłkowo sam go wyłączył zahaczając swoją torbą. Wystarczyło, aby zrobił to co obsługa z ziemi zalecała , a więc sprawdzić dokładnie panel z bezpiecznikami i wcisnąć wybity bezpiecznik. Cud, że nikogo nie zabili przez swoją bezmyślność.

[@rickfeng4466]

@@darko11221you talking about the LOT flight? Yeah it’s a huge Oops but fortunately there were no injuries.

[@eddissonofficial4402]

Cool story bro. Poland is irrelevant.

[@tonyharvey2307]

"His flaps would be out because they are dragging along the ground as well" what a load of dribble from a so-called aviation expert!.

[@romanroad483]

I guess all the real experts are in high demand just now.

[@rgr331]

Flaps ARE NOT deployed. Thats why they are flying so fast.

[@JimBoIndy]

The pilot smoothly put her down.... Just not enough room... Prayers for Family 😢

[@kotexconnection3804]

prayers help those feel better about themselves for doing nothing, well that and attention

[@annsheridan12]

@@JimBoIndy hit the obstacle at 100+ mph

[@AW-yv9sq]

Looked like they flew down half the runway

[@reginaldgraves1684]

When the camera picked it up I assume that the plane had used most of the runway yet it was still flying and there was never enough runway left to settle and come to a stop. The Black Boxes will reveal all, it will be very interesting to see what sequence of events caused this screw up.

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

"Experts baffled", ye need better 'experts'. there was only about 7 minutes from the bird strike to the second landing attempt, not enough time for the check lists, and that concrete wall should not have been on the runway overrun.

[@NerdKingCool]

Should blame the airport for the crash not the airlines

[@annsheridan12]

Abysmal design with a berm and reinforced concrete localizer antenna base which totally destroyed the aircraft instead of easily breakaway antenna structure.

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

The same thing happened in Jamaica in 2007, everyone survived because there was no wall.

[@annsheridan12]

@ also in St Thomas

[@azfinctrsaazvaat4568]

Apparently, you've asked the wrong "experts". It's quite obvious that the pilots failed to execute a safe approach to landing, then made matters worse by trying to execute a go-around. The video shows an attempt to rotate the aircraft to takeoff, and it continued at speed down the runway. Hire new experts.

[@hb1338]

Hire a new you at the same time. If you think you can diagnose an aircraft accident by watching a video clip and reading a number of confused and confusing reports, then you are labouring under a huge misapprehension.

[@axelweinrich1166]

Are they that hard up in South Korea that they don’t have enough room to make a runway a little bit longer?

[@drgta6]

Are they so incompetent to put a concrete barrier at the end of that runway? What a moronic design.

[@sleeplessnight8796]

How possible that there is a solid structure there.. hmm

[@GaleF-s9c]

The pilots knew they could not slow down the plane but did they know about the huge concrete wall ?

[@BubbaGeeSD]

Thrust reverser looks only deployed on right engine with bird strike?

[@Jeffrey_Bezos_Amazon]

Which idiot built a concrete wall at the end of the runway!? Even I, a person who has nothing to do with aviation, understand that such a wall in this place is simply inappropriate.

[@donw7796]

It appears that the wall is not directly at the end of the runway, but off on the side. The plane veered off to that side into the wall. But I agree, it should not be there. Perhaps to try to protect houses, equipment, etc. on that side of the runway?

[@elisaagustin3587]

Prayers and condolence 🙏 to the whole family.... so sorry for the lost.... Rest in Peace ❤️ 💕 🙏 to all the victims plane tragedy 🙏

[@kotexconnection3804]

prayers help those feel better about themselves for doing nothing, well that and attention

[@jujutrini8412]

Why is there a wall on a runway!

[@AndrewDaley-lr9qg]

It has guidence system to bring planes down safely in bad weather

[@andrewganley9016]

And kudos to the airport for that concrete wall at the end of the runway!

[@trilight3597]

Localizer Array was on a wall;which usually is on the ground, there may be a reason why it was like that.

[@thefpvlife7785]

@@trilight3597there’s no logical reason. Omgoodness think about it.

[@trilight3597]

@@thefpvlife7785 I have thought about it. What isn't logical is that it's solid concrete and bricks. Several other airports have a similar setup close to the ocean or sea. But they have them arranged in bricks so that it can be broken through. You need to rethink your own thoughts, please.

[@machikr]

It has two modes of pulling down landing gear: automatic and mechanical. If landing gear indicator lit them false confirm, why even bother with mechanical? If they realize it was false confirm only at the last moment it already landed, by its whole weight pushing it down, was there anything they could do?

[@stuartthurstan]

What the f is "artificially slowing down an aircraft"? It either slows down, or it doesn't. I've never heard so much garbage spewed by supposed "aviation experts".

[@FunSketchMovies]

Makes sense. Artificial has many different meanings. One of them: “not occuring naturally”. Or: “caused or produced by human actions”. Naturally occuring is just the slowing down solely by the friction with the air and the ground.

[@ssryr6427]

Forget to open landing gear

[@Ron4885]

😳

[@DaniMaulana-g3y]

How can a pilot forget?