Pilot Blog | Update 2 on Crash of Jeju B737 at Muan | Human Factor

[@korakys]

Just a man with a microphone, but giving a far better explanation than professional media. Thank you Denys.

[@dawid1803]

And he explained what? Nothing.

[@Eiermaler-b8q]

There is nothing to explain, because there is nothing clarified yet by the officials! So good job Denys, I really like your approach and your attitude!

[@dawid1803]

@@Eiermaler-b8q What? Nothing to explain? What?

[@syadh1]

@@dawid1803 you blind? or deaf?

[@getyoursupervisor8519]

Well, he is an expert, a B737 - 800 pilot. When will people understand that "professional media" is mainly just loudmouths, talking about things they usually know nothing about to fill air time with garbage ?

[@av8ferg237]

As an airline pilot that operates Boeing aircraft, I think this is a great assessment, nice job. We can never judge the decision and actions of the crew until we have all the data.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

Yes, and, Yes.

[@mahbriggs]

Agreed! We need to let the crash investigators do their job. I would imagine the flight data and cockpit recorders will answer a lot of the questions.

[@7x779]

Has an airline pilot, I have a question. Do you think if he had landed in the dirt instead of the asphalt that that would have slowed the aircraft down much more rapidly, as well as obviously avoided the concrete barrier at the end of the runway? In fact I had the idea it may have slowed down and stopped even before reaching the barrier if it had landed in the dirt and wouldn't that also have less risk of creating Sparks to trigger a fire by sliding down a paved runway?😮

[@stevedavenport1202]

True

[@aczeidan]

Is it possible that they shut down the wrong engine? Because you can see the bird strike hitting engine no.2 and then engine no.1 was shut down? Then they would have glided with like half an engine?

[@TheHighalldatime]

As horrific as this tragedy is, this will be a valuable lesson for aviation on the whole and flight crews will be properly equipped with knowledge and practice to deal calmly with similar circumstances if these kinds of emergencies arise. May all the victims souls rest in heaven and the families to have the strength to go through this difficult time.

[@민성우-d1w]

Dennis, your analysis is being quoted by almost all major medias in south korea. Im so proud of you!!

[@bluecheshirecat]

한국 언론이 어제부터 이 분의 사고분석을 인용하고 있어요

[@colinobrien3806]

what analysis ?... a 12 year old can read what birdstrike and go around means .. most people know you need wheels and flaps to land ... dont need to be a pilot for common knowledge

[@macbook802]

Dennis and the media keep blaming the use of the cement structure. For one, it has to be built to a standard, so if that one is built like that, then all of them in the region are. And two, the structure stopped the plane from breaching the airport. Just beyond the airport was a major road, a beach resort, a shopping plaza and a public beach. All of these places are usually crowded and they were all in the logical path of the plane. Its safe to say if the concrete structure didn't stop the plane, hundreds of people on the ground could have also been killed. Everyone keeps blaming the structure like parrots who have done research

[@macbook802]

He explained what was on the opposite end, which is irrelevant at this point, if the pilots are not familiar with the region they aren't going to be able to pick the safest crash landing point at 200mph. And just because there is construction there on the map now doesn't mean it hasn't been completed yet or atleast the concrete poured on the construction sites is my gues

[@ortnerendre4197]

Airplanes can easily overrun the runway. The Azerbaijani plane slowed down very quickly, I think it would have been the same here. I think that buck was a bad construction.​@@macbook802

[@kleinesbiest1264]

it’s more convincing to hear from a professional instead of a newsreader.❤

[@marcp.1752]

Mainstream news always do suck a lot, i want to hear opinions from (into this case) real pilots, real aviators.

[@theGENIUSofART-understood]

youtube pilot beats traditional news for sure

[@tom_123]

BBC and Sky News UK are interviewing pilots, crash investigators, experts etc. Also, don’t forget that this guy is doing a lot of speculating, based on limited information. Legit news agencies naturally don’t want to just put out a lot of speculation. As the guy even says, “I’m just a random guy so don’t take this too seriously…”.

[@walterraleigh-vv4su]

Newsreaders are essentially actors reading scripts.

[@justicewillprevail1106]

I think maybe after the plane ingested the birds, the passengers may have panicked and caused a bit of chaos. Then the pilots panicked and a string of wrong decisions were made. It’s tragedy that could’ve been an accident instead.

[@ChrisR1250GS]

Please don’t stop reporting on this Denys. Do another update as more info comes out. You’re doing a great job!

[@Jazbaati-Fan]

Big hand of applause for Denis for his consistent commitment to bring the upto date information for helping common folks understand the intricacies of aviation.

[@Sean884tv]

* stands up real fast and starts cheering with fist in the air 💪🏼* wahooooo yeaaaa

[@thomaschoi625]

I am Korean. Thank you for your analysis. In Korea, there are media outlets that interpret things differently politically. Your analysis has made me realize this accurately.

[@AB-yx7ip]

You can make all the explanations you want. Facts Plane landed on its belly Plane speeding through runway Plane was not on fire Plane going straight Plane off runaway Plane hits solid concrete wall Plane explodes into fireball Facts ! No concrete wall, If there was a Gravel trap there may have been a different ending Period !

[@こあここあ-i5e]

ロウソクの準備は良いですか？

[@WackoWambo]

What is the media in South Korea saying?

[@bmw_m4255]

Korea is hilarious

[@어디가닷글열어]

간첩들이 점령해버린 언론사들. 계엄령은 적절했다.

[@marjus89]

Respectfully, please continue making video updates into this crash as we the public greatly appreciate your thoughts into this matter. Thank you and happy new year!

[@Happygrumpysmile]

@marjus89 He is really insightful and knowledgeable. These updates are done so very well.

[@mikeyboy3054]

You sir and Juan make the legacy media look like kindergarten children. Thank you for your professionalism.

[@IN10THRC]

Legacy media is ridiculous. I keep seeing "BOEING crash!" type headlines, and lines in articles designed to make it look as if this was another Boeing fault- completely ignoring that it was a 14 year old aircraft, and could just as easily have been an Airbus, Embraer, etc. They're like vultures.

[@Optimiser113]

The legacy media is always fake/misinformation news.

[@merlingt1]

Pretty sure you could replace all of legacy media with AI and it would be a huge improvement over the crap they put out constantly.

[@rustyshackle917]

​@@Plutogalaxy think of Ron Burgundy anytime you watch the news and ask yourself if you're being informed. 😂

[@beenaplumber8379]

Different reports for different audiences. The news reporters are not trained in aviation, and they are speaking to general audiences. Denys and Juan are highly trained professionals speaking to a very specific audience of aviation professionals and people who are very knowledgeable about aviation. So, yeah.

[@IRY-a-modo-mio]

I'm from Italy, I haven't found anywhere such precise technical explanations and hypotheses as yours. Often the media report incomplete and hasty news. Please don't stop updating us, it's important for me and for many others to have an objective critical conscience and knowledge about this tragedy. Thank you for your precious work, inside and outside KZbin 🙏❤

[@BlueSpruce2]

What I have seen is the media people don't know the right questions to ask their so-called "experts" who are for the most part not current or recent pilots of this aircraft model.

[@IRY-a-modo-mio]

@@BlueSpruce2 Clearly they don't want the real experts to speak, people have to settle for a few vague pieces of information.

[@Chellz801]

@@IRY-a-modo-mio I think we also have an issue as a society being unwilling to find the information for ourselves. We have been spoon-feed sensationalized news for a long time so people get upset when they don’t have the facts but I wouldn’t expect them too at this point. We have given them the impression we don’t want facts but entertainment. In the future we have to shape the news we want by removing our support and showing them it doesn’t work that way and going forward always research and question what is being told to us. Even by creators on KZbin. Anyone can have an agenda. Most people aren’t like that but it has happened. That’s why the full details (like in airplane accidents) should be read from a final report rather than from a dramatic show using the deaths of the passengers for clicks. There’s lot of pilots of KZbin thankfully I only wish most people would watch their videos for their actual perspective instead of the news but we aren’t there as a species yet. Maybe in my grandchildren’s children’s time.

[@Robutube1]

Well said. This guy makes things as clear as possible for non-pilots.

[@IRY-a-modo-mio]

@@Robutube1 I'm completely ignorant on the subject, thanks to him I was able to understand the whole dynamics of the crash.

[@alandiehl202]

Great analysis! As a former NTSB human performance investigator, I compliment you on your detailed analysis, and your caveat suggests that we must wait for the official report before drawing any final conclusions. Alan E. Diehl, PhD, ATP, CPE

[@meynardocustodio2477]

Transcript of the communication between control tower and pilot shall be preserved for analysis. See Skynews Australia You Tube Video of Plane Landing and Australian Aviation Expert Analysys. The main reason is the hard impact on the Obstaacle at the runway end should not be there in the first place.

[@Asdayasman]

Bro this is the internet, don't sign your comments.

[@aum0aumgood]

@@alandiehl202 conclusory ends vs immediate knowing facts and to whom all individule events matter? 4 aviation incidents in one week as December 2024 enters 2025 While on earth serious events are repetitious likely need to expand other physical anomalies agendas. ... bc fact is John John's plane had an explosion as eyewitnesses from pre plunge into ocean waters and location was immediately discernable... as a DC 3 flight takeoff shelter cove air speed unable to lift due to un-removed "wing clamps" which may have been intentionally placed ... only one survived but later reports others... who are the others who claim survived? could be how someone stole anothers identity?... (ps my Stepfather survived the crash and 2 hours ocean waters not a scratch on his body but hypotheric on shore at a time when no thought of how to revive was applied as a coroner murdered in autopsy...) there were two aircraft the earlier was supposed to have him ... he gave his briefcase to another and switched planes. As several others are known to have also... some lived who would have died...as others died who would have lived... real reasons to be aware of what is occurring should include the bigger picture along with the minutiae details... honest integruous sound minded impeccable human beings were and are always what serves humankind especially in expertise arenas of technological endeavors... accidents don't just happen Though this present time seems to assure a program for constant insurance gains while human collateral damage is multi intent desensitization & fear factor... Great remote parking in twin towers had nothing to do with collapsing the buildings... too much stuffinspace off planet And on earth of unnatural disregard disrespecting Mother Earth and Creators creation that blatantly egos a kaliyuga hell on earth...

[@Richard_Cranium]

Bro just Doxxed himself 😂

[@Sweetlyfe]

@@meynardocustodio2477Don’t watch sky news in Australia it’s a Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch lie machine.

[@TheJLEE97]

Thanks to you, this is now becoming public knowledge in Korea

[@Choc_Chilla]

thats great but did Loreans not know from Korean source?

[@HibikiKano]

I don't think you realise just how rigid some Asian nations are with news. Till it's properly processed nothing cokes through even if people are anxious.

[@im2b1234]

Obvious !!!

[@miracookie444]

@@Choc_Chilla Seems like they have a politically and emotionally charged media atm. They don't want to pin the blame on the wall bcs it was a Gov decision or so. (They really wanted an airport on that bird island and then looked for a cheap way out to protect the ILS from typhoons - reinforced concrete wall it was.)

[@nicezic]

In Korea, politics secretly crashed a ship to avoid their political crisis. I think they sabotage the plane such as planting a bomb.

[@salem484848]

A guy behind a microphone who has more experience and knowledge than most of the news reporters that have been speculating about the cause. At least you know from flying these craft.

[@anticooperativ8398]

he as a former type rated pilot knows the aircraft better than anyone could ever that is neither a type rated pilot themselves or someone who is involved in designing and buildin the aircraft. that is why i trust rated pilots so much when it comes to stuff like that because they can find at least some logically sounding reasons for why accidents like that can happen

[@jjhaya]

Those news interviews I see on KZbin are really just for padding time. If the videos are only about 8 minutes or so, you know they're there just to display ads. I noticed the same thing when the Titan submarine was being covered. Some even had a time counter based on the oxygen assumed to be left. They didn't entertain the idea that the submarine might have already exploded because they wanted people to continue watching their coverage. They get experts to make people watch longer. It's the same with the coverage of this plane crash. Most experts interviewed don't really offer much value; sometimes they're out of touch and not up to date.

MSM reports are NOT knowledgeable in anything. They're literally just talking heads

[@BraddysReagent]

I don’t blame media for that, they aint expert in these but appreciate we have someone explaining all that here

[@andypotter3]

*in front of the microphone

[@sb5969]

You are very humble and offer a calm, reasonable, intelligent explanation.

[@t5ruxlee210]

Bravo Denys ! !

[@Drmac64631]

Thank you Denys! I am watching from Daytona Beach, FL ... I am 85 years old and I appreciate your awesome knowledge and reporting! You are the best

[@Ongily0]

When a KZbinr like Denys has more credibility in explaining and breaking down the incident than any media outlet in Korea, kudos to u

[@guyincognito.]

He's just giving you information you can find on the internet.

[@teppo9585]

It´s just normal people who are interested on a subject matter would know more about it than some news reader. You should never expect the news you see to have been written or narrated by someone who actually knows what they´re talking about.

[@simonbrown7455]

Bit of an unfair way to phrase this. In pretty sure south Korean news outlets broadcasts experts speaking about this. Den even used Korean sources to help his investigation.

[@nicezic]

In Korea, politics secretly crashed a ship to avoid their political crisis. I think they sabotage the plane such as planting a bomb.

[@Allard-lj8to]

Thank you for your measured, sober, and respectful insight into this awful circumstance.

[@blackhorseteck8381]

Extremely unsettling seeing the shadows of the pilots through the cockpit from the video. Air accidents are a chain of events that if broken down individually are not that dangerous, but put together they can take precious lives. Thanks for the information mate.

[@Chekmate99]

sometimes critical decisions to those events must be made in minutes if not seconds

[@blackhorseteck8381]

@@Plutogalaxy Because they're dead?

[@blackhorseteck8381]

@@Chekmate99 Absolutely, it's a tremendous amount of pressure plus the instruments flashing and banging all over the place making it even worse. Hope whatever led to this accident would be clarified and bring regulations and protocols to prevent it repeating.

[@Tazjet100]

I have one reply to your sympathy: Checklist procedure. Dumb and dumber reached the impact scene first, because they were not thinking about what they were doing. They had a survivable birdstrike problem and turned it into a non survivable tragedy.

[@franciscodongsukkim2792]

@@Tazjet100stop talking like you know everything. he was one of the most experienced pilots from Airforce, who was instructor for other pilots. Yes anyone can make mistake, but i dont think he was unexperienced like you are telling he didnt know basic checklist

[@EA-kb9pr]

Excellent reporting. You and Bllancolirio are outstanding pilots reporting in KZbin about this tragedy. Thank you

[@leokimvideo]

Everything about this crash has the hallmarks of a extremely rushed & panicked approach. Any form of checklist must have been thrown out the window. If you were going to make a list of all the wrongs going on here it's going to be a very long list. I agree they just forgot to lower the gear, and in the landing you see the anticipated flare. On impact with the runway the panic in the cockpit would have been off the scale. Maybe that explains the engine sound at full thrust

[@jimdemetriou8730]

One of the most sensible analysis of this I’ve read and it will prove to be very close to accurate when the final report is in

[@lowvaeater]

If they had dual engine failure and dual hydraulic failure, trying to lower gear requires a pilot getting out of the seat, open floor panel and pull 3 cables one by one, hence one can't judge they "forgot" the gear without further evidence.

[@leokimvideo]

@@lowvaeater So that's why the engines were screaming as the jet skidded down the runway, didn't sound like a glider approach to me

[@lowvaeater]

@@leokimvideo Number 2 engine even though were surging but were still producing power judging from reverse sleeve opened. Number 1 engine from video at 7:15 presumably failed.

[@antoncarmoducchi6057]

Go Dennis. Hardest working man on KZbin.

[@Digitalgems9000]

♥♥♥♥

[@fabicdes]

What if in addition there was smoke in the cabin?

[@MrStian78]

@@fabicdesmaybe, but that’s not dangerous. A belly landing with high speed and only 1600 meters of runway left, that’s dangerous.

[@lowkeyconvert8971]

i cannot figure out his accent. sounds polish but he is based in switzerland.

[@Jenncysworld]

I live in Korea and been deeply emotionally affected by this horrific tragedy, I can't stop tearing up. The country is in shock. The video footage of the plane hitting the wall is haunting me in my sleep. So many lives lost within seconds and no chance of survival because of that wall. Heartbreaking, soul crushing. I've been following your reporting of this case religiously. Thanks so much for your professional input and reporting on this.

[@KBowWow75]

I was 10 when I witnessed the second plane hit the tower on live TV on 9/11. Every year I still go back to that time. Of course that was intentional and this was a mistake. What brings comfort is that God is with us even after this life is over and we can all unite again. The passengers also probably didn't know what was about to happen, or told to even attempt to brace for impact. I don't think the pilots would have informed the cabin of what was happening. They may have suspected something was up on the go-around, but the final landing approach was smooth so the passengers really had seconds and it was over. They wouldn't have felt pain either. Even the survivors were unconscious and felt no pain or had a recollection of the moment of impact.

[@bmw_m4255]

Calm down

[@chab1rd155]

@@Jenncysworld prayers to the families of the victims and the whole of South Korea! 🙏💔

[@lvg777]

I expect there will be lawsuits forthcoming against the designers of that wall.

[@juaneer]

The wall isn't to blame, the crew reacted incorrectly resulting in a tragedy.

[@victo44344]

I have found both yours and Juan Brown’s analysis thus far to be very insightful. I like how both of you give the facts and your evaluation as a pilot. Keep up the good work. I would hope to watch more uplifting videos in the future versus this horrible accident.

[@gdiwolverinemale4th]

For the first time, I listen to this channel with a genuine interest. No politics. Upvote

[@Priestitude]

Diam la

[@tubistify]

Having been a captain on the 737, A320 and A330 my immediate reaction from your video was: why go around from a stabilised approach? You have a damaged engine and need high power to climb away, and you're taking a damaged aircraft up into the air again. On the face of it it doesn't make sense. It could be because of the frame of mind developed from simulator exercises done every 6 months. In the Kegworth accident the captain disconnected the autopilot because that is the configuration always used in the simulator exercises. In that accident the wrong engine was shutdown as it was misidentified when the vibration indicator was misidentified as the wrong engine. Airbus thinking is to keep the autopilot connected to allow both pilots to troubleshoot. And the latest aircraft automatically trim out the rudder required for single engine to allow the pilots to concentrate on troubleshooting. Better for the safe result for crew and passengers.

[@thefreedomguyuk]

Could be company procedure to go around ?

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

I'm not sure why they wouldn't have just continued with the first approach. Any ideas? Having decided to go around they then changed their mind and went for a 180. It seems like the port engine might have also injested a bird (some footage seems to indicate this). If this was the case and that engine then also developed problems would that explain the change in plan? Alternatively, if they did shut down the wrong engine, would also that explain it? It seems they had a plan that made some kind of sense then they changed it radically.

[@XRushaX]

I wouldn't want to land without flaps and landing gear, if that was also a problem beforehand. Maybe they wanted to solve at least some of the things but run out of time quickly.

[@fuzekle]

@@XRushaX They had deployed flaps and landing gear on the initial approach. Then they retracted it when they decided to go for the go around.

[@alexc5449]

I have hunch recurrent training has got to be a factor. I don't know how they do it in South Korea, but the entire landing configuration is so problematic.

[@TYoung21]

Wow out of all the videos I have watched on this, you by far explained this the best out of anyone! Nice job.

[@jasyamaha]

Good honest reporting. You have become the most trustworthy person I have turned to over the past few years. Thank you

[@jonathanhutchison6180]

My deepest condolences to the families. May god rest their souls. Thankyou sir for you comprehensive breakdown. It is first class. I hope that our aviation comrades take all of the aforementioned recommendations ❤

[@mikestone9129]

Thank you for not rushing to come to a conclusion. So many KZbinrs are doing just that. It is a tragedy and everyone wants to know what exactly happened. The CVR will tell us a lot as well as the other "black box".

[@Powlie]

Thank you for making these videos, Denys. You provide much more helpful information than news sources, and I think it is amazing that you make updates because of the incident being recent and new information can be found.

[@desmond-hawkins]

*3 minutes?!* This crash already didn't make sense yesterday when we thought it took only 7 minutes, but 3 minutes is unbelievable. This does point towards an overwhelming sense of emergency in the cockpit to put the plane down as soon as possible. With one engine seen and heard apparently working and the other seen ingesting at least one bird, this unfortunately points more towards the wrong engine being shut down. Landing with the gear up also support the argument that the crew was doing the maximum possible to extend a glide, _again_ incompatible with #2 still running - although with unknown performance. Very interesting analysis, despite the current lack of information putting major limits on what we can possibly know at this time.

[@Jeff-i8u]

Yes this is what makes sense!

[@Wannes_]

Add power to the other engine, and land straight ahead ... They were under 2 minutes from the runway @ the mayday call They flew past runway threshold, past most if not all of the airfield, did a 180, and landed fast on whatever available power they had , in 3 minutes This indicates they could have landed the plane on the initial approach

[@roxanbabin6680]

Yes there had to have been an extreme urgency to land. I guess all we can do is wait to see what the cockpit recordings say.

[@bobhan1]

Just because you hear an engine doesn't mean you have thrust, both engines had bird strikes. They had no power and had to land ASAP.

[@Tomxman]

Well its moving at 3-4,miles per min (180 kts)

[@robertjay1423]

This man answered (theoretically or not) all the questions I still had. Thank you Sir!

[@angelortunorubio6899]

There is a lot of rigor and consistency in this channel, congratulations on the work and thank you for sharing it.

[@nzsaltflatsracer8054]

Our man Denys with his knowledge & experience makes more sense than every other report on this crash.👍

[@themerkin1953]

In January 1989 a new British Midland Boeing 737-400 crashed at Kegworth in the UK (Flight 092). Denis mentions that the left engine on the Jeju aircraft may have been shut down in error, this certainly has precedent as this is what caused the British Midland flight to crash short of East Midlands airport onto a motorway. The cause of the emergency was an engine fire after a portion of a fan blade detached from the LH engine. The aircraft was climbing through FL28 at the time so the crew had much more time than the Jeju aircraft yet did not spot their error in reading what the aircraft was telling them. I think this demonstrates the amount of pressure a crew can find themselves in should an error/confusion arise during an emergency. As Denis says, this is really only speculation at this time and we must wait for the final accident report to come out for hopefully a full explanation.

[@jamesneilsongrahamloveinth1301]

The cabin crew on the flight seem to have been reticent about informing the pilots of what they were seeing out of the window. If I remember correctly, the Kegworth air accident report recommended that all passenger aircraft should be fitted with cameras so that the pilots can have sight of the engines. This does not seem to have happened . . .

[@Tijgert]

Iirc it was because they decided the failed engine on what side the smoke came out of the vents which was reversed between the -400 and -800. Had they checked the instruments they would’ve known.

[@sharla82]

A rushed response led to the BMI crash after not following the emergency checklist. Maybe practises in the simulator for engine failures, are not realistic enough without the noise & massive vibration that can cause pilots to jump to the wrong conclusion & assume which engine is out.

[@beepbeep5153]

Same with a taiwan crash in 2015

[@reeva5735]

Onboard that BA plane, a passenger pointed out to a hostess that the engine fire was visible from a window seat.. she went to the cockpit to alert cabin crew and they still shut the wrong engine down. The findings highlighted the dismissal of the vital information received via passenger and how it was ignored. And ultimately, how it ended.

[@김윤혁-l9q]

A lot of korean media at the moment discusses that the captain of this aircraft was a veteran with 6500+ hours of experience, trying to exclude any human error being involved. But as we have all learned from previous incidents, even a highly experienced veteran can still make wrong judgements. I can only hope the flight crew did their best, but we shouldnt exclude it from the possibility.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

It won't be excluded. It shouldn't be assumed either. I've not seen the reports you've mentioned but I don't think reporting the crew's experience is the same as excluding them. As it's information that is easilly obtainable I'd find it weird if they didn't mention it. Just as they'll mention their ages, marriage status etc. It's reporting. Not part of the investigation.

[@Eatlikebird-s5c]

A veteran with 6500 flight hours ? Are they kidding?

[@ddupddup]

@@Eatlikebird-s5c most Korean airline pilots have a military background as airforce pilots (airlines love hiring them, in fact) as was the case for this pilot as well. So, yes, he was a veteran.

[@nguyenmanhthang1892]

Last i check, an ATPL license, which is needed for commercial turbojet operation, requires 1500 flight hours. There is information floating on the net stating the FO had around 1650hours. That means the FO had like 150hours on 737 type, maybe even doing his/her line training.

[@nicezic]

In Korea, politics secretly crashed a ship to avoid their political crisis. I think they sabotage plane such as planting a bomb.

[@NatalieMcDonnell-h9f]

Excellent videos Denis, all you're work is a great view of how a pilot sees things, not just accidents but technical stuff too, thank you.

[@benn746]

Bro I would let you fly me ANYWHERE. THANK you for all this, crazy edits too! Good job putting all the info together in a clear concise way. Exactly what you want in a pilot, clear and concise, we run down the procedure and we land the plane!

[@marie-pascaleleonetti1555]

I am from France. You work very hard. Merci beaucoup !

[@SERGIONICOLASMARTINEZSIEKAVIZZ]

This is my new favorite you tube Channel. Professionalism ethics in aviation accident annalisis at its best

[@daviddeavours4909]

Thank you for giving such a detailed account, based on what little we have at the moment. And you're certainly far more than "just a random guy with a microphone!"

[@LouEssick]

Excellent analysis, Dennis. Thank you. Pilot Instructor-major airline

[@rodrigodepierola]

Finally a good explanation how a striken plane going for 01 ends up overshooting 19. Thanks.

[@jimdemetriou8730]

Think your gonna find the crew were more stricken (with panic) , than the plane itself

[@jjj6444]

One of the Korean news sources made an attempt to closely analyze the bird-strike footage frame by frame. Similar to your speculation, their analysis suggested that engine #1 may have also suffered a bird strike, although the damage wasn't severe enough to be easily visible in the footage or to disable the engine immediately. Hopefully, the rest of the data from the black box will clarify this issue. Thank you for your effort for providing professional insight on this issue.

[@williamm6446]

At least one engine can be heard running on the runway. Also you can see the heat from the number # 2 engine just as they start to flare. They had power, but limited.

[@Kakkoii_otoko]

Excuses. The pilot stupidly turned off the wrong engine.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

@@Kakkoii_otoko Oh well, since you know exactly what happened I guess they can forget about doing an investigation. 😂

[@renater.540]

​@@Kakkoii_otokoIsn't it somewhat harsh (to say politely) just to claim stupidity for the failure? 1. As Denys said, there was very limited time to react, 2. one should take the enormous stress in this situation into consideration. He who would have reacted in the perfect way in such a situation may throw the first stone... More than once I have been - and still am - frustrated, irritated (you name it) by the brutal judgement of people without detailed information from afar.

[@maxenielsen]

In some video images, a slight wisp also comes out of the engine that did not produce the obvious burst of flame.

[@kekenooutthere3095]

Great analysis of the facts & information available now - love your message of "wait for the Official reports coming from the Investigation Team & their final conclusions..." - I appreciate your work Denys

[@poorweakcua6372]

It’s so wild how you’re just a normal guy in your house giving out far better information than the Media itself.

[@andyb2515]

Excellent video with actual aviation knowledge 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

[@DR_1_1]

And they already had flaps and gear down on the first approach...

[@peterpan4038]

To be fair: most accidents can be avoided, usually A LOT of stuff has to go horribly wrong to result in such a tragedy. It's remarkable how far we have come at avoiding the worst case, given the insane amount of passenger aircraft taking off each and every day.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

If one engine was running that might be why they initially opted for a go around. If that engine then quit, that might be why they instead went for a 180 turn. To use the swiss cheese analogy, it's possible that the slices of swiss cheese moved. I've not flown anything bigger than a Cessna, and not much of that, but I have done a bit of gliding and a 180 turn is what you might do if the tow cable breaks on takeoff, where the only height you are ever going to have is what you have now, and you need to use it while you've got it. For a 737 that has suddenly become a glider that would be even more of an issue. Turning loses height so I can see why they might want to remain clean to stretch their glide. Configured one way they may not have reached the runway, configured to reach it they had trouble getting down and stopping. As Denys marked with an 'X' in this video there's that 'crucial point' where they went from 'go around' to 'get us down now' and we don't know what might have happened. They may only have had seconds to decide what to do at this point. According to one video the overshoot area was 200 metres, it said the norm would have been 390 metres. However, this airport was a regional airport up until December 8th, so the antennae embankment may not have been such an issue up until when it became one. They are going to extend the runway and I'm sure the embankment will not be rebuilt. Hopefully they will be able to access the voice recording so we can hear what was going on in the cockpit and the data recording to find out the state of the engines.

[@Eatlikebird-s5c]

Seems that they put absolutely zero chance on their side...

[@Wannes_]

Even with (double) engine trouble, why even bother shutting one down ? They were less than 2 minutes from the runway They crash within 3 minutes of the mayday call, and have flown past the airfield + performed a 180 in that time, effectively flying further than the runway threshold was on their initial approach ... If they lost power / or thought they couldn't make the runway, then surely going around wouldn't be an option ... clean up the plane as much as needed and land straight ahead None of the above makes any logical sense Second bird strike in the other engine on the go around, maybe ?

[@robbliven01]

In my humble opinion, you are an aviation expert and B-737 pilot without any bias. Thank you for your analysis of a very troubling crash. Prayers to all those grieving for their loss 😞

[@mizuhowaanjai2558]

It is highly understandable for any regular people like me too, your videos help a lot to understand the situation. Thank you!

[@JK-pd7jf]

Much appreciated analysis from a pilot of such a plane. Let's see if the flight recordings reveal the same or similar things.

[@jeffl3205]

Denys, you are quickly establishing yourself as the Sal Mercogliano of flying. ❤ Good work, sir.

[@amandajoki6398]

Love your updates and reminders to keep the official report as actual fact ❣️

[@sailaab]

not just a man on the internet with a microphone.. but a 🔥💙🤍 much nuanced analyst.👌🏼👍🏻💐

[@bakkerem1967]

I'm hoping people will learn from this tragedy, in order to assure this cannot be repeated under any circumstances. That's what made flying safer than driving. Thank you for you analyses 'just a random guy with a microphone' Denys !

[@teppo9585]

Nothing else to learn from this so far than that you shouldn´t have concrete structtures near end of runways, which is an utter dohhh. Anything else we need to first learn what happened besides the bird strike, as the bird strike 100% didn´t cause this accident.

[@dan7549]

I've been watching your videos the last days and I think they are the best and the most logical.

[@rogerhardy6306]

Thanks for this sober and sensible assessment.

[@lawrencedavidson6195]

The same thing happened in Jamaica in 2009, AA B737-800 landed in bad weather too fast down wind. On their second landing attempt they touched down 3/4 way down the runway, they skidded off the wet runway, across the ILS lights, across the run off area, over a road and stopped on the beach near the sea. EVERYONE SURVIVED, because there was no solid concrete wall to kill them.

[@brandwessels8582]

@lawrencedavidson6195 Just luck. Airliner should NEVER be off a runway - at all.

[@angelcore1669]

that airport probably wasn't near a residential area

[@damkayaker]

@@brandwessels8582 No it's more than bad luck that the ILS light were built on top of an earthen berm 20' high followed by a concrete cinder block wall topped with barbed wire. The earthen berm is what killed everyone and it was just 140 meters from the end of the runway concrete.

[@Tazjet100]

i remember the Continental 727 on approach to Chicago O'Hare in November 1993 with three crew so busy on approach talking about sexual conquests they failed to perform a checklist, so attempted to land wheels up.

[@msrRevId7]

I don’t know what happened to the crews and what they had been suffering before landing on the runway, at least they did a successful landing on the runway until the stupid wall killed them nearly all. 😔 Praying for them resting in the peace

[@joysgc6353]

Fantastic analysis, Dennis. 🤗😘 You have a great future in Air Crash Investigations.🙏 Thank you for your detailed, technical insights nto what could have gone wrong. Keep going, Sir.😘🙏

[@mateobravo9212]

Wow. Total confusion! I see lots of big news outlets pushing/blaming the concrete reinforced structure at the end of the runway, as if nothing else is to blame - so I really appreciate your attention to detail and real analysis. Outstanding work, señor. Greetings from Spain, Slava Ukraini.

[@freethinker--]

Yes,the wall caused the explosion,but it was all the other errors that led to that outcome,sad.

[@Songbirdstress]

Well, if nothing else it shows you can't land at that airport without landing gear...

[@ThornyroseSGA]

To be fair. Other sources are definitely questioning how and why the crew acted as they did. But anyone who has been at airports or seen a lot of videos also recognize that a concrete enforced erm doesn’t belong where that one was, and the hideous way the plane crumpled upon impact grabs your attention.

[@chipbug]

Air crashes were seldom caused by a single factor. It only occurred when the holes in the swiss cheese lined up.

[@timb8095]

To be fair, all the reports I’ve seen are saying that there would likely have been a high survival rate should that berm not been there. Obviously a lot went wrong before that, but they should have been able to ride out the landing otherwise.

[@BugPowderDust]

Thanks Denys, appreciate the honesty and the breakdown of this.

[@HsquaredH2]

Great discussion points! I like your approach to this subject as “possibilities”. There is way too much info on youtube from others who seem to immediately lay blame to something they have no actual information, this is one of those! Let’s wait for some tangible details before making “definite statements”. I’m a Pilot with almost 20,000 hours of flying commercially and you have earned my ‘subscription’. Thank you.

[@Christinacatalano]

Watching you religiously. Thank you for these immediate updates, your hard work is evident.

[@dermick]

Another great video, Denys - thanks for sharing your views on this tragedy.

[@renehinojales9271]

I salute your manner of reporting---conclusions based on facts and not conjecture! Not to mention that you truly "walk the talk"...

[@victoriadauberman]

Im back here to listen to you...3rd Appreciated all your efforts towards my country, KOREA...

[@nomomania6827]

​@@GregRippetoe You should ask your mom why she didn't teach you manners

[@swillm3ister]

Respect your comment, friend. Rest in peace to the lost.

[@victoriadauberman]

@@swillm3ister Appreciated you!!!

[@JonathanSwiftUK]

I think I would feel very safe flying with you at the controls. It is so obvious that the high ILS concrete installation destroyed most of the plane, and few airports have the Engineered Material Arresting System, which probably would have saved everyone. Airports really cannot afford to not install this, and passengers should be picky with what airports they fly to. Great, in-depth analysis and it will be helpful to know all the factors in this case.

[@richardc020]

Airports not installing it are being too stingy and awaiting a problem.

[@alanm8932]

Would EMAS have been at all effective in this incident? Surely EMAS needs a lot of the aircraft weight to be concentrated in small areas, (the tyres) for the EMAS material to be crushed. This aircraft went off the end of the runway at high speed (I've seen calculations of 150mph and also 160kts). It's also at a high angle of attack, resting on the engines and the rear of the fuselage with the nose high. At that speed and angle of attack, with no spoilers deployed, it must be quite close to lifting off the ground, with _very_ little weight on any of the three ground contact points. The ground contact points may also be larger than when the weight is on its tyres. I can see this aircraft going straight over EMAS without making any indentation in its surface.

[@amandak.4246]

they always claim they can't afford it but magically find the funds after a major disaster...

[@alanm8932]

"passengers should be picky with what airport they fly to." Also _from._ An aircraft can overrun the end of the runway from a late rejected takeoff too.

[@alanm8932]

I'm sure it's been thought about before but I wonder if there are situations where EMAS would _cause_ a crash? There have been several instances where aircraft have left major tyre tracks off the end of the runway, even taken out localiser antenna, runway lights or perimeter fencing and still climbed away. If these had been "caught" by EMAS with full power, full fuel, takeoff speed I don't think it would end well.

[@colinallan1962]

Black boxes are rarely damaged. Germanwings Flight 9525 was doing 435.mph when it crashed into the mountain. Both boxes recovered and read. This aircraft was doing about 150.mph. The tail survived. Black boxes are in the tail.

[@bernieschiff5919]

One box was reported damaged. This may be an attempt to prepare for the delay and limit release of information to the press and control fallout for Korean officials if there is unflattering data on those tapes.

[@gerdplume5544]

Yup, "damaged connector" prob means we won't be hearing from the 2 surviving crew any time soon either. Tail section survival a physics mystery it flipped up and sheered with no energy left, that was the berm, which having seen further photos had small concrete walls supporting cross section base, was it designed to stop under carriage and allow fuesilage to continue? No landing gear meant plane took full hit,but the berm was" designed " imo. RIP but many questions remain, hope the family's get answers.

[@Cookiesprinkles815]

@@bernieschiff5919that’s what I was thinking.

[@meynardocustodio2477]

The skidding friction without the front wheels should have at least slowed down the speed but the hard object left at the end of the runway near the berm migh have been the main factor on the impact explosion.@gerdplume5544

[@callmeadmin]

Shutting down working engine in stressful envirenment is pretty common reason for crashes. The reason probably is the fact that all engine instruments are located in the same area and switching off switches are also side by side. Plus, switches are in different location than instrumentation. So you have to memorize first which engine needs to be shut down and then find switches and use correct one. If switch off switches were right below the corresponding engine instrumentation, then chances to make to mistakes due to interrupted memorizing process are much smaller.

[@ucfj]

This. Wrote a similar comment. This mistake would explain a lot here

[@brianwebb191]

Why switch off any engine when you are landing ffs. Switch off engine then try and gain height does not make any sence to me, or am i missing something??? You can fly on One engine so why not Land on One?? Looks like the Pilot was Pissed at least he did not get a hang over lol.

[@productjoe4069]

@@brianwebb191not a pilot, but my understanding is that switching off the engine is a standard checklist item when it fails. They can’t know the state of the engine, and it may cause further damage (e.g. from shrapnel) if it is still running (even if it’s not producing thrust). If they had fire indications (we don’t know yet) then they’d also need to shut it down and then cut fuel and flood it with fire suppressors. Fire in a plane is the worst form of failure. That wrong engine shutdowns still occur mainly show to me (a product designer) that we still haven’t gotten the human-computer interaction piece right yet. No idea though if that’s part of the causal chain here.

[@wiredforstereo]

I dont understand shutting down engines. Small chance of further damage, much greater chance of shutting down the wrong engine. This has happened before.

[@ucfj]

@@wiredforstereo It's part of their memory items when an engine malfunctions

[@PranavChad]

RIP all lives lost in the crash 🙏🙏

[@jamiecheslo]

I saw a video clip of you on my local news channel last night. Well done, Dennis! The ironic and tragic part of this is, that even with the supposed 'mistakes" the pilots may have made under all that stress, had that damn berm not been there at the end of the runway, the incident would most probably have ended very differently with little to no loss of life. It still boggles my mind that a raised STRUCTURE was placed at the end of a runway!! ILS antennae that are designed to break away on impact is one thing, but a raised earthen berm??? Where was the oversight on this? Did no one question the wisdom of placing a solid obstacle at the end of a runway?? Because we all know that aircraft NEVER overrun a runway, right? Geez, my mind is blown by this. Anyway thanks for your awesome work, Dennis! With everything that has been happening lately in commercial aviation, you must not be getting much sleep!

[@sany7737]

It's so sad.. You can see pilots and people sitting in that plane, seconds before they crash into that wall. God bless their souls.

[@davethewave7248]

After watching all the vids, I'm thinking that the crew should have gone on ahead with the landing after the initial bird strike [as you mentioned earlier]. The plane was configured, gear down, air speed down. altitude down etc, gliding into the airport runway. In what world does it make sense to do a go around, involving a power up and reconfiguration, when a bird strike happens in the midst of LANDING [bird strikes happen when the plane is low]. If one engine is damaged, carry on. If both are damaged, definitely carry on...as you've potentially lost power. Continung the landing is down-powering the plane anyway. I think the fatigued crew first were startled to hear the bird warning, then when the strike came 2 minutes later, their knee-jerk reaction was the go around... where one thing led to another. Convince me I am wrong.

[@Jonathan-qz9td]

I still don’t get why the went around tho. Do you know what why?

[@Jonathan-qz9td]

Okay I got to that part, it was just the pilot decision I guess

[@neorenjie]

Yeah. Powering up after losing an engine doesn't seem wise. It did seem like a knee jerk reaction to buy themselves time to get ready for landing, but then they concluded they can't get landing gears out and decided to land without. Human incompetency is a key factor in this incident.

[@karolkozak64]

@@Jonathan-qz9td yes they went around so that they could hit the wall..

[@mitchmillett9214]

@@Jonathan-qz9tdMost likely a panic reaction to buy themselves some time to think.

[@marlonscloud]

PPL pilot here, but... The clean config for best glide makes sense, BUT, you could still extend flaps and gear on very short final. Something still very strange about this

[@chrisblue4652]

Considering you have 3 minutes and you in the middle of steering the plane back onto the runway at low altitude and no engine power - would you have enough hands / attention to handle both tasks? Trying to visualize: if I am drving my car doing a difficult maneuver I have both hands death gripping the wheel and eyes focused on the road - no driving with 1 hand and other fiddling with knobs. But I donno, airplane should have 2 pilots so 1 can fly, other can hit the knobs?

[@alexandermonro6768]

If there was a problem with the hydraulics, due to birdstrike on at least one engine, the alternate systems for flap and gear deployment take a lot more time than normal.

[@didierduplantier8359]

@@alexandermonro6768 Gear can be manually deployed but they probably lost hydraulic to extend flap if both engines are out.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

The problem is extending flaps and lowering the gear turns your glider into a brick. They were on the approach when they had to decide this. Meaning they had very little height to play with and much of that would be thrown away in doing the turn. Possibly configuring for landing may have resulted in them not reaching the runway. All will become clear when we know more. By then something else will have pushed it out of public conscienceness as this did with the Azerbaijan crash. We have a short attention span.

[@davidpark2509]

There was a flaw in the system of that aircraft aka boeing error... birdstrike on both engines isnt going to stop the aircraft from deploying landing gear

[@jesserandall1819]

Denys, we need an update 3 on this crash! Did you hear the news that both the black boxes stopped recording data 4 minutes before the crash? This is crazy. What could cause this? Without that CVR and FDR data how will they be able to piece together what actually happened in those doomed final minutes? I've read a few articles that say that if all electrical was lost that could explain why the black boxes stopped recording data, and maybe that would also explain why they rushed to land so quickly? But, I'm not a pilot and I know nothing about this. Your videos are always great and I hope you put out another one on this topic!

[@lanka3019]

My husband is an aeronautical engineer working for Sri Lankan airlines. After watching few videos he told me, the first officer might have tried to land the first time and couldn't do it(he says it happens sometimes ) during the go around the captain might have taken control and maybe he didnt know that landing gear was not deployed. He said the captain was rushed to land in the middle of the runway.

[@SkyBear0509]

Rushing and panicking- agreed But 737 have gear up warning I'm surprised if those pilots didn't know the gear was up

[@IN10THRC]

​@@SkyBear0509Is it an audible warning? Only asking because since they were not in a landing configuration, I am mentally picturing several audible warnings going simultaneously, such as sink rate, terrain, whatever. Maybe it simply went unnoticed? I've also hear that on some aircraft, there is a warning "heirarchy", where some audible warnings are automatically muted, in favor of what the systems deem to be a more pressing warning.

[@Skiandcycle]

Yep, this was what other expert on CNN stated too. I think it’s too early to jump to conclusions, I was told that declaring mayday (which the captain declared) will only happen if the aircraft loses thrust in both engines. In that case, lot of experts do state that you want to keep the lift as much as you can which means no flaps and landing gears. However, these are the current known facts. 1. The captain belly landed the aircraft on the runway. 2. The aircraft landed around 2/3 point of the runway. 3. The aircraft was moving very fast even after landed. 4. The pilot maintained the control of the aircraft on the runway. 5. Surviving flight attendants stated that there was smoke in the aircraft and possible fire. 6. The berm was covered under the dirt and there is no way that the pilot would have known that there is a reinforce concrete structure under the dirt berm. If that berm was constructed with sand and dirt, there is a very good chance it could have helped slow down the aircraft. Therefore, current evidence is showing that it is the concrete structure that mainly killed the passengers. The captain on this flight was experienced pilot with 6,800 flying hours and he was a former Air Force pilot. We can sit here and argue about pilot error, but based on what i see, i believe the pilot did everything correctly to land the aircraft safely. Was this the best decision? The hind sight is 20/20; however, these pilots had very short time to follow the checklist, troubleshoot and land. I would not blame the pilot just yet.

[@evulclown]

Ethical reporting on this, Denys. Good to see you explain that everyone needs to wait for the actual report and that you will not make more videos on it. 👍

[@JCChoi-tx2pt]

About the birdstrike footage, just before the major flame came out of the engine 2, there were little flames coming out from both of the engines 1&2. It was just shown for a glimpse, and a lot of people don't notice it, But if you watch the footage frame by frame, you'll be able to see it. Which means the birdstike happened to both of the engines.

[@yo2trader539]

That makes much more sense on why they glided, made a short turn and attempted to land as soon as possible, and no flaps or landing gear.

[@prome666]

@@yo2trader539 landing gear can still be lowered manually

[@ArticSpy]

@@yo2trader539 the engines are not needed for flaps and landing gear.

[@rebel_reform]

It may be a bird strike or something serious 😢

[@toma3025]

Aren't they required for the hydraulic pressure to operate the gear and flaps?

[@rob.ale90]

Since yesterday I started to worry that this is just human mistake, gross one actually. I still think we should not rush for conclusions, but it really looks bad for the company itself. I cannot imagine some professionals can be so unprepared. In Romania 2 days ago some "experts" were saying that there was foam and crew had a fly over to confirm no landing gears are down...the missinformation...your videos are helping, thanks!

[@Sacto1654]

JEJU Air needs to look at its cockpit resource management (CRM) procedures _immediately_ .

[@caydenph2741]

Human mistake for building that wall. Regardless of pilot error or not, that wall there was criminal.

[@GoddessFirstClass2882]

Your insights are amazing!! 👍 I understand it's your opinion, but just that explanation about how they could've circled to the right to land on 01 instead of 19, I learned so much from that. Thank you 🙏

[@fablearchitect7645]

3:05 if you go into street view on the road near you will see that is not a fence but a cinder block wall

[@LMarti13]

I've heard like a dozen theories and this is the only one that makes sense to me. All the other ones take the easy way out and say "Oh they just didn't know what they were doing and made like six mistakes"

[@davidrs9898]

Its great to hear real professionals who explain exactly what they, know, note if they speculate and always suggest people not to rush to judgement without all the facts.

[@sushimamba4281]

Thank you. You are making FAR more sense than ALL of the other so-called 'experts' on the news channels. They're clueless.

[@alfaeco15]

When learning to fly I learned that things pile up pretty fast in the cockpit.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

google 'catasprophe theory'. It's a bit old school but is an interesting way to view 'sudden state changes' such as flying along happilly then being upside down in the trees.

[@stpfs9281]

As a pilot, who has flown this type of plane, your insights are very valuable.

[@Wytnucls]

Perhaps in the future, pilots should practice the approach in clean configuration and register the track miles needed from 1500 ft downwind for a safe landing with a small margin for error. Something we did in a flapless configuration before, but with the gear down.

[@FlyWithMe_666]

Great analysis as always. The only thing I think make little sense is 11:17 - if they deliberately decided to reduce drag by not extending flaps and landing gear, I doubt they forgot just a few seconds later that landing gear wasn’t extended, even under all that stress. And, of course, it might be bad pilot decisions here (to some degree). But I recall the two 737max crashes, where also the pilots were blamed first, before the whole MCAS story evolved. I hope the authorities will make a thorough investigation here to get the complete picture. I wish everyone a happy new year!

[@fewwiggle]

"I hope the authorities will make a thorough investigation" Understandably, all parties involved have opted for a cursory investigation -- their reasoning is that planes rarely crash, so learning stuff about crashes just wastes time and resources . . . .

[@geniferteal4178]

There was probably a very loud warning to put the gear down, which makes it even harder to imagine they weren't at least aware of it.

[@amd.0001]

​@@geniferteal4178 in the PIA 8303 accident we knew that landing gear is the least warning to be audible if there's another higher priority warning

[@geniferteal4178]

@amd.0001 as it's been suggested they probably knew, and "were getting to it". Not right now quickly became there's no time left.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

Yes, although many crashes are human error (although often with mitigating circumstances it should be said) for the sake of crew and relatives I think it's wise not to assume this was human error. We don't yet know what the crew were dealing with and it's possible they did the best they could under the circumstances. Currently we don't know what we don't know.

[@samrossi2641]

I subscribed to this channel a long while ago when it was at 20k subs, im so happy to see it grow this big.

[@SamwiseLee]

Dual engine failure seems to be more and more the case. The phone recorded video of the right engine flame was filmed AFTER the person heard multiple banging noises. That’s what prompted them to start filming. I’m Korean.

[@Wannes_]

It could be from the same engine With a double engine failure or damage, you wouldn't start a go-around as the runway is straight ahead Going around at the very least triples the time to fly and you'll need a LOT more energy (either as engine power, or height/speed to trade) in order to do so, compared to continuing straight in However ... Going around after a compressor stall / birdstrike and then having another one in the other engine during the go around

[@twinsiesyt]

​@@Wannes_there were bird stikes and the pilot alreay initiated go-around before the video footage started. The angle of the appoach confirms that the airplane was not headed for the runway. Then there were more bird strikes during the go-around. 2 mins later the plane touched down.

[@bmused55]

I think there will be strong scrutiny of JejuAir crew training. This crew appears to have completely panicked and botched an otherwise fairly benign situation.

[@Songbirdstress]

Without the concrete barrier at the end of the runway, everything would have been fine anyway.

[@bmw_m4255]

​@@Songbirdstress airport has been open for decades. The wall wasn't a problem before

[@juaneer]

​@@Songbirdstressno this was pilot error. The airport is not to blame at all

[@yellowjoe.2000]

exactly. human error ridiculous

[@MatthewWilkinson]

Definitely some element of pilot error in this.

[@ProvincelandsExplorer]

Extremely nice analysis looking at so many aspects that are not obvious and with intelligent hypotheses and no jumping to conclusions. Very nice.

[@dr.shaun.g]

Denis please give few secs to answer this question- if right engine has failed or shut down, then according to your experience does the direction of turn for around matters at all - Does it helps which direction you should go for fly around - right direct turn (clockwise) or left direction fly around (counterclockwise) to align with final runway approach? Would the right turn for go around be better for right engine failure? Respect from Canada and thanks in advance. !

[@jimthompsonmd]

Go around prob inadvisable, period. But better to circle back from the right so pilot can keep runway in his view out toward the left as he comes around.

[@MeidasBodhi]

@@dr.shaun.g if he didn’t answer the answer is no. As long as your rudder and control surfaces were working, which looks like they were, it wouldn’t matter so much.

[@MeidasBodhi]

Above was correct too. If pilot wanted to visual it then that turn would’ve been advised.

[@dr.shaun.g]

@@jimthompsonmd thanks a lot Jim .. appreciate your explanation

[@dr.shaun.g]

@@MeidasBodhi thanks

[@saleen367]

There is a real possibility that the bird strike video/photo was a mirror image which happens often when uploaded to social media. That would then suggest that #1 engine was shut down and #2 engine was operational, but the mystery remains as to why they performed a belly landing.

[@stauferaerial]

**EDIT- I WAS INCORRECT** This is what I think too - except the clip at 6:33 is the one that is mirrored. It is from the main angle that we all have seen going around the internet, where the plane slides from left to right. It was pretty easy to verify that it was mirrored with google earth, and the surroundings. I believe engine #2 was shut down from the bird strike.

[@mfree80286]

@@stauferaerial What if #1 took the strike and simply went non-operational immediately, and #2 ingested something fowl and surged through the turbine a few times but remained ignited and stabilized? #2 is still operating at a decent percentage on impact, the large heat distortion and reverser deployment show it.

[@YouScroob]

I think the possibility of a mirror image can be determined by looking at what side of the plane was illuminated by the sun.

[@stauferaerial]

@@YouScroob You're right. I was wrong. Based on the sun, the video I referred to is NOT mirrored. Very interesting that 1 was out and 2 was running. The bird strike clip may have been mirrored

[@mfree80286]

@@YouScroob As I recall that was done elsewhere with morning light on the right of the aircraft being correct for a 0/360 approach in the morning (sun rising from east). Verify if desired, I'm running on secondhand memory there.

[@garygrant9612]

Dennis, you were spot on yesterday regarding a possibility that the left engine was not running. You were the very first to show this photo where the right engine was running and the left was not. Another mistake was keeping the nose high after touchdown, this alone kept the speed up through ground affect.

[@flexairz]

That last sentence is nonsense. With the nose up the aircraft WILL decelerate due to higher drag, nose down accelerates the aircraft. Basic aerodynamics.

[@CoolHardLogic]

Hey, thanks for this interesting update. On the other end of the runway, you can see on Street View from the public road to the west that there is an embankment for the localiser there too, BUT it is nowhere near as high and the earthworks are less steep as a result. Hence it looks flat from above. It may be that if this aircraft had had the opportunity to land on 01, that it may have fared better.

[@SiegeSniper]

This was a redeye flight too Denys.. Blessings to all the families and very sad 😔 💐💐❤️♥️

[@HenkGootjes66]

Whats's a redeye flight?

[@bravewarrior1218]

​@@HenkGootjes66 A red-eye flight is an overnight flight that departs late at night (usually after 9 p.m.) and arrives early the next morning (before 5 a.m.), typically leaving passengers with tired, reddened eyes from lack of sleep.

[@theGENIUSofART-understood]

@@HenkGootjes66they left at 5am from bkk

[@junglescope]

@@HenkGootjes66 an overnight flight, where they took off at night and landed in the morning. The pilots likely might've been fatigued.

[@MathewPollard-vj4uq]

@@HenkGootjes66 Night flight after midnight. Not good for optimum performance.

[@4af]

The bottom line is that: 1) if the pilots had landed on runway 01, as originally planned, instead of going around, the plane - even without flaps and landing gear brakes - would have slid past a short (5 foot tall) fragile cinder block perimeter airport wall into a huge empty and unobstructed field and come to rest without exploding or breaking apart. 2) if there had NOT been a tall concrete wall/dirt mound at the end of runway 19, the pilots could have landed on runway 19 - even without flaps and landing gear brakes - and slid past the fragile cinder block perimeter airport wall into an empty field and probably without exploding or breaking apart, although the ground beyond runway 19 is not as level and unobstructed as the ground beyond runway 01 so there might still have been a partial plane body breakup and some deaths.

[@Songbirdstress]

The takeaway from this is you can't land at that airport without landing gear.

[@alexandermonro6768]

​@@SongbirdstressThe takeaway from this is that you shouldn't build solid reinforced concrete structures directly in line with the end of the runway. It's even in the safety regulations for airport construction in many parts of the world, but apparently, not in Korea. Maybe next week's president might do something about it?

[@Songbirdstress]

@@alexandermonro6768 I have two takeaways, no airports in bird sanctuary wetlands. Biggest cause of catastrophic accidents as far as I know, and no typhoon proof barriers where they don't need to be. Despite all the errors without barriers they had a chance, with them they had none. Looking at Google, there's nothing all around. Then water. No need for barriers. It's actually a testament to how safe flying is, all that mess and STILL they had a chance without a stupid typhoon proof barrier.

[@fuzzie1956]

What the majority of people don't realize is that the Korean peninsula is still technically at war. The 1953 Korean armistice agreement is nothing more than a cease fire and war could resume at any time. A number of airports in S Korea are built in a multi use role such that military aircraft can be dispersed to those airports for use in wartime. If one google maps these airports they will generally see significant security measures not seen at civilian only airports in partcular large cement/cinder block perimeyer fences with guard towers for instance. Muan airport appears to be one of these airports and that is why you see the solid wall perimeter just beyond the ILS structure. Even without that berm the aircraft would have hit the cinder block perimeter fence and at the speed they were going would still have caused signicant damage but probably less loss of life. Served in the army there in the early 1970's and saw some bizarre stuff.