11–20 of 365 posts
I don’t know why people keep fixating on this. Airplanes can’t skid out of the airport into the surrounding city. Mistakes were made, but this isn’t one of them. I suspect it is people trying to deflect blame from pilot error, which seems by far the most likely issue. They did none of the things you should do to stop a plane.
I was wondering the same thing and suspected it was some safety feature (better for a plane to smack into said wall instead of crash into some populated area, etc) I had no idea he had to make the approach in the opposite direction.
> no idea he had to make the approach in the opposite direction.
So the wall is actually at the beginning of the runway. That wall was never never meant to be at the end of a landing but at the start of landing.
I don't understand why this isn't made clear. Basically the runway was used against the design specifications.
I was wondering the same thing and suspected it was some safety feature (better for a plane to smack into said wall instead of crash into some populated area, etc) I had no idea he had to make the approach in the opposite direction.
Stinks of bad crew resource management and ATC which is why the ATC and airline for raided by SK officials.
I don’t know why people keep fixating on this. Airplanes can’t skid out of the airport into the surrounding city. Mistakes were made, but this isn’t one of them. I suspect it is people trying to deflect blame from pilot error, which seems by far the most likely issue. They did none of the things you should do to stop a plane.
I think this is disingenuous reporting. It’s too early to actually draw a conclusion. We should wait for the full investigation. There are a large number of compounding problems here. That was just the last one.
Even with all of the compounded problems, the flight could have been non fatal in most world airports.
Let’s wait for the investigators. It’s not good to fixate on this outcome.
I was wondering the same thing and suspected it was some safety feature (better for a plane to smack into said wall instead of crash into some populated area, etc) I had no idea he had to make the approach in the opposite direction.
I don’t know why people keep fixating on this. Airplanes can’t skid out of the airport into the surrounding city. Mistakes were made, but this isn’t one of them. I suspect it is people trying to deflect blame from pilot error, which seems by far the most likely issue. They did none of the things you should do to stop a plane.
Like doing what things? What I read so far is that they suspect the pilot had control issues. I don't think people who say that it's a bad idea to have a concrete wall at the end of the runway argue the plane should make its way to a nearby motorway. I think most refer to using EMAS, ie a crushable concrete floor in which the plane sinks and stops.
but was it the end of the runway? As I understand, the pilot came in from the opposite direction, i.e.
> The pilot then aborted the original landing and requested permission to land from the opposite direction.[1]
So that wall was located at the beginning of the runway if the runway was used correctly.
From the bottom image[2], it would appear the wall is located behind the point where planes begin their take-off (and I assume their landing) - but I'm no aviation expert.
[1]: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgzprprlyeo [2]: https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1536/cpsprodpb/9090/live/ab9db...
I don’t know why people keep fixating on this. Airplanes can’t skid out of the airport into the surrounding city. Mistakes were made, but this isn’t one of them. I suspect it is people trying to deflect blame from pilot error, which seems by far the most likely issue. They did none of the things you should do to stop a plane.
There is nothing beyond the embankment. Airports are generally made in the middle of nowhere. And no, they are not "skidding" into the surrounding city, he probably needed a few hundred meters at most.
I found this comment helpful from a Reddit thread.
>The embankment is there to protect the road from the jetblast of departing aircraft in oposite runway direction. Thats why it is allowed directly in the safety area.
I think this is disingenuous reporting. It’s too early to actually draw a conclusion. We should wait for the full investigation. There are a large number of compounding problems here. That was just the last one.
"...the runway design "absolutely (did) not" meet industry best practices, which preclude any hard structure within at least 300m (984ft) of the end of the runway."
"it emerged that remarks in Muan International Airport's operating manual, uploaded early in 2024, said the concrete embankment was too close to the end of the runway."
I mean that was a pretty obvious design flaw that went against common standards. I agree it isn't cut and dry yet but an investigation isn't going to change the above info.
