On December 29, 2024, Jeju Air Flight 7C2216 crashed while landing at Muan Airport. The cause of the accident is still under investigation. Here are some possible reasons:
Bird strike factor
1.Direct impact: Yonhap News Agency quoted witnesses who were fishing at the nearby seaside as saying that the plane collided head-on with a flock of birds when landing on the runway, and some birds may even be sucked into the engine. Bird strikes may cause damage to the structure and system of the aircraft, thereby affecting the normal landing of the aircraft.
2.Psychological interference of pilots: After the aircraft is hit by birds, the pilot may suffer a certain degree of psychological shock and interference, resulting in distraction or misjudgment, and then fail to discover problems such as the landing gear not being lowered in time.
Landing gear failure
1. Mechanical failure: The aircraft’s landing gear retraction and extension mechanism may have a mechanical failure, resulting in the inability to lower the landing gear normally. This may be caused by wear, aging, damage to the landing gear parts or hydraulic system failure.
2. Bird strikes: Although bird strikes generally do not directly damage the landing gear retraction and extension mechanism, they may trigger a series of chain reactions and indirectly cause landing gear failure. For example, bird strikes may damage sensors, lines or control systems related to the landing gear, thereby affecting the normal operation of the landing gear.
Airport facility issues
1. Concrete facility violations: David Learmont, a well-known British aviation safety expert, pointed out that the concrete protection facilities at the end of the runway at Muan Airport, about 251 meters away from the outer perimeter of the runway safety area, should be metal structures and should not protrude from the ground, but this facility at the airport violated relevant regulations, which may cause the passenger plane to explode and catch fire after hitting the facility46.
2. Limited runway length: Some people once believed that “insufficient runway length” caused the accident, but relevant personnel from the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of South Korea said that the accident model Boeing 737-800 can land on a runway of 1,500 to 1,600 meters, and other aircraft are currently operating without problems, so it is difficult to regard the runway length as the cause of the accident.
Insufficient emergency preparedness
1. No foam was sprayed on the runway: Some experts questioned whether special foam was not sprayed on the runway when the fuselage landed to reduce the impact during landing. Under normal circumstances, the airport should spray foam on the runway in time when it is learned that the aircraft may need to perform a belly landing or other emergency situations, so as to reduce the friction and impact force of the aircraft during landing and reduce the loss of the accident2.
2. Untimely firefighting and rescue: Although the Korean fire department tried its best to rescue after the accident, it still resulted in the tragic result of 179 deaths. There may be problems such as insufficient airport firefighting facilities, long response time of firefighters or improper rescue measures, which failed to effectively control the fire and rescue passengers in the first time.
Crew operation problems
1. Failure to release fuel in time: Boeing 737 models such as the accident passenger plane have not had the function of releasing fuel in the air since their manufacture, and must continue to rotate in the same area to consume fuel naturally in an emergency. However, it is speculated that in the case of multiple emergency situations such as engine abnormalities, there is not enough time to consume fuel, resulting in a large amount of fuel in the fuel tank when the aircraft landed, increasing the risk of fire and explosion.
2. Improper emergency response: The aircraft performed a “belly landing” with the landing gear not lowered. It may be that the crew did not discover the landing gear failure in time before landing, or did not take correct measures after discovering the failure, such as circling in the air waiting for the problem to be resolved, selecting a suitable alternate airport, etc., but instead took the risk of landing.
