Plane Crash in South Korea

a reply to: RazorV66

Suddenly we have three plane crashes. Somethings up with that amigos.

Fake alien invasion
Ninety seconds to midnight on the atomic clock
The economy about to collapse
Brand new pandemic being rolled out with threats and hyperbole
All with the globalists drones flying around all after Trumps election?
I'll be looking for more planes going down because I believe the
drones are weapons and they're about to engage.

Fear is the objective as always.

a reply to: Astrocometus

What are "globalists drones"?

The Azerbaijan plane was shot down by mistake by Russian air defence, looks like the SK one was reported by the pilot as a bird strike.

As for fear, you seem to be pushing it yourself!

a reply to: Astrocometus

Fear is a control construct which is also part of the human condition, nothing new on that score, and business as usual.

As to a "fake alien invasion", when did that happen?

All i saw was some mad hysteria over drones.

Which hardly constitutes much.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

What are "globalists drones"?

You are aware of very powerful people like Klaus Schwab George Soros etc.
Right? Surely you are aware of their globalist agenda in your face right?
I can't imagine as member of this sight you have no idea there are drones
flying around US airspace and our military is not engaging in our defense
at all. You should be able to surmise logically that if they were of unkown
origin our military wouldn't be standing down I hope. As I said they are
weapons. And our gov.s knows exactly who and where they come from.

Unless I miss my guess planes will keep going down and you can continue
to believe whatever you're told without considering the timing and the
reality of what we are facing. But Bear in mind the FICTIONAL Martian
invasion in Orson Welles's 1938 radio play The War of the Worlds took
place in Grovers Mill, New Jersey.

So you asked me a question our own gov. claims it doesn't know. I did
my best considering. You don't seem to realize your own gov. has
declared war on you. I can only question the plane crashes for now.

A whole lot of sketchy and erroneous information being reported about this crash. I suspect there are lots of deflections and obfuscations going on also.

After trying to piece together some sensible sequence of events based on fragments so far, here are a couple interesting things which don't seem to be being clearly reported.

1. It's beginning to look like JJA 2216 may have had two (2) go-arounds, not one as earlier reported. The first landing attempt was to the north on Runway 01. This landing was aborted and a go-around was initiated. The reason for the abort seems to be reports of birds in the area of the runway.

2. The second landing attempt was to the south (which is very odd) on RWY 19 (same pavement, just opposite direction). This 2nd landing attempt was also aborted. Details get sketchy right here, but it sounds as though the reason this 2nd attempt was aborted was due to a "birdstrike" reported by the pilots of JJA2216. The aircraft then banked left, made a 360 degree turn and attempted to make a 3rd approach to RWY 19. It was on this 3rd attempt where the crash occurred.

3. There are pictures from a nearby hangar which show what appears to be a compressor stall on the #1 engine (right). This would support the theory of a birdstrike (no birds are evident in that video, but it's not a great video so they might have been missed).

4. Prior to the first landing, JJA2216 was aligned for a straight-in approach to RWY 01 with a reported airspeed of 150 kts at an altitude of 500 feet. This would have only been possible if the flaps were already down, and the landing gear was also down. Minimum stall speed of a 737-800 with no flaps is 200 kts. JJA2216 was 50 kts below this speed on their initial approach, thus below their flaps up stall speed.

5. There does not appear to be any data indicating airspeed, altitude or direction after the above report. However, they were cleared for landing in the opposite direction (RWY 19). This was before the pilots reported the birdstrike. This is important because it means they had already turned 180 degrees and were returning to the same runway in the opposite direction. As noted previously, this is known as the "impossible turn" in aviation. It would never be given as an instruction by ATC in any situation other than a dire emergency, and even then only as a last ditch "Any runway" clearance by ATC. BUT...the birdstrike hadn't happened yet. So, what was the situation which caused this?

6. While there is no flightradar data for the 2nd and 3rd landing attempts, you can clearly see several things in the video of the crash. First, you can clearly see there are no flaps deployed. So, given they were deployed at one point previous to this, it means they must have been retracted prior to the 2nd approach. This would make sense for a full go-around procedure but that would have put them landing to the north again (not to the south). In a catastrophic emergency the pilots would not retract the flaps if they were going to attempt an impossible turn return to the airfield; they'd leave them down for the added lift needed to make the turn and prevent a stall.

Second, from the video, you can also see not only did they not have the flaps down, but they were also traveling at a very high rate of speed (above 200 kts), and you can see they touched down on the engine nacelles well down the runway, like at the midway point. The late touchdown would be explained by them being too high after they made the 180 turn to return in the opposite direction, and zero degree flaps would explain the excessive speed. BUT, why would they retract the flaps in such a scenario. It makes no sense. In other words...retract the flaps = full go-around, and anything else = full crisis, massive failures and imminent crash likely with a 180 return (impossible turn). But again, remember, all of this was going on before the birdstrike was reported.

Now, it could be there was a delay in reporting the birdstrike..."Aviate, Navigate, then Communicate". However, how then did they get ATC to clear them in the opposite direction without declaring something like an emergency. Again, it makes no sense.

a reply to: Astrocometus

Okay.

If all the Aliens have is unarmed drones with navigation lights, my fear factor is low.

What this has to do with Orson Wells War of the Worlds, I don't know.

Any evidence that Alien drones caused these crashes?

It's hardly Independence Day, is it?

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

In relation to your remarkable analysis I wonder at where in
all that was going on did the one of two survivors see smoke
coming from that engine. Some excellent work there Clay.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Hey skepticism is always healthy. Til it isn't.

a reply to: Astrocometus

Despite all the seeming oddities of the aircraft and crew in the approach, the ultimate cause of the disaster was the concrete and earthen barrier upon which the localizer was mounted. This one thing was the cause of the massive and instantaneous destruction of the aircraft. Had it not been for that, the aircraft would have skidded to a stop and many lives would have been saved.

The actions of the pilots and aircraft, while seemingly odd and unexplainable, were not the largest factor in the massive destruction of the aircraft and loss of life...the airport design was.

The failure of the facility to have an ICAO standard Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ), in my opinion, is grounds for a criminal investigation! That localizer construction absolutely should NOT have been permitted like that, and those who allowed it are directly responsible for the massive death toll of JJA2216.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Astrocometus

Okay.

If all the Aliens have is unarmed drones with navigation lights, my fear factor is low.

What this has to do with Orson Wells War of the Worlds, I don't know.

Any evidence that Alien drones caused these crashes?

It's hardly Independence Day, is it?

I appreciate the aliens FAA compliance.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Those pilots should have schools and libraries named after them.
Because heros they are even tho as Lightfoot said.

"Heros often fail" God love em.

a reply to: Astrocometus

I'm not sure I'd go that far. At least not yet anyway. Remember, the plane wouldn't have crashed into the berm if it had landed safely.

So, there's that.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

I would say no matter what three attempts at landing are indicative
of the concern for and pursuit of safety. Also it sounds to me like they
were some how left with no choice on the third go around. They fought
as hard as they could in my view.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Astrocometus

Despite all the seeming oddities of the aircraft and crew in the approach, the ultimate cause of the disaster was the concrete and earthen barrier upon which the localizer was mounted. This one thing was the cause of the massive and instantaneous destruction of the aircraft. Had it not been for that, the aircraft would have skidded to a stop and many lives would have been saved.

The actions of the pilots and aircraft, while seemingly odd and unexplainable, were not the largest factor in the massive destruction of the aircraft and loss of life...the airport design was.

The failure of the facility to have an ICAO standard Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ), in my opinion, is grounds for a criminal investigation! That localizer construction absolutely should NOT have been permitted like that, and those who allowed it are directly responsible for the massive death toll of JJA2216.

Well duh, right? This was the first thing that stood out to me about the crash. It reminded me more of something you’d see at a crash testing facility.

Aviation experts question purpose of concrete wall at end of runway after catastrophic Jeju Air crash: ‘Verging on criminal’

Air safety specialists are now questioning why it was there at all.

nypost.com... =iphone_nyp&utm_source=pasteboard_app

Just some more fragments of data...

- The Pilot in Command (PIC) had nearly 7,000 hours, so certainly no rookie. Haven't seen anything stating if all those hours were in a 737, but he'd been with Jeju for over 4 years. First Officer (FO) had 1,650 hours which is pretty low (very actually). No names have been released but that's kind of irrelevant.

- Confirmed they did make two missed approaches before the crash on the 3rd attempt.

- The Missed Approach ('Go-around') procedure for RWY 19 is as follows... (I'll say it in plain English first, then in the aviation terms). After the missed approach, they should have climbed to 5,000 feet on the runway heading until reaching an imaginary point called "JB451" and then turned 90 degrees to the right. After reaching another imaginary point called "JB452" (roughly 2 miles) they then should have executed another 90 degree right turn (to the north) to a point called "GOBUN", then made another 90 degree right turn onto the runway heading at a point known as "GOANE" for another landing attempt. They should have, in essence, circled the airfield around the west side and then attempted landing again. T

The actual aviation instructions are...Climb to 5,000 on track of 187 to the JB451 intersection. Right turn to 277 to JB452. Right turn to 007 to GOBUN. From there, you’re either going to be making a left turn into a 10 mile orbit (penalty box), or vectored back into the pattern which will be a right turn to 097 over to GOANE on the base leg, then right to 187 then cleared to land.

- I checked the localizer distance for compliance with FAA, ICAO and IATA Obstacle Free Zone (OFZ) and Runway Safety Area requirements and they are 1,000 feet after the runway end. I checked the measurement of the Muan airport distance to the Localizer berm. It was 800 feet (so, 200 feet short of required). Interestingly, the FAA requires specifically state "No hazardous humps or ruts". And what did they hit? A major 'hump'. Additionally, these requirements vary somewhat, but those are generally the minimums.

- I confirmed JJA2216 (the flight in question) was in fact flying at 154 kts 6 minutes prior to arrival, and they were headed north on approach to RWY 01 (to the north), and they were at 500 above the ground (AGL). So, they definitely had their flaps down at some point. Stall speed for the aircraft is 200 kts with no flaps. Prior to slowing to 154 kts 40 degrees of flaps (maximum) is required to prevent a stall. JJA2216 was clearly well in excess of this speed at the time of the crash, and their flaps were not extended.

- ATC issued a bird strike warning at 6 minutes prior to landing. This may have prompted the 1st go-around.

- The pilots didn't call a bird strike until 1 minute prior to landing, about 5 minutes after the warning, and after having changed headings 180 degrees and approaching from the north to south.

- A local restaurant owner allegedly filmed 6 minutes of video which includes video of the crash from a different angle, and more importantly what sounded (to him) like several loud "bangs". I have not been able to locate this video other than a few seconds which multiple news agencies are using (but not the whole 6 minute video). These sounds were probably a compressor stall, perhaps from a bird strike. One possible explanation might be a scenario where they had one bird strike, followed by a second bird strike later in the landing sequence, possibly in the.

About all I can conclude at this point is (until further information becomes available)... It's starting to look like they may have had multiple failures all at once, and possibly more than one bird strike.

JJA2216 aborted their first approach to the north based on the ATC warning. ATC then must have directed them around to a downwind landing in the opposite direction. They may have encountered a bird strike and compressor stall on the second landing attempt and, as they were climbing out for a go-around after this first bird strike, then encountered a second bird strike possibly in the #2 (left) engine. This would have created a very dire emergency situation indeed, especially low to the ground. This may have been what led to the sweeping left hand turn 360 degrees (which is the opposite of the missed approach procedure for RWY 19).

Following this, the workload on the crew likely became unmanageable and there was insufficient time and/or altitude to reset the flaps and drop the gear (manually). The radical turn would have likely led to them being very high in the 3rd approach, which would explain why their first contact with the runway wasn't until nearly 4,000 feet past the threshold down the 9,000 foot runway. Because the flaps were up their airspeed was probably too high to lower the gear (even manually), else they risked stalling, thus the high rate of speed when the engine nacelles did finally contact the runway. The video shows the rest. The pilot was clearly keeping the nose up as long as possible to maintain control. But no amount of control would have prevented the airframe from slamming into the giant berm which the localizer was built on and instantly being obliterated.

If that's what happened then the pilots likely did about everything they could. However, this is just a theory I've tried to put together trying to explain all the strange facts and maneuvers. I can think of some other less favorable scenarios too, so take it with a grain of salt.

Just thought I'd share.

edit - Oh, and one other thing. There seems to be some confusion in many "news" reports of what the plane actually impacted. Let's clear this up. There are two obstacles off the south end of RWY 19 an Muan. The first is a large earthen berm embanked around a reinforced concrete structure upon which the Localizer antennas were mounted. This is what JJA2216 impacted causing it to disintegrate instantly. There is another "wall" which is constructed of concrete blocks several hundred further feet south of this. This was not the wall JJA2216 impacted. Some of the wreckage slid into this second wall, but the initial impact was to the berm supporting the localizer. A number of "news" sources are incorrectly reporting JJA2216 impacted this 2nd concrete block wall, and this is not correct. The aircraft would have plowed through the block wall like it wasn't even there. It was the earthen berm to the north of this wall which caused the instantaneous and catastrophic destruction of the plane.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Thank you for your well informed and detailed posts.

Much appreciated, and... Happy 🎊🎊 🎇🎆 New Year!

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Much appreciated Clay