Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Boeing 737-800, the model that crashed in South Korea, is one of the world’s most popular aircraft
CNBC ^ | December 30, 2024 | Leslie Josephs

Posted on 12/30/2024 10:54:52 AM PST by Red Badger

Key Points

* Jeju Air Flight 7C2216 crash landed at Muan International Airport killing 179 of the 181 people on board, in South Korea’s worst air disaster in decades.

* Investigators are trying to figure out what caused the fatal belly landing of the Boeing 737-800.

* The aircraft is one of the world’s most common models of aircraft, with nearly 4,400 in service, according to Cirium.

=========================================================

Accident investigators are trying to figure out what caused a Jeju Air flight to belly land without its landing gear down at Muan International Airport in southwestern South Korea, killing all but two of the 181 people on board as it burst into flames in the nation’s worst air disaster in decades.

South Korea’s acting president, Choi Sang-mok, ordered an emergency inspection of the country’s Boeing 737-800s, the type of plane used on the fatal Jeju Air Flight 7C2216.

The Boeing 737-800 is one of the world’s most commonly used airplanes, and it has a strong safety record. It predates the Boeing 737 Max, the type that was involved in two fatal crashes in 2018 and 2019 that killed all 346 people on board those flights. The 737 Max was grounded for almost two years, and a flight-control system, which was later tweaked, was implicated in both of those crashes.

There are nearly 4,400 of the older Boeing 737-800s operated around the world, according to aviation-data firm Cirium. That means the model makes up about 17% of the world’s in-service commercial passenger jet fleet.

The average age of the world’s 737-800 fleet is 13 years old, according to Cirium, and the last of the series of planes were delivered about five years ago.

Jeju Air took delivery of the plane which was involved in this weekend’s crash in 2017. It was previously operated by European discount carrier Ryanair, according to Flightradar24. The plane involved in the crash was about 15 years old.

Aerospace experts say it’s unlikely that investigators will find a design problem with the long-flying aircraft.

“The idea that they’ll find a design flaw at this point is borderline inconceivable,” said Richard Aboulafia, managing director at AeroDynamic Advisory, an aerospace consulting firm.

Why the Boeing 737 Max has been such a mess

A full investigation could take longer than a year, and the unusual incident has raised more questions than answers, such as why the landing gear wasn’t deployed. Even with a hydraulic malfunction, Boeing 737-800 pilots can drop the landing gear manually.

One theory involves a possible bird strike that disabled the engines.

“If that happens at the altitude they were at, they may not have had time to do emergency checklists,” said Jeff Guzzetti, a retired air safety investigator with the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration. He also said if the plane hadn’t run into a hard wall at the end of the runway, the accident could have been more survivable.

The NTSB is leading the U.S. team of investigators that also includes Boeing and the FAA, since the aircraft was manufactured and certified in the United States.

Under international protocols, the country in which the accident took place will lead the overall investigation.

VIDEO AND PICS AT LINK (Getty)


TOPICS: Business/Economy; History; Military/Veterans; Travel
KEYWORDS: aviation; korea
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

1 posted on 12/30/2024 10:54:52 AM PST by Red Badger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

When you have a bird strike... It doesn’t matter what model number your jet is... It’s coming down.


2 posted on 12/30/2024 10:56:26 AM PST by jerod (Nazis were essentially Socialist in Hugo Boss uniforms... Get over it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Oddly this doesn’t make me feel any more secure when I fly. In fact just the opposite. I haven’t flown since 1999. If I can drive that’s what I’ll do thanks.


3 posted on 12/30/2024 11:05:53 AM PST by xp38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Yup, bird strike, no hydraulics...gear up landing, which is survivable except that the plane had no flaps and thrust reversers (landed on the engines)...meaning it slid to the end and hit a barrier. Typical MSNBC “analysis” provided by folks who’d fail a fifth grade science test. And the media wonders why we give the turds in our toilet more regard than we give them. I’m surprise they didn’t let Rachel Maddow give the report, since she is arguably the best liar there.


4 posted on 12/30/2024 11:09:08 AM PST by Da Coyote (H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jerod
No. "Bird strikes are a significant threat to airliner safety, with over 13,000 reported incidents annually in the United States alone." "...bird strikes rarely cause fatal crashes".

source:
https://search.brave.com/search?q=air+liner+bird+strikes&source=desktop&summary=1&conversation=e9ee9375054c174324fed5

5 posted on 12/30/2024 11:10:05 AM PST by WhoisAlanGreenspan? (GO LIONS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

“no hydraulics”

The bird strike will not take out hydraulics. Raising flaps after the bird strike indicates they still had hydraulics.
The smooth control on landing indicates they had hydraulics.


6 posted on 12/30/2024 11:19:26 AM PST by TexasGator (/'1/11111)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

The media are stupid. Originally claiming this as the worst Korean air disaster, now edited to saying “in decades” because they want us to forget the Soviet Evil Empire killing 269 people aboard Korean Air 007 in 1983.
.
Bonus points for those who remember the impact on Reagan’s handling of the situation.


7 posted on 12/30/2024 11:33:41 AM PST by sturmde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Some investor group needs to buy Boeing and take it private long enough to clean out the DEI people and completely restructure it where necessary...and then bring it public again.

Here are the reasons I suggest that strategy:

Operational Flexibility:

As a private company, Boeing's new management/owners could make bold, long-term decisions without the constant pressure of quarterly earnings and shareholder expectations. Restructuring efforts will involve moves that will be unpopular with some public shareholders, like cost-cutting, gutting the DEI/Woke people, and divesting non-core business units.

Focus on Core Issues:

A private environment allows management to concentrate on fixing critical operational and cultural problems (e.g., quality control, safety standards, supply chain issues) without distractions from public scrutiny.

Simplified Capital Raising and Restructuring:

A private equity investor or consortium could provide the needed capital to overhaul Boeing's operations without having to explain their turnaround efforts to the public markets.


8 posted on 12/30/2024 11:37:14 AM PST by RoosterRedux (Emerson paraphrased, "If you strike at the king, don't fail." The Democrats failed. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote
...meaning it slid to the end and hit a barrier.

What idiot puts a solid concrete barrier close to a runway???

9 posted on 12/30/2024 11:37:14 AM PST by null and void (Regarding the second Trump presidency, everyone who isn’t terrified is thankful!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jerod

I’ve seen a C-130 eat a pelican and keep flying...


10 posted on 12/30/2024 11:45:14 AM PST by Parity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: null and void

What is “close to?” I remember blast walls not far from runways. They’re supposed to divert energy and debris from explosions upwards. What might have been on the other side of the barrier?


11 posted on 12/30/2024 11:46:47 AM PST by gundog (It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. the )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: null and void

What idiot puts a solid concrete barrier close to a runway???

~~~

An idiot that wants to protect the civilian infrastructure that exists beyond that point?

That’s just pure speculation on my part though, because if there isn’t anything like a residential neighborhood or a chemical storage plant on the other side of that runway, then you are right, that wall never should have been there.


12 posted on 12/30/2024 11:48:38 AM PST by z3n (Kakistocracy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: z3n

It didn’t crash into the wall. It crashed into the ILS structure.


13 posted on 12/30/2024 11:52:13 AM PST by TexasGator (/'1/11111)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator
It crashed into the ILS structure.

Which is perversely ironic.

14 posted on 12/30/2024 11:52:59 AM PST by central_va (I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: gundog

“I remember blast walls not far from runways. They’re supposed to divert energy and debris from explosions upwards.”

To divert jet engine blast.


15 posted on 12/30/2024 11:53:41 AM PST by TexasGator (/'1/11111)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xp38

It is the most popular aircraft, but you must know how to fly it. Vid shows the aircraft touched down at Ref plus 120 kts without a foamed runway. Captain should have landed at Ref or lower with a foamed runway and most pax should have walked away without injury. Next issue is why the concrete abutment on end of chosen runway?


16 posted on 12/30/2024 11:57:46 AM PST by chopperk (airhig)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

“no hydraulics”

“The bird strike will not take out hydraulics. Raising flaps after the bird strike indicates they still had hydraulics.
The smooth control on landing indicates they had hydraulics.

Raising flaps whilst on landing approach? I believe was the case. Could be wrong. However, a hit on one engine shouldn’t take out redundant hydraulics. However, I never flew the airliner types...’twas the fast stuff that could pull Gs and cause excitement.


17 posted on 12/30/2024 11:59:36 AM PST by Da Coyote (H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

And exploding ordnance, in an accident. Think 12 foot tall concrete Jersey barriers. I’m thinking of the Alert Pad, at Homestead AFB. I wonder if S. Korea has military alert launch capability from that airport. I know that Portland International had Oregon Air National Guard jets that launched from there. Seems like launch sites might be at a premium in SK


18 posted on 12/30/2024 12:00:22 PM PST by gundog (It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. the )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

pilot sabotage.


19 posted on 12/30/2024 12:01:02 PM PST by knarf (Ther )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Da Coyote

The turds have more substance than Rachel.


20 posted on 12/30/2024 12:02:03 PM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah so shall it be again," )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson