On December 29, 2024, Jeju Air Flight 2216, a Boeing 737-800 en route from Bangkok to Muan International Airport, South Korea, experienced a tragic crash during its final approach.
While initial reports speculated a landing gear malfunction, further evidence suggests a far more complex sequence of events.
This article delves into the technical, procedural, and geopolitical factors surrounding this incident.
Understanding Gravity Extension: The Landing Gear That Rarely Fails
Landing gear issues are a rare occurrence in aviation due to multiple fail-safes built into modern aircraft systems. Among these is gravity extension, a manual override that allows pilots to deploy the gear even if hydraulic or electrical systems fail. Here’s how it works:
- Unlocking the Gear: The crew pulls a manual lever in the cockpit, disengaging the locks holding the gear in its stowed position.
- Gravity at Work: The force of gravity ensures that the gear drops down to its fully extended position.
- Mechanical Locking: Once extended, the gear is secured in place by mechanical locks, ensuring stability during landing.
This redundancy is highly reliable, making a landing gear failure nearly unheard of without catastrophic structural damage. If gravity extension had been attempted but failed, investigators would likely focus on factors such as bird strikes or sabotage that could have physically obstructed the gear mechanism.
Why Gear-Up Landings Are A Controlled Exercise
When deploying landing gear is impossible, pilots are trained to execute gear-up landings, which are deliberate and carefully planned emergency procedures. These landings, though unconventional, prioritize passenger and crew safety. Here’s what typically happens:
- Runway Foam Application: Airports may spread foam on the runway to reduce friction, minimize sparks, and prevent fires during touchdown.
- Emergency Services Deployment: Firefighters and paramedics are pre-positioned along the runway, ready to respond immediately.
- Crew Coordination: The cockpit crew ensures the aircraft lands as smoothly as possible while the cabin crew prepares passengers for the impact.
In the case of Jeju Air Flight 2216, no such preparations were evident. Emergency services arrived only after the crash, suggesting the landing was neither planned nor communicated as a gear-up emergency.
This raises critical questions: Was the crew unaware of the gear issue, or did they face external pressures that prevented adequate preparation?
Why Didn’t the Crew Respond To Warning Systems?
Modern airliners like the Boeing 737-800 are equipped with advanced systems designed to prevent incidents like gear-up landings. These systems include:
- Visual and Aural Alerts:
- The cockpit displays clear indicators of the landing gear’s position.
- Loud warnings are triggered if the gear remains retracted during the landing approach.
- Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS):
- The GPWS alerts the crew if the aircraft is descending dangerously close to terrain without being properly configured for landing.
- Standard warnings include: “Too Low, Gear!” or “Terrain, Pull Up!”
- Automatic Callouts:
- At key altitudes during descent, the aircraft announces altitude milestones (“500 feet,” “200 feet”), prompting the crew to cross-check the landing configuration.
The fact that the crew proceeded with a gear-up approach despite these robust safeguards indicates potential failures in communication, situational awareness, or external interference.
Photographic Evidence: Ruling Out Gear Collapse
Photographs of Flight 2216 moments before the crash show the aircraft flying close to the ground with its landing gear fully retracted. This visual evidence eliminates the possibility of a gear collapse during landing.
Instead, it points to the gear never being deployed—a significant anomaly that investigators must address. Was the crew unable to deploy the gear, or did they intentionally choose not to?
Could a Bird Strike Have Played a Role?
Bird strikes are a known hazard in aviation, capable of causing significant mechanical damage. In the case of Flight 2216, speculation about a bird strike has centered on its potential to disrupt the landing gear deployment mechanism. Key considerations include:
- Direct Impact: A bird strike in the landing gear bay could damage hydraulic or mechanical systems.
- Secondary Failures: If the bird strike affected other systems, such as avionics, it might have distracted the crew during the critical approach phase.
However, bird strikes are rare at altitudes above 500 feet, where aircraft typically retract or deploy landing gear. Investigators will need to analyze flight data and physical evidence to confirm if a bird strike occurred and whether it contributed to the crash.
Geopolitical Context: Could Sabotage Be A Factor?
South Korea’s unique geopolitical situation cannot be ignored in this investigation. The Korean Peninsula remains one of the tensest regions globally, with ongoing hostilities between North and South Korea.
While there is no direct evidence of sabotage, the following scenarios merit consideration:
- North Korean Hostilities:
- North Korea has a history of provocative actions, including cyberattacks and interference with South Korean infrastructure.
- Could a broken arrow / unwanted person on board have disrupted Flight 2216’s systems?
- Domestic Political Pressures:
- South Korea has faced political unrest in recent months, with protests over economic policies and national security concerns.
- Could internal actors have exploited this turmoil to carry out sabotage?
Investigators will need to explore these possibilities while remaining cautious about speculative conclusions.
Emergency Response: A Crucial Factor
One of the most striking aspects of the Flight 2216 crash is the timing of the emergency response. Unlike planned gear-up landings, where emergency services are pre-positioned, the response to this crash was reactive rather than proactive. This delay likely exacerbated the severity of the incident, contributing to the high casualty rate.
Lessons For The Aviation Industry
The Jeju Air Flight 2216 tragedy offers critical lessons for the global aviation community:
- Crew Training: Enhanced training programs should focus on situational awareness and emergency decision-making under stress.
- Technology Audits: Airlines must regularly inspect and test all onboard warning systems to ensure functionality.
- Geopolitical Preparedness: In regions with heightened security risks, aviation authorities must integrate geopolitical assessments into safety protocols.
Conclusion
The crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216 is a somber reminder of the complexities of aviation safety. While mechanical failures, pilot decisions, and potential external factors are all under scrutiny, the overarching priority remains the same: uncover the truth to prevent future tragedies.
As investigators work tirelessly to piece together the final moments of Flight 2216, the aviation world must take these lessons to heart, ensuring the skies remain as safe as possible.
- Group Capt MJ Augustine Vinod VSM (R) is COO, AutoMicroUAS. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect the EurAsian Times’ views.
- He tweets at @mjavinod
