Aviation experts have raised questions about an “unusual” concrete wall near the runway and its role in the South Korean plane crash that killed 179 people.
Footage shows a Jeju Air plane taking off from the runway at Moan International Airport on Sunday before crashing into a wall and bursting into flames.
Officials investigating the cause of South Korea’s worst-ever plane crash are considering the significance of the concrete wall’s location about 250 meters (820 feet) from the end of the runway.
Air safety expert David Learmount said the plane would have come to rest with “most – possibly all – of those still alive” had it not been for the “interruption”.
The pilot said the plane had hit a bird and then aborted the original landing and asked for permission to land in the opposite direction.
The plane came down some distance along the 2,800m runway and appeared to land without using its wheels or any other landing gear.
Mr Learmount said the landing was as good as a flapless/gearless touchdown could be: wings level, nose not high enough to avoid tail break and no significant damage to the aircraft as it skidded along the runway. did not arrive
“The cause of so many deaths was not the landing, but the fact that the plane hit a very difficult obstacle just short of the runway,” he said.
Another aviation analyst agreed. Captain Ross Emmer, chief executive of Aero Consulting Experts, told Reuters: “Unfortunately, that’s why everyone was killed, because they literally hit a concrete structure. It shouldn’t have happened.”
Munich-based Lufthansa pilot Christian Beckert called the concrete structure “unusual”, saying: “Usually at an airport with a runway at the end, you don’t have a wall.”
According to South Korea’s Yonhap news agency, the concrete structure houses a navigation system that helps the plane land – called a localizer.
At 4 meters high, it is covered with dirt and raised to maintain local level with the runway to ensure it functions properly, Yonhap reported.
South Korea’s transport ministry has said the devices are installed at other airports in the country and some overseas with concrete structures. However, authorities will examine whether it should have been made of lighter materials that would break more easily on impact.
Chris Kingswood, a pilot with 48 years’ experience who has flown the same type of aircraft involved in the crash, told BBC News: “There are obstacles within a certain range and distance of the runway. Must be fragile, which means that if an airplane hits them they break.
“It seems unusual that it’s such a hard object. My understanding is that the plane was traveling very fast, got very far down the runway, so it must have gone well past the end of the runway. . . .so where you draw the line with that is definitely something to investigate.
“Airplanes aren’t strong structures – they’re light by design to make them efficient in flight. They’re not really designed to go on their belly at high speeds so any kind of structure can break the body. Can be causative and then destructive
“Fuel is kept in the wings so once the wing explodes, the potential for a fire is very high.
“So it’s not a given that it would have been a completely different outcome if the wall hadn’t been there.”
Mr Kingswood said he would be “surprised if the airport did not meet all the requirements as per industry standards”.
He added, “I suspect that if we went around airports at many major international airports … we would find many obstacles that could be accused of presenting a similar threat.” “
However former pilot John Cox, chief executive of Safety Operating Systems, said the runway’s design met industry best practice, which prevented any rigid structure from being at least 300m (984ft) from the end of the runway. is
After the accident, it was revealed that remarks in Moan International Airport’s operating manual, uploaded in early 2024, stated that the concrete embankment was too close to the end of the runway.
A document prepared by the Korea Airports Corporation recommends that the location of the equipment be reviewed during the planned expansion.
Kim Hong-rik, director general of South Korea’s airport policy, said the government would “review the relevant regulations and their application”.
Aviation analyst Sally Gethin questioned whether the pilot knew there was an obstacle, especially given that the plane was approaching from the opposite direction from the normal landing approach.
He told BBC News: “We need to know, were (the pilots) aware that there was this hard limit at the end?
“If they were directed by the control tower to reverse the use of the runway a second time, that should come up in the investigation of the black boxes.
“I think there are a lot of questions.”
At a news conference Tuesday, Jeju Air Chief Executive Kim Yi-bae would not be drawn when asked about the concrete wall.
Asked by a reporter if he thought the wall was a factor in the disaster, he did not give a straight answer and instead said that it was correct to call the plane crash the Jeju Air disaster rather than the Moan Air disaster.