South Korea Jeju air plane crash

[jaybee]

There is one physical runway.

There are two logistical runways.

I was going to say, a good analogy would be physical and logical processors/cores, perhaps one close to many OCUK forum goers hearts!?

 

[Terminal_Boy]

We would have to bend the laws of physics for that to be practical at civilian airports.

Perfectly doable if you have the space and money to build one.

A Boeing 737 is roughly just over double the width and take off weight of an F-14 Tomcat for example.

 

[Will Gill]

This is getting sigged, couldn't have put it better myself

Remove the nasher one pal, I can do it but I thought you might want to look at it one last time!

 

[jaybee]

Oh good, now we're talking about Heathrow.

I love these arguments, we'll be discussing the chemical composition of the sand found on Mars in a minute

Early days. I'm sure Brexit could make an appearance. It's still got legs.

 

[Blackvault]

Why is the one/two runway thing even an argument?

This is the Internet, and you have to score one-upmanship.
RIP to those who have lost their lives. Amazingly, two people survived, and I hope they pull through. I hope, as with every plane crash, lessons are learned and it makes a difference.

 

[Em3bbs]

Moving words.

 

[Penfold101]

London Gatwick Key Information | London Gatwick Airport

London Gatwick started out as an aerodrome back in the 1930s before it was officially opened in 1958. Discover more facts and statistics about Gatwick.

www.gatwickairport.com

Gatwick - the busiest single runway airport in Europe. It also has two strips of tarmac and therefor four runways…

 

[Malevolence]

If only they had the guys that built the runway in Fast and Furious 6 build theirs, this might not have ever happened.

 

[MichaelAwkward]

What is there even to debate. There’s one runway listed on the wiki page. Yes it can be used in either direction, it’s still one runway whichever way you look at it.

Heathrow doesn’t have 4 runways. We’ve spent how many decades debating whether to build a 3rd runway, not a 5th and 6th runway.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

Seems likely to be a bird strike given the circumstances described, it will be interesting to find out whether it was significant enough to cause failure of the landing gear or if something else resulted in it not being deployed.

I haven’t read the rest of thread but do we know why the pilot called a mayday?

From my understanding the plane should be capable of flying with one engine even in the event of a bird strike. I can’t see the pilots bottling it on a simple bird strike as I believe those are part of recurrent training.

 

[200sols]

What is there even to debate. There’s one runway listed on the wiki page. Yes it can be used in either direction, it’s still one runway whichever way you look at it.

Heathrow doesn’t have 4 runways. We’ve spent how many decades debating whether to build a 3rd runway, not a 5th and 6th runway.

Nobody said it had 2 physical runways.

 

[Uther]

I haven’t read the rest of thread but do we know why the pilot called a mayday?

From my understanding the plane should be capable of flying with one engine even in the event of a bird strike. I can’t see the pilots bottling it on a simple bird strike as I believe those are part of recurrent training.

There seems to be rumours of them turning off the wrong engine, and if they did that whilst everything else was going on I could see them getting overwhelmed with no time to react.
The results of the investigation will be interesting.

 

[MichaelAwkward]

Nobody said it had 2 physical runways.

What have you all been arguing about for the last 5 pages then? The usual nonsense?

 

[dlockers]

I was going to say, a good analogy would be physical and logical processors/cores, perhaps one close to many OCUK forum goers hearts!?

Is there one physical Dis and 86 logical ones?

 

[Maccy]

There are far too many posts for me to delete here, pack it in everyone.

 

[200sols]

I haven’t read the rest of thread but do we know why the pilot called a mayday?

From my understanding the plane should be capable of flying with one engine even in the event of a bird strike. I can’t see the pilots bottling it on a simple bird strike as I believe those are part of recurrent training.

Should be capable if trained correctly yes, but sometimes actual pilot responses in a real emergency situation are different to training, its a fact that most air disasters are the result of pilot error.

 

[Stu999]

Some days I hate the Internet.

 

[Diddums]

I think the answer is somewhere in the middle tbh.

 

[Penfold101]

Should be capable if trained correctly yes, but sometimes actual pilot responses in a real emergency situation are different to training, its a fact that most air disasters are the result of pilot error.

A long one as it’s the final report, but this one was horrific and completely avoidable:

 

[adam cool dude]

Should be capable if trained correctly yes, but sometimes actual pilot responses in a real emergency situation are different to training, its a fact that most air disasters are the result of pilot error.

It does look more and more likely as everything just seems really odd. The plane was landing clean with landing gear up and when it hit the wall it was doing close to 150mph so barely slowed down at all. Even with faults on board you have plenty of redundancy to lower gear etc.

Almost seems like a deer in headlights situation.

The only reason you would try to land without flaps is if you need to extend your glide without the use of engines but speed wasn't a problem here as it landed late on the runway and at some speed. A good 60 knots above stall speed from what I have read.

Without flaps, landing gear and engines you are slowing down with hopes and dreams.