By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The investigation into the Jeju Air 089590.KS crash, which killed 179, revealed bird feathers and blood in both engines. A pilot reported a bird strike four minutes prior to the crash, following an air traffic control warning about bird activity. The plane’s black boxes stopped recording four minutes before impact, hindering the investigation. This double engine bird strike is exceedingly rare, though successful emergency landings following similar incidents have occurred. The lack of data from the black boxes suggests a complete power failure may have occurred.
Read the original article here
Bird feathers and blood discovered in both engines of the crashed South Korean jet present a deeply unsettling and unusual circumstance. The sheer rarity of such an event, a double bird strike causing catastrophic engine failure, immediately throws a shadow of doubt on initial assumptions and fuels intense speculation. The immediate aftermath of the crash saw a wave of online commentary, some of it unfortunately disrespectful to the deceased pilots, assuming pilot error as the sole cause. This highlights the need for patience and a thorough investigation, rather than hasty judgment.
The absence of crucial flight data due to a complete loss of electrical power further complicates the investigation. The lack of data from the black box, which typically has backup power, adds another layer of mystery to the accident. This is extremely unusual and raises questions about the severity of the impact and the extent of the damage sustained to the aircraft’s electrical systems.
It’s impossible to ignore the striking similarity to other notable aviation accidents, such as the “Miracle on the Hudson,” where a double bird strike also played a significant role. While incredibly rare, such incidents are not unprecedented, reminding us of the unpredictable and potentially catastrophic nature of even common occurrences like bird strikes. However, the scale of damage in this case, affecting both engines simultaneously, is unusually high and deserves careful consideration.
Many are questioning the lack of landing gear deployment. While procedures exist, the intense pressure and chaos of a dual engine failure at low altitude could easily overwhelm even the most experienced pilots. A cascading series of alarms and emergency checklists could potentially overshadow the critical step of deploying the landing gear. The gravity-assisted deployment mechanism, while a backup system, may not have been feasible in the extremely short timeframe available.
The discussion around the pilots’ response also highlights the challenge of analyzing a high-stress emergency situation without complete knowledge of the circumstances. Speculation about pilot error is not necessarily unfounded, but it is crucial to avoid premature conclusions until a complete investigation clarifies the chain of events. The sheer pressure and rapid unfolding of the emergency may have led to overlooked steps, rather than incompetence or negligence.
Social media’s role in this aftermath has been a double-edged sword. While allowing for the sharing of information and perspectives, it also risks disseminating misinformation and fueling insensitive speculation. The lack of complete information provides fertile ground for conjecture, and it’s imperative to remember the human cost behind this tragedy and avoid adding further pain to grieving families.
Concerns about the South Korean aviation safety record and investigative capabilities have also surfaced in some discussions. While past incidents might raise questions, judging the present based on outdated perceptions is unfair, especially given the advancements in safety regulations and the improvements in the country’s overall aviation record in recent years. South Korea’s aviation sector is not exempt from scrutiny but should not be subjected to unwarranted bias.
The size and weight of the birds involved are also relevant. Standard engine testing often involves smaller birds; a flock of larger birds, such as Canadian geese, could cause significantly more damage than anticipated in such testing. The possibility of multiple birds impacting both engines simultaneously adds another layer of complexity to this already unusual incident. It’s also crucial to look at the conditions around the airport, such as the bird population near the runway and the proximity of obstacles like terrain variations and structures.
This accident ultimately underscores the importance of ongoing investigation and data analysis. While the initial indications strongly suggest a double bird strike as the primary cause of the engine failure, a thorough examination of the flight data, if recoverable, the aircraft’s maintenance history, and the pilots’ actions is paramount to drawing accurate conclusions. The focus should be on learning from the incident to improve safety protocols, rather than apportioning blame prematurely. This tragic event requires careful, nuanced consideration, and avoiding simplistic narratives is vital to ensuring future safety.