Aviation consultants have mentioned airport authorities in South Korea ought to face severe questions over the concrete wall {that a} aircraft collided with killing 179 individuals.
“Not only is there no justification [for it to be there], I think it’s verging on criminal to have it there,” he mentioned.
Picture:
The scene of the crash at Muan Airport. Pic: Reuters
Reside updates: South Korea aircraft crash
Witnesses reported seeing massive numbers of birds across the runway shortly earlier than the crash and the management tower had warned the pilot of the opportunity of a hen strike. A minute later the aircraft despatched out a mayday sign.
When the aircraft landed on its second try at 9.03am, its touchdown gear was not deployed.
Please use Chrome browser for a extra accessible video participant
0:50
Aircraft skids down runway earlier than crash
Mr Learmount believes the individuals on board had likelihood of survival as soon as the pilot had obtained the aircraft on to the bottom regardless of travelling at excessive pace.
“He [the pilot] has brought it down beautifully given the circumstances, they are going very fast but the plane is still intact as it slides along the ground,” he mentioned.
Picture:
Satellite tv for pc pictures present a wall holding touchdown system
Because it reached the top of the airfield and struck the wall, the aircraft was nearly immediately destroyed.
“That kind of structure should not be there,” he mentioned.
“That is awful. That is unbelievably awful.”
Muan Worldwide Airport opened in 2007 and has turn out to be a busy regional hub within the south of the nation. It’s managed by the state-owned Korea Airports Company.
Satellite tv for pc maps present the concrete construction has stood on the southern finish of the runway near the perimeter fence for a few years.
Picture:
An professional says the wall is ‘verging on legal’
Learn Extra:All the pieces we learn about lethal crashSouth Korea’s worst aviation catastrophe
It holds the instrument touchdown system which helps pilots land at evening or when visibility is poor.
At most airports these methods are positioned on collapsible constructions.
“To have a hard object about 200m or less into the overrun, I’ve never seen anything like this anywhere ever before,” Mr Learmount added.
If the aircraft had not struck the wall he instructed it could have hit by a fringe fence, travelled over a highway and certain stopped in an adjoining discipline.
“There was plenty of space for the aircraft to have slowed down, come to a halt,” Mr Learmount mentioned.
“And I think everybody would have been alive… the pilots might have suffered some damage going through the security fence or something like that. But I even suspect they might have survived.”
One other aviation professional Sally Gethin mentioned she shared issues in regards to the location of the wall however disagreed that everybody would have survived.
Ms Gethin mentioned it “seemed to be maintaining speed, so even if there had been more space at the end of the runway it could have possibly ended up being catastrophic”.
The nation’s deputy transport minister Joo Jong-wan mentioned the runway’s 2,800m size was not a contributing issue within the crash – and maintained that partitions on the ends have been constructed to business requirements.
