By Bart Meijer
(Reuters) – There is uncertainty surrounding the deadliest crash on South Korean soil, experts said on Sunday, questioning initial suggestions that a bird strike could have brought down Jeju Air Flight 7C2216.
The apparent absence of landing gear, the timing of the landing of the twin-engine Boeing (NYSE:) 737-800 at Muan International Airport and reports of a possible bird strike raised questions that could not yet be answered.
The single-aisle plane was seen in a video broadcast by local media sliding down the runway with no visible landing gear before crashing into a wall in an explosion of flames and debris.
“Why didn’t the firefighters put foam on the runway? Why weren’t they present when the plane landed? And why did the plane land so far down the runway? And why was there a brick wall at the end of the runway? clue? the clue?” said Airline News editor Geoffrey Thomas.
South Korean officials said they were investigating the cause of the crash, including a possible strike with a bird, which killed nearly all 181 people on the plane.
The flight data recorder was found at 11:30 a.m. (02:30 GMT), approximately two and a half hours after the crash, and the cockpit voice recorder was found at 2:24 p.m., according to the ministry. of Transportation of South Korea.
“This provides all the parameters for all the systems on the plane. The heartbeat of the plane is on the flight data recorder,” Thomas said. “The voice recorder will likely provide the most interesting analysis of what occurred in this tragic accident.”
Within minutes, the control tower issued a bird strike warning, the pilots declared distress and then attempted to land, officials said, although it was unclear whether the plane had struck any birds.
Experts said it seemed unlikely that the bird strike would have caused the landing gear to malfunction.
“A bird strike is not unusual, landing gear problems are not unusual. Bird strikes occur much more frequently, but they typically do not by themselves cause the loss of an airplane,” Thomas said.
Australian airline safety expert Geoffrey Dell (NYSE:) said: “I have never seen a bird strike prevent the landing gear from extending.”
Australian aviation consultant Trevor Jensen said fire and emergency services would normally be ready for an emergency landing, “so this appears to have been unplanned.”
A bird strike could have impacted CFM International’s engines if a flock had been absorbed by them, but that would not have shut them down immediately, giving the pilots some time to deal with the situation, Dell said.
It was unclear why the plane did not decelerate after hitting the runway, Dell and Jensen said.
Typically, in a belly landing, “you’re going to land on your engines and have a bumpy ride,” Thomas said.
“You arrive with minimal fuel, have firefighters present, cover the runway with foam and land on the far end of the runway and it usually ends up being an acceptable situation.”