Mechanical failure doubtless reason behind Jeju Air airplane crash – knowledgeable

Fireplace and smoke rise from the tail part of a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 sequence plane after the airplane crashed and burst into flames at Muan Worldwide Airport in South Jeolla Province, some 288 kilometres southwest of Seoul on December 29, 2024. Agence France-Presse

As Korean and US authorities launched a joint probe on Tuesday into the crash of a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 at Muan Worldwide Airport in South Jeolla Province, which killed 179 passengers and crew, Robert Clifford, a Chicago-based aviation plaintiff trial knowledgeable, recommended {that a} hen strike was unlikely to have been the reason for the tragedy.

Clifford is at present the lead counsel in authorized circumstances in federal district court docket in Chicago in opposition to Boeing for members of the family of a Boeing 737 Max that crashed in 2019 in Ethiopia, killing all 149 passengers and eight crew members on board. The Boeing 737-800, which was the mannequin that crashed on the airport in Muan on Sunday, is the precursor to the US plane producer’s 737 Max.

“A hen strike is unlikely to have interfered with the deployment of the touchdown gear,” mentioned Clifford.

READ: What brought on South Korea’s most threatening airplane crash

“This airplane seems to have skilled a mechanical downside. … Analysis of the digital flight information and cockpit recorders is important to realizing precisely what occurred.”

Hydraulic system

The aviation authorized knowledgeable famous {that a} lack of energy to at least one or each engines attributable to hen strikes wouldn’t usually minimize the hydraulics, stressing that info from the digital flight information recorder and cockpit recorder can be vital to understanding what brought on the crash.

READ: Jeju Air airplane crash in South Korea: What we learn about it

“The airplane might not have had functioning hydraulic programs, so it’s vital to grasp whether or not that in truth is right,” he mentioned.

“That ought to not have occurred with a hen strike. If there was a flaw within the hydraulic system, then that may be a significant challenge for the aviation business not simply in South Korea, but in addition around the globe.”

READ: One other disaster: Airplane crash assessments South Korea’s performing president

Clifford has represented these injured or killed in quite a few main industrial airline crashes within the US during the last 4 many years, together with the American Airways crash at Chicago O’Hare Worldwide Airport in 1979, the United Airways DC-10 crash in Sioux Metropolis, Iowa, in 1989, the Comair runway crash in Lexington, Kentucky, in 2006 and the Continental Colgan crash of 2009 in Buffalo, New York.

“There can be wrongful dying claims made below relevant legal guidelines in South Korea except there’s some form of case in opposition to Boeing or another American producer that made a number of of the plane’s parts,” mentioned Clifford.

READ: Jeju Air airplane crash: 179 feared useless, solely 2 survivors

“Of their South Korean case, Boeing retains pointing to the hen strike challenge. If they are saying it typically sufficient, possibly individuals will suppose that the one factor concerned here’s a hen strike. It’s commonplace apply for his or her public relations crew to shift the main target away from Boeing.”

Horrible catastrophe

Calling for diligence, he emphasised that investigators ought to keep centered on the digital flight information recorder and cockpit voice recorder to determine what went mistaken and the way the tragedy occurred.

“The households of the victims of this horrible catastrophe ought to search native recommendation on the authorized points,” mentioned Clifford.

“It’s too quickly to inform whether or not there’s any compensation that may be sought in opposition to Boeing or different makers of element components. I urge the households to heed correct authorized recommendation early and to maintain following it.”

In keeping with the Worldwide Civil Aviation Group’s Annex 13 that lays out requirements and really useful practices in regard to plane accidents and incidents investigation, a preliminary report of an accident must be issued inside 30 days of the occasion, whereas a closing report must be issued inside a 12 months of the occasion, following completion of the investigation.

Learn Subsequent