What we know about the South Korea plane crash – and what could have gone wrong
A plane carrying 181 people has crashed in South Korea, killing all but two people on board.
It’s the country’s worst domestic civil aviation disaster, and a special disaster zone has been declared.
Here’s everything we know.
Follow latest: South Korea plane crash
Pic: AP/Ahn Young-joon
What happened?
Around midnight UK time (9am Sunday local time) a Jeju Air plane carrying 181 people attempted to crash-land at Muan International Airport, about 180 miles south of Seoul.
On its second attempt, it veered off the runway and crashed into a wall, quickly becoming engulfed in smoke and fire.
It did not have its landing gear deployed and was travelling at speed before crashing, footage appears to show.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
The Jeju Air plane, which was carrying 181 people, veered off the runway and into a wall before bursting into flames.
What caused the crash?
A bird strike is one of the potential causes being considered by officials.
South Korea’s transport ministry said the plane was sent a warning about a bird strike from the control tower before the fatal crash.
The pilot sent out a distress signal shortly before the accident. They had been given permission to land in a different area than usual.
The News1 agency reported that a passenger texted a relative to say a bird was stuck in the wing of the plane.
Their final message was said to have been: “Should I say my last words?”
Read More:
Airline’s bosses face tough questions
South Korea plane crash kills 179 people, two survive
A crash survivor is rushed to a hospital in Mokpo. Pic: Cho Geun-young/Yonhap/AP
Witnesses on the ground reported hearing a “loud explosion” and seeing sparks in the plane’s engine before it crashed.
Officials are also looking at the weather conditions at the time of the crash.
As footage shows the landing gear was not deployed when the plane was attempting to crash land, a landing gear failure is also likely to be investigated.
The plane’s black box and cockpit voice recording device have been retrieved, but decrypting them could take more than a month, officials have said.
What have experts said?
Former pilot Terry Tozer told Sky News that even in the event of a bird strike and the loss of one engine, the pilots should have still been able to control the plane.
“They fly on one [engine] quite well,” he said.
“The regulations require a passenger aircraft to sustain an engine failure at the most critical point of take-off and still continue the take-off on the remaining engine.
“So to be already airborne on one engine, and I’ve done it, and we’ve all done it in the simulator, it really is not a major problem. The problem tends to occur if the crew has lots of other problems and they become overloaded.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Ex-pilot ‘puzzled’ by South Korea crash
He added: “The flight data recorder will show what systems were operating, what the crew did, what they selected.
“Normally with an engine failure, you would expect to go into the hold perhaps, go through an emergency checklist, and figure out what you can do and what your options are.
“I’m still very puzzled by the fact that this aircraft is shown on the runway at high speed and without the undercarriage. I can’t think why that would be.
“It looks to me that there was an event that created problems for the crew, that, for whatever reason, they were unable to deal with.”
Aviation expert Sally Gethin told Sky News the pilots could have been left with a “split-second decision” in the event of a bird strike.
Sally Gethin, aviation expert, speaking to Sky News
“Obviously the worst case scenario with a bird strike, which is ingrained into all airport safety procedures around the world, is being ingested into the engine,” she said.
“It’s a known, potentially catastrophic, factor in air travel.
“If indeed it was a bird strike, it possibly impacted one engine, but possibly knocked out hydraulics, which in turn would have impacted the use of the landing gear.
“The pilots would have had to make very split-second decisions on what their options would be in a case like that.
“They would have decided they didn’t have enough time to divert to another aerodrome, and so they took the decision to land at that particular one.
“Then, of course, they ran out of runway and hit a buffer wall right at the end, which caused the actual eruption.”
Why was there a wall at the end of the runway?
The plane exploded seemingly while colliding with a solid wall at the end of the runway, and experts have questioned why it was there.
Aviation expert David Learmount said all of the passengers would have survived without the concrete wall.
David Learmount, aviation expert, speaking to Sky News.
He said: “When you saw it slide off the end of the runway, nothing was on fire. The aircraft was completely under control.
“The actual touchdown itself, the aircraft was perfectly wings level. The aircraft had been handled very, very nicely.”
“The aeroplane was fine up until the point it hit the wall. If there had been no wall there, everybody would be alive now.”
What do we know about the flight?
Jeju Air flight 7C2216, a Boeing 737-800 jet, was on its way back from Bangkok, Thailand, at the time of the crash.
There were 173 South Koreans and two Thai people on board as well as six crew members, according to local media.
The plane followed a flight path northeast over Taiwan, according to tracking data from Flight Radar.
South Korea’s transport ministry said the plane was manufactured in 2009.
Jeju Air said the plane had no previous record of accidents, and that there were no early signs of the plane malfunctioning.
What is Jeju Air and what is its safety record like?
Jeju Air is South Korea’s largest low-cost airline, carrying more than 12.3 million passengers last year.
Formed in 2005, the company is named after Jeju Island – located to the south of the Korean Peninsula – which is home to the airline’s headquarters.
The company has more than 3,000 employees and more than 40 aircraft, most of them Boeing 737-800s – a model widely used around the world.
South Korea is well-regarded in safety terms, and is rated Category 1 in the US Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) International Aviation Safety Assessment Program.
Jeju Air received a safety grade of “A” – “very good” – in the latest South Korean Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s annual review of domestic airlines, according to the New York Times.
A history of the Boeing 737-800
The plane was launched in 1994 by US company Boeing to replace its older 737 models, and it competes with the Airbus A320. It was used in a commercial flight for the first time since 1997.
Nearly 5,000 have been sold worldwide since the launch of the 737-800, with Ryanair, United Airlines and American Airlines among the largest operators of the planes.
Often described as the “workhorse” of major commercial airlines due to its widespread use, the aircraft has a strong safety record.
While Boeing 737-800s have been involved in previous fatal crashes, most have been put down to poor weather conditions, human error, or other factors.
The last fatal crash involving a 737-800 was China Eastern Airlines Flight 5735 in March 2022, when a plane crashed in Wuzhou, China, after descending steeply mid-flight.
The crash is still under investigation by China’s civil aviation authority, though multiple reports have suggested the plane was deliberately crashed.
Other previous fatal crashes include in March 2016, when a Flydubai flight landing at Rostov-on-Don, Russia, crashed on the final approach in inclement weather, killing all 62 people on board.
More than 150 people were also killed in an Air India Express flight in May 2010, when a 737-800 overran the runway at Mangalore airport.
A report later found that the plane’s captain had continued an unstabilised approach, despite three calls from the first officer to initiate a “go-around”.
Drive an hour outside China’s commercial capital Shanghai, and you’ll reach Elon Musk’s Tesla gigafactory.
It manufactures almost one million Tesla cars a year and produces more than half of all its cars worldwide.
But with US president-elect Donald Trump preparing to move into the White House, the relationship between his new buddy Elon Musk and the leadership of China‘s Communist Party is in sharp focus.
Tesla’s Shanghai gigafactory. Pic: Lex Ramsay
Shanghai has been the key to Tesla’s success, largely thanks to the city’s former Communist Party secretary, now China’s premier, Li Qiang.
Chief executive of Shanghai-based Auto Mobility Limited, Bill Russo, says: “Qiang is China’s number two person. His position in Shanghai made everything possible for Tesla.”
He added: “In 2017, China adjusted its policy guidelines for the automotive industry to allow foreign companies to own their factories in China.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Musk, Trump and China explained
“Tesla signed its deal in 2018, broke ground in 2019, and started producing the Model 3 in 2020.”
The factory opened at breakneck speak and in record time.
In April, Musk met Qiang in Beijing, later posting on X: “Honoured to meet with Premier Li Qiang. We have known each other now for many years, since early Shanghai days.”
Elon Musk met Chinese premier Li Qiang in Beijing in April 2024. Pic: AP
The Musk-China ties go all the way to the top.
When China’s President Xi Jinping visited the US in November 2023 he met Musk, who posted: “May there be prosperity for all” – echoing the language often used by China’s government.
Read more:
Tommy Robinson ‘won’t be joining’ Reform UK, says Farage – after support from Musk
Musk says right-wing AfD party is Germany’s ‘last spark of hope’
Inside a Tesla showroom in Shanghai. Pic: Lex Ramsay
Musk has previously weighed into the debate over the status of Taiwan. Two years ago, he suggested tensions could be eased by giving China some control over Taiwan.
This comment incensed Taiwan’s leaders.
Chinese commentator Einar Tangen, from the Taihe Institute in Beijing, says: “If Musk had said anything else, he could face action against the Shanghai plants. He’s not going to endanger that. He’s playing both sides for his own advantage.”
What’s in it for China?
Musk needs China, and in the months to come, China may need Musk.
He could act as a well-connected middleman between the Chinese Communist Party and Trump, in the face of a potential global trade war.
“Like it or not, we are living in a world where China is the dominant player in the race to an electric future,” says Russo.
Musk pioneered the EV industry in China, but is now struggling to compete with local car brands like BYD and Nio.
Elon Musk’s support helped propel Donald Trump to a second term in the White House. Pic: AP
The relationship between Musk and Trump could become volatile, but for now, Musk stands to benefit.
“Donald Trump has never had a problem giving exceptions to friends,” Tangen says.
“It fits his personality, that he can grant pardons and give favours to the people and companies he chooses.”
Musk ‘the pioneer’
Musk is well regarded as a pioneer in China and most people speak of him highly.
Strolling along the Bund waterfront area in Shanghai, Benton Tang says: “Tesla really impacted the entire industry here.
“It pushed people to develop and improve the quality, the design and especially the price.”
Chinese vehicle manufacturers like BYD provide stiff competition for Tesla. Pic: Lex Ramsay
Interest in the Musk family has also gripped China’s online community.
His mother, Maye Musk, frequently visits the country, where she has a huge social media following as a senior-age celebrity fashion icon and endorses several Chinese products including a mattress brand.
Her book, A Woman Makes A Plan, has been translated into Chinese and is a bestseller here.
Maye Musk. Pic: Reuters
Meanwhile, as the countdown to Trump’s inauguration gains pace, the spotlight on the president-elect’s coterie of advisers intensifies.
In the middle of the glare is Elon Musk.
China waits to see what that will mean for them.
Did the authorities fail the victims of the New Orleans terror attack? It’s barely in question, surely.
And yet, consider the response of Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick of New Orleans police when I asked if she’d let them down by not having an appropriate security plan.
“That’s not correct, we would disagree with that.”
“It has to be a security failure?” I suggested.
Pic: Reuters
“We do know that people have lost their lives,” she responded. “But if you were experienced with terrorism, you would not be asking that question.”
With that, she was escorted away from gathered journalists by her media handlers.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
How much of a threat does ISIS pose?
Superintendent Kirkpatrick had been holding a short news conference at the end of Bourbon Street to herald its re-opening. It was just yards from the spot where a terrorist was able to drive through a gap in a makeshift line of obstructions and accelerate towards New Year crowds.
Invoking “experience with terrorism” is something to ponder. What experience told authorities they had adequate protection against a vehicle attack?
What experience told them it was appropriate to have a car’s width gap in makeshift street barricades?
What experience told them to contradict the security protocols of major cities around the world when it comes to large public gatherings?
Read more on this story:
What we know about the suspect
Brother of attack victim reveals last words
The victims who have been named so far
Pic: Reuters
To many, the answer shouldn’t be talk of experience – it should be, simply: “Sorry.” Notably, it has seemed to be the hardest word in a series of briefings by authorities who have bristled at the notion of security failings.
I asked Jack Bech for his view. He lost his brother Martin, or ‘Tiger’ in the Bourbon Street attack. He told Sky News he watched the final moments of his brother’s life on a FaceTime call to an emergency room as doctors tried, but failed, to save him.
It’s one heartbreaking story among dozens in this city.
Tiger Bech (left) and Jack Bech (right). Pic: Jack Bech
On security, he said: “You can’t blame them. That dude easily could have been walking through the crowd with a jacket on and a bomb strapped to his chest.”
True. But the least that might be expected is an acknowledgement of failure to stop the man who drove his weapon into the crowd because he was able to. They certainly can’t claim success.
A measure of contrition would, perhaps, help the healing in this city. Experience should tell them that, if nothing else.
Israel has confirmed it is holding the director of one of the last functioning hospitals in northern Gaza following reports of his arrest last week.
Dr Hussam Abu Safiya was held along with dozens of other staff and taken to an interrogation centre during a raid on the Kamal Adwan Hospital on 27 December.
The Israeli military said they targeted the hospital as it was being used a command centre by Hamas militants.
Now, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have confirmed the doctor is being held on suspicion of “involvement in terrorist activities” and accused him of “holding a rank” in Hamas, but have not disclosed his whereabouts.
This is believed to be one of the last photos taken of Dr Hussam Abu Safiya before he was detained, walking towards Israeli tanks
He is “currently being investigated” by Israeli security forces, the statement said.
Human rights campaigners have raised concerns for Dr Abu Safiya’s welfare, with the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor organisation saying it had received information his health had deteriorated.
It said Physicians for Human Rights – Israel, another human rights group, had submitted a request for information and a lawyer’s visit on behalf of the hospital director’s family.
Following the raid on the hospital, Sky News spoke to patients who said they were forced outside in cold weather and told to strip.
Confirmation of Dr Abu Safiya’s detention comes as Israeli strikes killed at least 30 people in Gaza, including children, overnight, according to staff at al Aqsa Martyrs, another hospital in the enclave.
The Israeli army again said in a statement that it had struck Hamas gathering points and command centres.
Earlier this week, a new report from the UN Human Rights Office said Gaza’s health system was being brought “to the brink of total collapse” by Israel’s attacks on and around hospitals in the region.
At least 10 hospitals have been attacked by Israeli forces since the start of the war, some multiple times, the report said.
The Kamal Adwan Hospital has been hit multiple times over the past three months.
The Israel-Hamas war was sparked after Hamas launched an attack on Israel on 7 October 2023.
Militants killed around 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and abducted about 250. Around 100 hostages are still inside Gaza, with at least a third believed to be dead.
Israel’s retaliation has killed more than 45,500 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children, and wounded more than 108,000 others, according to the Hamas-run Palestinian health ministry, which does not distinguish between civilians and combatants.
Israel’s military says it only targets militants. The army says it has killed 17,000 militants, without providing evidence.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports9 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway