Korean Air plane overshoots runway, shuts down Philippine airport

[GON]

Korean Air plane overshoots runway, shuts down Philippine airport​

The Airbus A330 flying from Incheon, South Korea, attempted to land twice before overrunning the runway on the third attempt, Korean Air Lines Co. said in a statement.

I wonder of possible low fuel concerns isa reason the captain chose to land on the third attempt.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/korean-air-plane-overshoots-runway-shuts-philippine-airport

 

[PimTac]

I have flown on this route a few times. This time of the year the weather can be nasty in a moment. But my opinion is lacking.

I heard the aircraft took out the localizer as well. This airport is essential so hopefully they get it back going soon.

 

[4WD]

I posted this version from a weather site

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...h-cannot-dump-fuel.360714/page-2#post-6271705

 

[MNgopher]

I wouldn't rely on Fox news (or any other TV network for that matter) to get this reporting correct. They usually botch many of the details in incidents like this.

Reports on aviation sites are that there were three landing attempts.

The first was a go around (passengers state the weather was not great).

The second attempt was a very hard impact with an immediate go around with the pilot reporting wind shear.

Warning lights for the braking system came on after the hard impact, resulting in an emergency being declared and the resulting landing.

 

[tyman]

Saw that two days ago....thanks bad weather.

 

[LazyDog]

It is my wife's favorite air line and route to take when visiting her relatives.

 

[PimTac]

It is my wife's favorite air line and route to take when visiting her relatives.

It is a great way to go if your final destination is down south. You can also avoid the horrible airport in Manila which is a bigger advantage.

 

[4WD]

I wouldn't rely on Fox news (or any other TV network for that matter) to get this reporting correct. They usually botch many of the details in incidents like this.

Reports on aviation sites are that there were three landing attempts.

The first was a go around (passengers state the weather was not great).

The second attempt was a very hard impact with an immediate go around with the pilot reporting wind shear.

Warning lights for the braking system came on after the hard impact, resulting in an emergency being declared and the resulting landing.

I just re read what I posted - they made references - that’s a start …

Anything ahead of a proper RCA is going to contain speculation …

 

[PimTac]

Just read that the airport has resumed operations but limited to daytime hours and for A320 aircraft and smaller. No widebodies.

 

[Just a civilian pilot]

From what I can find out, they landed on a runway 10,900 feet long ( that’s a long runway ) with an ILS approach which is the most precise type of approach and guides an aircraft laterally and vertically right to the threshold. On certain runways with ILS, the plane can Auto Land.

Two go around’s prior , to me, would be normally indicative of pilots aborting the approach while fairly far out on final approach due to bad weather showing on their radar ( on the approach or over the airport ) or being told the weather is below landing minimums ( visibility .…heavy rain ).

A major concern landing at an airport that has CB or thunderstorms ( which was the case ) close by is hydroplaning, even more so depending on quality of runway ( not grooved or poor drainage ).

An Air France A330 went off the runway in Toronto, Canada under similar circumstances.

On the A321, landing on a wet runway increases the landing distance about 600 feet whereas landing in moderate or heavy rain ( code 2 ) can increase it to 2500 feet extra.

Not sure if the runway was grooved ( helps when standing water or moderate to heavy rain ) or if they landed in touchdown zone or long unintentionally.

I am hesitant to speculate and why I didn’t post this story when I read it but that’s my guess at this point.

https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20221023-0

 

[jstert]

what a mess, but thank god no fire, no casualties. i’ve spent enough time in the third world, including the philippines, to be highly wary of emergency 911 services, very lucky that none were needed this time. seems that this kal cabin crew was not only attractive, attentive and polite as usual, but accomplished in their primary mission of ensuring passenger safety.

a common thread of asian air disasters seems to be “flight deck psychology.” https://www.cnbc.com/id/100869966. i was in japan and korea for almost 16 years during some of kal’s and jal’s most deadly in-flight losses: apparently one mistake up front was compounded by a uniquely east-asian deference to seniority, and need to “save face” and “ganbaru” (carry on no matter the cost). in this case the divert airfield from cebu would likely be manila or maybe clark, which local kal likely figured would be a logistical headache that would tee off kal headquarters, so “let’s land where we are supposed to and be done.” the cho family, who founded and own kal, has its own “history,” only some being in the public domain.

when i fly it is always wearing tie-shoes with socks, long sleeve shirt & long pants made with mostly natural fibers. in a discreetly flat fanny pack lives my passport, id & credit cards, cash. keys with a small flashlight are in a small pocket pouch. overseas i’ve seen how scantily-clad folks are shredded after running on, and rolling around, debris strewn ground after an explosive incident. i’ve dealt with folks after aircraft incidents afres whose every document and financial means are left behind.

 

[nthach]

a common thread of asian air disasters seems to be “flight deck psychology.” https://www.cnbc.com/id/100869966. i was in japan and korea for almost 16 years during some of kal’s and jal’s most deadly in-flight losses: apparently one mistake up front was compounded by a uniquely east-asian deference to seniority, and need to “save face” and “ganbaru” (carry on no matter the cost). in this case the divert airfield from cebu would likely be manila or maybe clark, which local kal likely figured would be a logistical headache that would tee off kal headquarters, so “let’s land where we are supposed to and be done.” the cho family, who founded and own kal, has its own “history,” only some being in the public domain.

Korean Air and China Airlines were known to hire former military pilots - and there’s a code of secrecy and go it alone in the military if you’re in a fighter jet. Not so much in a commercial airliner where human resource management is important.

JAL had a plane go down due to improper repairs by Boeing.

However, just like in cars with people deferring driving to computers, some airlines, mostly the Asian low-cost carriers want their flight crew to fly in full-auto and won’t hesitate to 86 someone for flying manually. KL is a top-tier airline, it’s no AirAsia/Lion Air however and there’s times the person in charge will need to take the yoke/sidestick over.