Protests erupt in South Korea as president declares martial law

[LadyTevar]

I saw the full video of the plane crash. The flaps were in the wrong position, according to experts. The nose was still pointing up as it was skidding on its belly. There was no sign the rear or front landing gear bays were even open. The plane was going far too fast, no way to slow down, and it blew up immediately upon impacting the wall at the end of the runway.

Now, they have said the plane was landing in the wrong direction, and touched down nearly 2/3 of the way down the runway, which was way past where it should have touched down. People are asking the biggest question -- WHY WAS THERE A WALL ON THE RUNWAY? And so far the answer is "it held important wiring for the runways".

There was also something about the BlackBoxes being damaged, which tells you how bad that crash/explosion really was.

Unsurprisingly, South Koreans are cancelling future flights on that particular airline, and it's spreading to other airlines.

[Broomstick]

Yeah, I watched the video, too. The wing flaps weren't deployed at all. Neither were the spoilers or (as near as I could tell) the reverse thrusters on the engines. The only way that makes sense is if the airplane - which, as a Boeing, has triple redundancy - lost ALL hydraulic control, in which case the only way to "steer" is by differential engine thrust (so you wouldn't use the reverse in that case). It is not impossible but rather unlikely that a bird strike would have that effect. Normally a bird strike takes out an engine or maybe two, it doesn't destroy the hydraulics.

Landing "wrong way" on the runway (with a tail instead of a head wind) goes a long way towards explaining why it was moving so damn fast. But sometimes you don't have a choice, the airplane is descending, you can't go back up, and you have to land but, as this shows, there are some risks to doing that. It doesn't usually result in a fiery crash but this time it was probably a contributing factor.

Nope, no sign of landing gear. Why? Important question. In the event of a hydraulic failure there are mechanical back ups but depending on where/how high they were there might not have been time to use them before touch down. That said, a belly landing, although terribly destructive to the airplane, is it not usually fatal. Unless you hit something. Which, this time, they did.

I wish to clarify that the wall was NOT at the end of the runway but past the runway. It is a typical sort of wall erected to protect wiring for various systems for lighting and landing, not so much from airplanes but mischievous humans and wildlife. The only way to for an airplane to hit one is to overshoot a runway. Unfortunately, if you overshoot a runway at a high enough speed you will usually encounter a solid object sooner or later (which is why the US military uses dry lakebeds in the desert for testing new airplanes - few to no obstacles past the runway just in case).

There are things like crushable-concrete arrester beds that can slow down an airplane that overshoots - Chicago Midway installed them after this crash - but I don't think they were installed at this particular Korean airport. If they had been the outcome might have been different.

The nose-high attitude at touchdown MIGHT have been for one of two reasons: first, you don't want the nose to touch first and dig in, stopping while the rest of the airplane keeps moving. This would be a Bag Thing to happen. It did seem a bit nose-high for that, but I wasn't in the cockpit at the time. The second reason might have been an attempt to increase drag to slow the airplane. Maybe. Again, I wasn't in the cockpit and I'm no expert with that sort of airplane.

[bilateralrope]

which, as a Boeing, has triple redundancy

Well, it should have triple redundancy. But the doors on planes should also stay attached, which is something Boeing has had some trouble with recently.

The final report is going to be very interesting.

[Zaune]

I was going to say much the same: Boeing's quality control has gone to absolute shit of late.

[muse]

I was going to say much the same: Boeing's quality control has gone to absolute shit of late.

They probably shouldn't be fixing their planes with duct tape...

[LadyTevar]

@Broomstick
You're not the first one I've heard say that there may have been a massive hydralics failure, because of all the things that were seen malfunctioning during the landing.

I somehow doubt a bird strike would hit the hydralics reservoir, so something else went fubar to lead to this wreck.

[Broomstick]

which, as a Boeing, has triple redundancy

Well, it should have triple redundancy. But the doors on planes should also stay attached, which is something Boeing has had some trouble with recently.

The triple redundancy is not something that can just be overlooked or forgotten during construction, it's an inherent part of the design. Now, maintenance may be an issue but triple failure of hydraulics is exceedingly rare in any airplane, even poorly maintained ones.

@Broomstick
You're not the first one I've heard say that there may have been a massive hydralics failure, because of all the things that were seen malfunctioning during the landing.

I somehow doubt a bird strike would hit the hydralics reservoir, so something else went fubar to lead to this wreck.

Even if ONE of the hydraulic "reservoirs"/systems had been hit and completely drained the other two would have still been functional. That's the point of triple redundancy.

There's a choke point in the tail section where a lot of stuff - including hydraulics - have to go through a narrow space. It is possible for something to hit the hydraulics there. That's what happened with the Sioux City, Iowa crash but that wasn't a bird stirke, it was a disintegrating engine that sent metal fragments through the control systems at high speed and took out all three hydraulic systems.

For a bird to do that... it would have to be one hell of a big bird. It seems unlikely.

A lot of stuff that should happen during landing didn't. That seems to indicate mechanical failure, pilot error, or perhaps both. Or perhaps so little time for the pilots to react that they favored direction control over all else, which might or might not be considered an error.

What really killed so many people was not the touch down and belly slide it was the sudden stop at the end erupting in fire. I've heard people on the media pontificating that a solid object should never, never, never be so close to the end of the runway but that's not reality. Many airports have structures near the end of runways, even if not originally designed that way, because the areas around airports tend to get built up. Now, in this case, it might have been better to locate the runway lighting hardware off to the side but hindsight is 20/20 and we don't know why those things were located there in the first place.

[muse]

737 pilot (and former Thunderbirds pilot) chimes in with his 2 cents.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqZtfClx7NE

He says one possible reason the landing gear wasn't lowered was to ensure that the plane had enough energy left to make it to the runway. With the landing gear down there might be too much drag for the plane to complete its landing approach, so given a choice between crashing in the ocean/city or crash landing in the airport, the airport is the better choice.

[Broomstick]

Yep, that's a possible trade-off a pilot might have to make.

At this point we're all into speculation and we need to wait for the results of the investigation.

[AniThyng]

Yep, that's a possible trade-off a pilot might have to make.

At this point we're all into speculation and we need to wait for the results of the investigation.

But once they we already on the path to the runway with that speed isn't there enough to drop the gear at that point

[EnterpriseSovereign]

which, as a Boeing, has triple redundancy

Well, it should have triple redundancy. But the doors on planes should also stay attached, which is something Boeing has had some trouble with recently.

The triple redundancy is not something that can just be overlooked or forgotten during construction, it's an inherent part of the design. Now, maintenance may be an issue but triple failure of hydraulics is exceedingly rare in any airplane, even poorly maintained ones.

@Broomstick
You're not the first one I've heard say that there may have been a massive hydralics failure, because of all the things that were seen malfunctioning during the landing.

I somehow doubt a bird strike would hit the hydralics reservoir, so something else went fubar to lead to this wreck.

Even if ONE of the hydraulic "reservoirs"/systems had been hit and completely drained the other two would have still been functional. That's the point of triple redundancy.

There's a choke point in the tail section where a lot of stuff - including hydraulics - have to go through a narrow space. It is possible for something to hit the hydraulics there. That's what happened with the Sioux City, Iowa crash but that wasn't a bird stirke, it was a disintegrating engine that sent metal fragments through the control systems at high speed and took out all three hydraulic systems.

For a bird to do that... it would have to be one hell of a big bird. It seems unlikely.

A lot of stuff that should happen during landing didn't. That seems to indicate mechanical failure, pilot error, or perhaps both. Or perhaps so little time for the pilots to react that they favored direction control over all else, which might or might not be considered an error.

What really killed so many people was not the touch down and belly slide it was the sudden stop at the end erupting in fire. I've heard people on the media pontificating that a solid object should never, never, never be so close to the end of the runway but that's not reality. Many airports have structures near the end of runways, even if not originally designed that way, because the areas around airports tend to get built up. Now, in this case, it might have been better to locate the runway lighting hardware off to the side but hindsight is 20/20 and we don't know why those things were located there in the first place.

Reading about that flight it's remarkable they were able to (crash)land at all, though if you were in first class or in the back half of the aircraft you were SOL.

[LadyTevar]

Back to the OT:

FAILED ARREST ATTEMPT ON YOON SUK YEOL

((TL:DR Version: Police tried to get into his house and arrest him, but the Presidential Security Forces and S.Korea refused entry. House is also surrounded by Yoon Suk Yeol's civilian supporters))

The stand-off started long before dawn. By the time we arrived in the dark, an army of police had pushed back suspended president Yoon Suk Yeol's angry supporters, who'd camped out overnight hoping to stop his arrest. Some of those I spoke to were crying, others wailing, at what they feared was about to unfold.

As dawn broke, the first officers ran up to the house, but were instantly thwarted - blocked by a wall of soldiers protecting the compound. Reinforcements came, but could not help. The doors to Yoon's house stayed tightly sealed, his security team refusing the police officers entry.

For several hours the investigators waited, the crowds outside growing more agitated - until, after a series of scuffles between the police and security officials, they decided their mission was futile, and gave up.

This is totally uncharted territory for South Korea. It is the first time a sitting president has ever faced arrest, so there is no rule book to follow - but the current situation is nonetheless astonishing.

When Yoon was impeached three weeks ago, he was supposedly stripped of his power. So to have law enforcement officers trying to carry out an arrest - which they have legal warrant for - only to be blocked by Yoon's security team raises serious and uncomfortable questions about who is in charge here.

The investigating officers said they abandoned efforts to arrest Yoon not only because it looked impossible, but because they were concerned for their safety. They said 200 soldiers and security officers linked arms, forming a human wall to block the entrance to the presidential residence, with some carrying guns.

This is arguably part of Yoon's plan, leveraging a system he himself designed. Before he declared martial law last month – a plan we now know he cooked up months earlier – he surrounded himself with close friends and loyalists, injecting them into positions of power.

One of those people is the current head of his security team, who took up the job in September.

But although alarming, this situation is not entirely surprising. Yoon has refused to cooperate with the authorities over this investigation, ignoring every request to come in for questioning.

This is how things reached this point, where investigators felt they had no choice but to bring him in by force. Yoon is being investigated for one of the most serious political crimes there is: inciting an insurrection, which is punishable by life in prison or death.

Yoon has also spurred on his supporters, who have gathered in force outside his residence every day since the arrest warrant was issued. He sent them a letter on New Years' Day thanking them for "working hard" to defend both him and the country.

Although most people in South Korea are upset and angry at Yoon's decision to impose martial law, a core of his supporters have stayed loyal. Some even camped overnight, in freezing temperatures, to try and stop police reaching his home.

Many told me this morning they were prepared to die to protect Yoon, and repeated the same unfounded conspiracy theories that Yoon himself has floated – that last year's election was rigged, and the country had been infiltrated by pro-North Korea forces. They held up signs reading "stop the steal", a slogan they chanted over and over.

Attention is also now on South Korea's acting President Choi Sang-mok, and how far his powers extend; whether he could and should sack the president's security chief and force the team to allow his arrest. The opposition party says police should be arresting anyone who stands in their way.

Although investigators have until 6 January to attempt this arrest again – this is when the warrant runs out - it is unlikely they will go in once more without changing their strategy or negotiating with the security team in advance. They will want to avoid a repeat of today's failure.

They also have to contend with the throngs of Yoon's supporters, who now feel victorious and empowered. They believe they are largely responsible for the authorities' climb down. "We've won, we did it," they have been singing all afternoon.

As their confidence grows, so will their numbers, especially with the weekend approaching.

[Ralin]

Although investigators have until 6 January to attempt this arrest again

Seriously

[bilateralrope]

Either South Korea has never had someone run out the clock on their arrest warrant before. Or, more likely, it can be reissued if it expires.

[Ralin]

Either South Korea has never had someone run out the clock on their arrest warrant before. Or, more likely, it can be reissued if it expires.

Was more noting the date

[bilateralrope]

Yes, that's a fun coincidence.

[LadyTevar]

Well... this is not good, and something I didn't think was possible. Whatever happened to the plane took out the flight recorders too.

South Korea Air Crash Recorders Missing Last 4 Minutes of Flight

[bilateralrope]

Sim Jai-dong, a former transport ministry accident investigator, told Reuters news agency that the loss of data from the crucial final minutes was surprising and suggested that all power, including back-up, could have been cut.

My first thought is that this was intentional. Someone on the plane cut the power.

[Zaune]

It might end up being an important clue in itself. There's got to be a very finite number of ways a modern airliner can lose all onboard electrical power including battery backups while still in flight.

[Solauren]

It might end up being an important clue in itself. There's got to be a very finite number of ways a modern airliner can lose all onboard electrical power including battery backups while still in flight.

The only thing I can think of is an EMP weapon. But I don't think those are a thing yet.

[Patrick Ogaard]

Or...a one-in-a-billion incident in the avionics bay lets the emergency oxygen supply for the pilots torch the electronics and the battery system in the avionics bay. Then again, speculation is one step away from speculative fiction.

[LadyTevar]

THey finally arrested him.

Yoon Suk Yeol Arrested After Investigators Scale Wall

It's caused some backlash.
Yoon Suk Yeol's Arrest Fuels Divisions