Hearth and smoke rise from the tail part of a Jeju Air Boeing 737-800 sequence plane after the aircraft 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, prompt {that a} chicken 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 relations 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 chicken strike is unlikely to have interfered with the deployment of the touchdown gear,” stated Clifford.
READ: What precipitated South Korea’s most threatening aircraft crash
“This aircraft seems to have skilled a mechanical drawback. … Analysis of the digital flight knowledge and cockpit recorders is crucial to figuring out precisely what occurred.”
Hydraulic system
The aviation authorized knowledgeable famous {that a} lack of energy to 1 or each engines brought on by chicken strikes wouldn’t usually lower the hydraulics, stressing that info from the digital flight knowledge recorder and cockpit recorder will likely be important to understanding what precipitated the crash.
READ: Jeju Air aircraft crash in South Korea: What we find out about it
“The aircraft might not have had functioning hydraulic programs, so it’s important to grasp whether or not that in reality is right,” he stated.
“That ought to not have occurred with a chicken strike. If there was a flaw within the hydraulic system, then that might be a significant situation for the aviation trade not simply in South Korea, but additionally all over the world.”
READ: One other disaster: Aircraft crash assessments South Korea’s appearing president
Clifford has represented these injured or killed in quite a few main industrial airline crashes within the US over the past 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 will likely be wrongful demise claims made below relevant legal guidelines in South Korea until there’s some sort of case in opposition to Boeing or another American producer that made a number of of the plane’s parts,” stated Clifford.
READ: Jeju Air aircraft crash: 179 feared useless, solely 2 survivors
“Of their South Korean case, Boeing retains pointing to the chicken strike situation. If they are saying it typically sufficient, possibly individuals will suppose that the one factor concerned here’s a chicken strike. It’s normal follow for his or her public relations workforce to shift the main focus away from Boeing.”
Horrible catastrophe
Calling for diligence, he emphasised that investigators ought to keep centered on the digital flight knowledge recorder and cockpit voice recorder to determine what went fallacious and the way the tragedy occurred.
“The households of the victims of this horrible catastrophe ought to search native recommendation on the authorized points,” stated 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 line with the Worldwide Civil Aviation Group’s Annex 13 that lays out requirements and beneficial practices in regard to plane accidents and incidents investigation, a preliminary report of an accident ought to be issued inside 30 days of the occasion, whereas a closing report ought to be issued inside a yr of the occasion, following completion of the investigation.
Learn Subsequent
Disclaimer: The feedback uploaded on this web site don’t essentially characterize or mirror the views of administration and proprietor of Cebudailynews. We reserve the proper to exclude feedback that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial requirements.
