是什么原因?qū)е马n國(guó)飛機(jī)墜毀?
What caused South Korean plane to crash?譯文簡(jiǎn)介
多家媒體對(duì)韓國(guó)飛機(jī)失事的原因進(jìn)行分析,目前有以下幾個(gè)猜測(cè),分別是鳥(niǎo)擊、天氣影響、飛行員的失誤、飛機(jī)的結(jié)構(gòu)缺陷、機(jī)場(chǎng)不合理的混凝土墻設(shè)計(jì)。多數(shù)網(wǎng)友認(rèn)為跑道盡頭不合理的混凝土墻是造成這起事故的主要原因。
正文翻譯
It was a swift and catastrophic accident - a Jeju Air flight skidded off the runway at Mokpo airport, hit a barrier and burst into flames. Reports indicate that the plane's landing gear did not work properly, leading to serious consequences. The fire extinguishing service initially said the probable cause of the accident was a bird strike and could also be related to bad weather conditions. The exact cause has yet to be determined by further forensic and joint investigations.
這是一場(chǎng)迅速而災(zāi)難性的事故——濟(jì)州航空的一架航班在務(wù)安國(guó)際機(jī)場(chǎng)滑出跑道,撞上屏障后爆炸起火。報(bào)道指出,飛機(jī)的起落架未能正常工作,導(dǎo)致了嚴(yán)重后果。滅火服務(wù)部門(mén)初步表示,事故的可能原因是鳥(niǎo)擊,也可能與惡劣天氣條件有關(guān)。目前,確切原因尚待進(jìn)一步的法醫(yī)和聯(lián)合調(diào)查確定。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
這是一場(chǎng)迅速而災(zāi)難性的事故——濟(jì)州航空的一架航班在務(wù)安國(guó)際機(jī)場(chǎng)滑出跑道,撞上屏障后爆炸起火。報(bào)道指出,飛機(jī)的起落架未能正常工作,導(dǎo)致了嚴(yán)重后果。滅火服務(wù)部門(mén)初步表示,事故的可能原因是鳥(niǎo)擊,也可能與惡劣天氣條件有關(guān)。目前,確切原因尚待進(jìn)一步的法醫(yī)和聯(lián)合調(diào)查確定。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Most of the passengers were holidaymakers returning from a five-day Christmas trip to Thailand. However, the families will never hear their travel stories again and now have to wait for the victims to be identified. The youngest victim was just three years old. Rescue workers faced huge challenges in recovering the badly damaged wreckage, and the rescue effort had to shift to body collection.
機(jī)上大部分乘客是剛從泰國(guó)完成五日圣誕旅行的度假游客。然而,這些家庭再也聽(tīng)不到他們的旅行故事了,現(xiàn)在只能等待確認(rèn)遇難者身份。最年輕的受害者僅三歲。救援人員在搜尋被嚴(yán)重?fù)p毀的飛機(jī)殘骸時(shí)面臨巨大挑戰(zhàn),而救援工作也不得不轉(zhuǎn)為遺體收集行動(dòng)。
Founded in 2005 as a joint venture between Jeju Special Autonomous Province (Jeju Island) and Aekyung Group, Jeju Air is the largest budget airline in South Korea. It was the airline's first fatal accident and one of the worst aviation disasters in South Korean history. "First of all, I bow in apology to all those who care about Jeju, especially to express my sincere apologies and condolences to the families who lost their loved ones in the accident. At this time, we cannot speculate on the cause of the accident and must wait for the results of the official investigation."
濟(jì)州航空(Jeju Air)創(chuàng)辦于2005年,是濟(jì)州特別自治道(濟(jì)州島)和愛(ài)京集團(tuán)的合資企業(yè),是韓國(guó)最大的廉價(jià)航空公司。這是該航空公司首次發(fā)生致命事故,也是韓國(guó)歷史上最嚴(yán)重的航空災(zāi)難之一。航空公司負(fù)責(zé)人深表歉意:“首先,我向所有關(guān)心濟(jì)州的人鞠躬致歉,尤其是向事故中失去親人的家庭表示真誠(chéng)的歉意和哀悼。目前,我們難以推測(cè)事故原因,必須等待官方調(diào)查結(jié)果?!?/b>
濟(jì)州航空(Jeju Air)創(chuàng)辦于2005年,是濟(jì)州特別自治道(濟(jì)州島)和愛(ài)京集團(tuán)的合資企業(yè),是韓國(guó)最大的廉價(jià)航空公司。這是該航空公司首次發(fā)生致命事故,也是韓國(guó)歷史上最嚴(yán)重的航空災(zāi)難之一。航空公司負(fù)責(zé)人深表歉意:“首先,我向所有關(guān)心濟(jì)州的人鞠躬致歉,尤其是向事故中失去親人的家庭表示真誠(chéng)的歉意和哀悼。目前,我們難以推測(cè)事故原因,必須等待官方調(diào)查結(jié)果?!?/b>
Still, there were miracles in the tragedy, as two crew members who were in the tail of the plane survived and are being treated in hospital. Sadly, morgues, not emergency rooms, will soon fill up, and the missing are now presumed dead.
盡管如此,這場(chǎng)悲劇中仍有奇跡,兩名在飛機(jī)尾部的乘務(wù)員幸存并正在醫(yī)院接受治療。但令人痛心的是,停尸房而非急診室將很快人滿為患,失蹤者如今也被推定全部遇難。
盡管如此,這場(chǎng)悲劇中仍有奇跡,兩名在飛機(jī)尾部的乘務(wù)員幸存并正在醫(yī)院接受治療。但令人痛心的是,停尸房而非急診室將很快人滿為患,失蹤者如今也被推定全部遇難。
The flight took off from Bangkok without any problems but began to deteriorate when it landed at Mokpo Airport at 8:54 a.m. The airport control tower allowed the plane to land on runway 01, but issued a bird strike warning to pilots three minutes later. A minute later, the captain issued a Mayday emergency signal and attempted to turn to runway 19 (in the opposite direction of runway 01). However, upon landing at 9:03, the landing gear was not deployed properly, causing the aircraft to fail to slow down, eventually crashing into the concrete barrier at the end of the runway, breaking apart and catching fire.
航班從曼谷起飛時(shí)一切正常,但在早晨8:54降落木浦機(jī)場(chǎng)時(shí)情況開(kāi)始惡化。機(jī)場(chǎng)控制塔允許飛機(jī)降落在01號(hào)跑道,但三分鐘后向飛行員發(fā)出鳥(niǎo)擊警告。一分鐘后,機(jī)長(zhǎng)發(fā)出“Mayday”緊急信號(hào),試圖轉(zhuǎn)向19號(hào)跑道(與01號(hào)跑道方向相反)。然而,9:03降落時(shí),起落架未正確部署,導(dǎo)致飛機(jī)未能減速,最終撞上跑道盡頭的混凝土屏障,解體并起火。
航班從曼谷起飛時(shí)一切正常,但在早晨8:54降落木浦機(jī)場(chǎng)時(shí)情況開(kāi)始惡化。機(jī)場(chǎng)控制塔允許飛機(jī)降落在01號(hào)跑道,但三分鐘后向飛行員發(fā)出鳥(niǎo)擊警告。一分鐘后,機(jī)長(zhǎng)發(fā)出“Mayday”緊急信號(hào),試圖轉(zhuǎn)向19號(hào)跑道(與01號(hào)跑道方向相反)。然而,9:03降落時(shí),起落架未正確部署,導(dǎo)致飛機(jī)未能減速,最終撞上跑道盡頭的混凝土屏障,解體并起火。
While South Korean aviation officials have denied the lack of runway length was a problem, one aviation expert told the media that the disaster might not have been so deadly had the plane not hit a barrier.
盡管韓國(guó)航空官員否認(rèn)跑道長(zhǎng)度不足的問(wèn)題,但一位航空專家向媒體表示,如果飛機(jī)未撞上屏障,這場(chǎng)災(zāi)難或許不會(huì)如此致命。
盡管韓國(guó)航空官員否認(rèn)跑道長(zhǎng)度不足的問(wèn)題,但一位航空專家向媒體表示,如果飛機(jī)未撞上屏障,這場(chǎng)災(zāi)難或許不會(huì)如此致命。
According to South Korean media reports, the accident is the largest number of casualties in an aircraft accident in South Korea. At an emergency meeting presided over by Acting President Choi Sang-mok, the government decided to set up a seven-day national mourning period, set up a joint memorial hall at the accident site and 17 cities and provinces including Jeolla Province, Gwangju, Seoul, and Sejong. The national flag of all government departments, local governments, and public organizations will fly at half-mast, and public officials will wear bows to express their condolences.
據(jù)韓國(guó)媒體報(bào)道,此次事故是韓國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)發(fā)生的飛機(jī)事故中傷亡人數(shù)最多的一起。韓國(guó)代總統(tǒng)崔相穆當(dāng)晚主持召開(kāi)務(wù)安機(jī)場(chǎng)客機(jī)墜毀事故緊急會(huì)議時(shí)說(shuō),政府決定設(shè)立持續(xù)7天的國(guó)家哀悼期,并在事故現(xiàn)場(chǎng)和全羅南道、光州、首爾、世宗等17個(gè)市道設(shè)立聯(lián)合靈堂,所有政府部門(mén)和地方自治團(tuán)體、公共機(jī)關(guān)將降半旗,公職人員將佩戴表示哀悼的蝴蝶結(jié)。
據(jù)韓國(guó)媒體報(bào)道,此次事故是韓國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)發(fā)生的飛機(jī)事故中傷亡人數(shù)最多的一起。韓國(guó)代總統(tǒng)崔相穆當(dāng)晚主持召開(kāi)務(wù)安機(jī)場(chǎng)客機(jī)墜毀事故緊急會(huì)議時(shí)說(shuō),政府決定設(shè)立持續(xù)7天的國(guó)家哀悼期,并在事故現(xiàn)場(chǎng)和全羅南道、光州、首爾、世宗等17個(gè)市道設(shè)立聯(lián)合靈堂,所有政府部門(mén)和地方自治團(tuán)體、公共機(jī)關(guān)將降半旗,公職人員將佩戴表示哀悼的蝴蝶結(jié)。
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 4 )
收藏
Fr, what kind of planning leads to a thick concrete structure at the end of a runway?
到底是什么樣的規(guī)劃會(huì)在跑道盡頭建造厚實(shí)的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)?
I was thinking the same thing
我也是這么想的
Depends what’s on the other side…
這取決于另一側(cè)是什么……
I'm wondering why as well
我也想知道為什么
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@Dharcness I’m wondering how a bird strike affected the landing gear.
我想知道鳥(niǎo)擊是如何影響起落架的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@deee1979 the river was on the otherside. They could've live.
河流在另一邊。他們本可以活下來(lái)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
This airport is also used by the military
這個(gè)機(jī)場(chǎng)也被軍方使用。
@saharnoble2928 birds are like deer. see a plane or a car coming and decide to fly or walk right in front of it.
鳥(niǎo)類就像鹿一樣,看到飛機(jī)或汽車(chē)靠近時(shí)會(huì)決定飛過(guò)或直接走到前面。
@Tewthpaste The river had 2 roads and multiple office buildings in between that and the wall, that wall may have killed the people on the plane but it saved everyone on the road and in those buildings.
河流與墻之間有兩條道路和多個(gè)辦公樓,那堵墻可能導(dǎo)致飛機(jī)上的人死亡,但它拯救了道路和樓里的人。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
The runway is longer than most runways. I believe the barrier was there to protect a residential area. Under normal circumstances given the runway is both longer and wider than average, this would not have happened. But the plane had no landing gear, and no way to brake speed.
這條跑道比大多數(shù)跑道都長(zhǎng)。我認(rèn)為障礙物是為了保護(hù)居民區(qū)。在正常情況下,由于跑道既更長(zhǎng)也更寬,這種情況本不該發(fā)生。但這架飛機(jī)沒(méi)有起落架,也無(wú)法剎車(chē)減速。
At the end of the video there was something like 'the plane landed on the same runway but in the opposite direction.' I don't know if that makes sense.
視頻末尾提到“飛機(jī)降落在同一跑道上,但方向相反”。我不知道這是否合理。
@saharnoble2928 it's not the engineers at boeing that are causing this - management is cutting corners, limiting on site staff, neglecting safety procedures etc
這不是波音工程師的問(wèn)題——管理層偷工減料、限制現(xiàn)場(chǎng)人員、忽視安全程序等才是原因。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@skabbymuff111 wrong that runway is shorter than average runways in Korea
錯(cuò)了,那條跑道比韓國(guó)的平均跑道短。
@deee1979 an Australian aviation expert says video shows both engines failed after being struck by a flock of birds. The electric systems and hydraulics would be rendered inoperable and the pilots would not have had control of their aircraft. There was no time to manually lower the landing gear and no reverse thrust.
一位澳大利亞航空專家稱,視頻顯示兩臺(tái)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)在被鳥(niǎo)群撞擊后失靈。電力系統(tǒng)和液壓系統(tǒng)癱瘓,飛行員無(wú)法控制飛機(jī)。沒(méi)有時(shí)間手動(dòng)放下起落架,也沒(méi)有反推力。
I think it’s a mound of soil
我認(rèn)為那是一個(gè)土堆。
There was no "Thick concrete structure" it was a dirt berm.
那里沒(méi)有“厚實(shí)的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)”,而是一個(gè)土坡。
The pilots made the decision to land the wrong way around. It seems all of this is pilot negligence. No reason for them to do a no flaps no landing gear landing.
飛行員決定以錯(cuò)誤的方式降落。這似乎完全是飛行員的疏忽。他們沒(méi)有理由不使用襟翼和起落架進(jìn)行降落。
@saharnoble2928 right cause bird strikes are not a problem for any other airplanes, just the Boeing built. I guess the Airbus A321 that went down in Moscow in 2019 due to a bird strike in the form of a flock of gulls taking out both engines shortly after take-off just didn't happen then?
對(duì),因?yàn)轼B(niǎo)擊對(duì)其他飛機(jī)都不是問(wèn)題,只有波音制造的才是問(wèn)題。我猜2019年在莫斯科墜毀的那架因鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致兩臺(tái)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)失靈的空客A321并不存在,是吧?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
What's bizarre is the official response defending the design. Who are they trying to protect?
奇怪的是官方回應(yīng)在為設(shè)計(jì)辯護(hù)。他們想保護(hù)誰(shuí)?
S. Korea airfields are shared with the military......
airports are surrounded by walls with razor wire on top.....
plane did not hit that wall...... they hit the ILS structure.....
P.S. - minimum control speed is 115 knots for the rudder on a 737
韓國(guó)機(jī)場(chǎng)與軍方共用……
機(jī)場(chǎng)周?chē)袔甑毒€的圍墻……
飛機(jī)沒(méi)有撞到墻……而是撞到了ILS結(jié)構(gòu)……
附注:737飛機(jī)方向舵的最低控制速度是115節(jié)。
Ironically, it seems safer if the pilot didn't land on the runway but the parallel strip of dirt beside it clear of that localizer beacon. It didn't slow down and just hit the "barrier" at full speed like Ayrton Senna.
諷刺的是,如果飛行員沒(méi)有降落在跑道上,而是降落在跑道旁邊沒(méi)有定位信標(biāo)的泥地上,似乎會(huì)更安全。它沒(méi)有減速,像艾爾頓·塞納一樣以全速撞上了“屏障”。
@wakawaka608 the wall was where the planes start for take-off. That’s what is meant with “opposite direction”
墻是飛機(jī)起飛時(shí)的起點(diǎn)。這就是“方向相反”的意思。
@DaleSteel there was fire already on board in the air so they had obviously severe problems to operate the plane
空中已經(jīng)起火了,所以他們顯然在操控飛機(jī)時(shí)遇到了嚴(yán)重的問(wèn)題。
@Cookiesprinkles815 I don't believe their was fire onboard from a bird strike.
我不相信鳥(niǎo)擊會(huì)導(dǎo)致飛機(jī)起火。
It’s not in the runway. It’s at the field
不在跑道上,而是在場(chǎng)地上。
@creavanaddams9045 The plane did NOT land on a main runway. The barrier was there to prevent planes from going onto the middle of the main runway. It was either catastrophic malfunctions of multiple parts of the plane at the same time, sabotage, complete and utter incompetence of the pilots or a combination of these factors.
飛機(jī)并沒(méi)有降落在主跑道上。那道屏障是為了防止飛機(jī)進(jìn)入主跑道中間。這可能是飛機(jī)多個(gè)部件同時(shí)出現(xiàn)災(zāi)難性故障、破壞行為、飛行員完全無(wú)能或這些因素的組合導(dǎo)致的。
@DaleSteel The pilots were supposed to do a 180 degree turn, but with both engines out they could not maintain the altitude. Without engines, there was no hydraulic pressure to lower the gear and they had no time for a manual gravity deployment. With all these factors, they also had considerable excess speed.
飛行員本應(yīng)進(jìn)行180度轉(zhuǎn)彎,但由于兩臺(tái)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)失靈,他們無(wú)法維持高度。沒(méi)有發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī),就沒(méi)有液壓壓力來(lái)放下起落架,也沒(méi)有時(shí)間進(jìn)行手動(dòng)重力部署。在所有這些因素下,他們的速度也大大超標(biāo)。
Similar concrete structures exist in other airports in South Korea and abroad, said Ju Jong-wan, a director of aviation policy at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. It was built according to regulations but the government planned to investigate whether the rules should be revised in the wake of the Jeju Air crash, he said.
韓國(guó)和國(guó)外的其他機(jī)場(chǎng)也有類似的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu),國(guó)土基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和運(yùn)輸部航空政策負(fù)責(zé)人朱鐘完表示。這是根據(jù)規(guī)定建造的,但政府計(jì)劃調(diào)查是否應(yīng)該因濟(jì)州航空墜機(jī)事件修改相關(guān)規(guī)定。
Why is there a huge barrier at end of runway?
為什么跑道盡頭會(huì)有一個(gè)巨大的障礙物?
That concrete wall at the end of the runway caused the explosion and killed the passengers.
跑道盡頭的那堵混凝土墻引發(fā)了爆炸并殺死了乘客。
Its built that the plane can t go to living zones (parts who people living) but that wall was deadly
它是為了防止飛機(jī)進(jìn)入居民區(qū)(人們居住的地方),但那堵墻是致命的。
exactly. the runway is actually other way round for planes to take off and land but no matter what they have to investigate why the concrete obxt was around the runway
確實(shí),跑道實(shí)際上是反方向用于飛機(jī)起飛和降落,但不管怎樣,他們必須調(diào)查為什么跑道周?chē)鷷?huì)有這種混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)。
Yes it’s tragic they died hitting the barrier, but nearly all airports in cities have barriers to protect cities, roads, buildings, from more danger.
是的,他們撞上障礙物死亡非常悲慘,但幾乎所有城市的機(jī)場(chǎng)都有障礙物,以保護(hù)城市、道路和建筑免受更多危險(xiǎn)。
@chrisshepherd7770 The runway leads to a road (leading to the airport) and then ocean. No structure exists beyond the runway in that direction.
跑道通向一條道路(通往機(jī)場(chǎng)),然后是海洋。那條方向上跑道以外沒(méi)有任何結(jié)構(gòu)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
I was about to ask the same question. If it's there to stop planes going past that point, it did its job. Catastrophic and absolutely ludicrous
我正打算問(wèn)同樣的問(wèn)題。如果它的作用是防止飛機(jī)超過(guò)那個(gè)點(diǎn),那它完成了任務(wù)。災(zāi)難性且絕對(duì)荒謬。
If they need a barrier there why not a ditch or a bil,board type carrier or netting but plwne seemed to be coming intoo fast so it proberly hit wall at 170 mph therefore thed all be killed at point of impact hence the prob,lem identifying people apart from fire.
I'm glad someone's being sensible and yellow flagging where bodies are a few years back there was a plsne rash elsewhere in world where first responders didn t mark a body and a fire engine nearly run over it.
But back yo this crash why did they have famslies and media together not very sensitive but that's just me
如果需要在那里設(shè)置障礙物,為什么不設(shè)置溝渠、廣告牌類型的載體或網(wǎng)狀物?但是飛機(jī)似乎進(jìn)得太快,所以可能以170英里的速度撞上了墻,因此所有人在撞擊點(diǎn)就會(huì)死亡,除去火災(zāi)外很難辨認(rèn)身份。
我很高興有人考慮周到,在幾年前世界其他地方發(fā)生的一起飛機(jī)事故中,急救人員沒(méi)有標(biāo)記尸體,導(dǎo)致消防車(chē)幾乎壓過(guò)它。
但回到這次事故,為什么要把家屬和媒體放在一起?這不太敏感,但這只是我的看法。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
My sympathies to all the families.
我向所有家屬表示同情。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
omg, the pilots managed to land without the gears but 179 people died because of that stupid wall.....
天哪,飛行員成功在沒(méi)有起落架的情況下降落,但179人因?yàn)槟嵌掠薮赖膲Χ?.....
No, the wall being there was not stupid. The runway length was longer than normal. The plane had no landing gear or way to reduce speed.
不,那堵墻不愚蠢。跑道比正常的長(zhǎng)。飛機(jī)沒(méi)有起落架,也沒(méi)有辦法減速。
@skabbymuff111 still, there are many no-gear landings that are successful, it was the wall....
但是,許多沒(méi)有起落架的降落都是成功的,問(wèn)題在于那堵墻……
@skabbymuff111 No the wall has no business being there, it's beyond stupid. Regardless of runway length, the clearways should allow at least half the length of runways themselves to prevent accidents like these.
不,那堵墻根本不該在那里,簡(jiǎn)直愚蠢。無(wú)論跑道多長(zhǎng),跑道的清空區(qū)至少應(yīng)該允許跑道本身的一半長(zhǎng)度,以防止發(fā)生類似的事故。
@skabbymuff111 No, it was stupid!! Airports are designed with soft ground at the end of the runways with colapsable lights/aerials etc becuase it's not uncommon for aircraft to fail to stop even if the gear is down. It's the work of a MORRON!! to build a hard structure in the run off area. The length of the runway has nothing to do with the run off areas!! The pilots gear up landing was text book!! but the diffrence between 181 minor injuries and 179 deaths was the lack of run off considering there was a large field on the other side of that wall!!
不,那是愚蠢的??!機(jī)場(chǎng)的跑道末端設(shè)計(jì)為軟土,配有可折疊的燈光/天線等,因?yàn)榧词蛊鹇浼芊畔拢w機(jī)也可能無(wú)法停下。把硬結(jié)構(gòu)建在跑道緩沖區(qū)內(nèi),簡(jiǎn)直是個(gè)傻子做的決定??!跑道的長(zhǎng)度與緩沖區(qū)無(wú)關(guān)!!飛行員的起落架著陸完全是教科書(shū)式的!但造成181人輕傷和179人死亡的區(qū)別就是沒(méi)有緩沖區(qū),考慮到那堵墻另一邊有一片大田地!!
That's why the dumb wall shouldn't have been there!
這就是為什么那堵愚蠢的墻不應(yīng)該在那里!
@rocklol2335 not the wall but the breaker..
不是墻,而是隔離器……
It would make sense to have a wall there if it was protecting other people on the ground, otherwise pointless
如果那堵墻是為了保護(hù)地面上的其他人,那么它就有意義,否則就是毫無(wú)意義。
Bird strike or weather. They were still reasonably fine and alive when the plane touched the ground until they hit the reinforced concrete wall.
是鳥(niǎo)擊還是天氣問(wèn)題。在飛機(jī)著陸時(shí),它們還相對(duì)完好并且活著,直到撞上了那堵加固的混凝土墻。
@mistervo8185 because they dont have a breaker..
因?yàn)樗麄儧](méi)有隔離器。
"Touched the ground"
They were literally still hovering in the last few hundred meters and slammed on the concrete wall
A "belly landing" would have touched down as early as possible to create as much friction as possible
“觸地”
它們實(shí)際上在最后幾百米時(shí)還在懸停,直到猛撞上混凝土墻。
“腹部著陸”會(huì)盡可能早地著陸,以創(chuàng)造盡可能多的摩擦力。
How does bird strike prevent landing gear opening?
鳥(niǎo)擊是如何阻止起落架打開(kāi)的?
this will have to be investigated. or maybe the bird strike was just a coincidence and had nothing to do with the accident.
這需要調(diào)查?;蛘咭苍S鳥(niǎo)擊只是巧合,與事故無(wú)關(guān)。
Took out a hydraulic pipe would be my guess......... they wouldn't have lowered the gear if they couldn't grantee all three wheels would lock down, on top of that they had no flaps which means the stall speed is higher meaning they had to come in hot. To be fair Props go to the pilot!! he did a text book gear up landing!! any other airport around the world that plane goes off the end of the runway in a plume of dirt and comes to a stop in another 100 or 200 yards with minor injuries.
我猜是破壞了液壓管......如果不能保證三個(gè)輪子都能鎖定,他們就不會(huì)放下起落架,另外,他們沒(méi)有襟翼,這意味著失速速度更高,所以他們必須以更快的速度進(jìn)場(chǎng)。公平地說(shuō),應(yīng)該給飛行員點(diǎn)贊!他做了一個(gè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的無(wú)起落架著陸!在世界其他任何機(jī)場(chǎng),這架飛機(jī)都會(huì)飛出跑道,揚(yáng)起一團(tuán)塵土,停在100或200碼外,只會(huì)造成輕傷。
? @K2edg don't these planes have a manual way of deployment for landing gear?
這些飛機(jī)沒(méi)有手動(dòng)起落架部署方式嗎?
@K2edg the hydraulic system is twice redundant, it would have to take out all three systems for there to be a total hydraulic failure.
液壓系統(tǒng)是雙重冗余的,必須破壞所有三個(gè)系統(tǒng)才會(huì)發(fā)生完全的液壓故障。
It doesn't at all; most, if not all, modern planes have redundancy circuits, and the landing gear can be manually deployed! This is more than a freak accident!
完全不是;大多數(shù),甚至幾乎所有現(xiàn)代飛機(jī)都有冗余電路,起落架可以手動(dòng)部署!這不僅僅是一個(gè)偶發(fā)事故!
?@K2edg landing gear can be manually released and lowered down via gravity. And I don't think all hydraulics was down since the other engine should be intact.
起落架可以手動(dòng)釋放并通過(guò)重力放下。我不認(rèn)為所有液壓系統(tǒng)都失靈了,因?yàn)榱硪粋€(gè)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)應(yīng)該還完好。
"Bird strikes" can knock an engine out which leads to losing hydraulics but they have redundancy in set.
Landing gears can also be manually deployed
The pilots probably rattled out
My guesstimate is that "Pilot Error"
It 100% looks like they aborted the landing as they never intended to do an airbrake by fully extending spoilers/wings/flaps nor did they touched down in the first few hundred meters of the runway creating as much friction as possible and as much runway left as possible
They were still hovering and on lift before the runway runs out so it looks to me they wanted to abort the landing and attempt to go around
“鳥(niǎo)擊”可能會(huì)摧毀發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī),導(dǎo)致液壓系統(tǒng)失效,但他們有冗余系統(tǒng)。
起落架也可以手動(dòng)部署。
飛行員可能已經(jīng)失誤。
我的推測(cè)是“飛行員失誤”。
看起來(lái)他們100%放棄了著陸,因?yàn)樗麄儚膩?lái)沒(méi)有打算通過(guò)完全伸展擾流板/機(jī)翼/襟翼來(lái)進(jìn)行空氣制動(dòng),也沒(méi)有在跑道的前幾百米著陸,盡可能制造更多的摩擦和盡可能多的跑道
在跑道耗盡之前,他們?nèi)匀辉诳罩斜P(pán)旋和升力,所以在我看來(lái),他們想要中止著陸并嘗試?yán)@飛
the feathers etc can cause a jam on the retraction and deployment of the wheels
羽毛等可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致起落架收回和部署時(shí)卡住。
Why the hell is there a wall at the end of the runway?
為什么跑道盡頭會(huì)有一堵墻?
Because some idiot who designed it, another one who approved it, and so on upward the chain of collective irresponsibility...
They never assumed even that the brakes of a plane might fail. The result would have been the same probably. Pilots trusted their only safe place....but paid the ultimate price for negligence. So did the passengers and crew... RIP...
因?yàn)樵O(shè)計(jì)它的那個(gè)傻瓜,批準(zhǔn)它的那個(gè)傻瓜,責(zé)任鏈向上層層堆積……
他們從未假設(shè)飛機(jī)的剎車(chē)可能會(huì)失效。結(jié)果可能是一樣的。飛行員信任著唯一的安全地點(diǎn)……但因疏忽付出了極大的代價(jià)。乘客和機(jī)組人員也付出了同樣的代價(jià)……安息。
Combinations of errors
Mechanical > Pilot > Airport
錯(cuò)誤的組合
機(jī)械 > 飛行員 > 機(jī)場(chǎng)
The wall is on on the approach side of that runway. As it was on pilot's first aborted attempt at landing. He then requested permission to land in the "opposite" direction on the doomed second attempt.
那堵墻位于跑道的進(jìn)近側(cè)。它出現(xiàn)在飛行員第一次放棄著陸時(shí)。然后,他請(qǐng)求許可以“相反”方向降落,但第二次嘗試注定失敗。
Similar concrete structures exist in other airports in South Korea and abroad, said Ju Jong-wan, a director of aviation policy at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. It was built according to regulations but the government planned to investigate whether the rules should be revised in the wake of the Jeju Air crash, he said.
類似的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)在韓國(guó)和其他國(guó)家的機(jī)場(chǎng)也存在,韓國(guó)土地、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和交通部航空政策局局長(zhǎng)朱宗萬(wàn)表示。這些結(jié)構(gòu)是按照規(guī)定建造的,但政府計(jì)劃在濟(jì)州航空墜機(jī)事件后調(diào)查是否應(yīng)修改相關(guān)規(guī)定。
Let's wait for a more serious report, a bird strike should not cause an accident like this
讓我們等待更詳細(xì)的報(bào)告,鳥(niǎo)擊不應(yīng)造成這樣的事故。
It could
是有可能的
It wouldn’t have had that stupid structure been there.
如果那堵愚蠢的結(jié)構(gòu)不在那里,事情可能就不會(huì)發(fā)生。
Flight 1549 :
During climbout, the plane struck a flock of Canada geese at an altitude of 2,818 feet (859 m) about 4.5 miles (7.2 km) north-northwest of LaGuardia...
1549航班:
在爬升過(guò)程中,飛機(jī)在離拉瓜迪亞機(jī)場(chǎng)約4.5英里(7.2公里)的地方,以2818英尺(859米)的高度撞上了一群加拿大鵝...
On the approach birds are feeding and roosting near the airport so it’s possible media footage showed the plane getting hit by a bird strike on engine 2
在進(jìn)近時(shí),鳥(niǎo)類在機(jī)場(chǎng)附近覓食和棲息,因此媒體畫(huà)面可能顯示飛機(jī)的第二號(hào)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)被鳥(niǎo)擊中。
Sudden impact hitting a solid the wall killed everyone, it had no business being there at all. Ten meters before the plane impacted the wall, all 181 people were still alive. Lawsuits.
撞上堅(jiān)硬的墻壁的突然沖擊殺死了所有人,這堵墻根本不該在那里。就在飛機(jī)撞到墻前的10米處,所有181人仍然活著。集體訴訟。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
In Asia safety isn't a top priority perhaps..
也許在亞洲,安全并不是首要任務(wù)。
@simsnqta
@Buppasiri1 South Korea is a super developed country. This isn't India or Pakistan. Yet... This happened.
@Buppasiri1 韓國(guó)是一個(gè)高度發(fā)達(dá)的國(guó)家。這不是印度或巴基斯坦。然而……這件事發(fā)生了。
It is to prevent people from trespassing and contains radars and ILS localizers
它是為了防止人們非法闖入,并且包含雷達(dá)和ILS本地izer系統(tǒng)。
2 crew who were sat at the back of the plane survived.
坐在飛機(jī)后部的2名機(jī)組人員幸存下來(lái)。
Why are they focused on a bird strike when a cement wall caused the damage?
為什么他們關(guān)注鳥(niǎo)擊,而混凝土墻才是造成損害的原因?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@kt3076 why the wall when the breaker not working..
為什么是墻,而不是隔離器失效……
@日本語(yǔ)learner
What's matter is why a bird can destroy most of a plane systems.
墻并沒(méi)有導(dǎo)致這次事故。鳥(niǎo)擊開(kāi)始了這場(chǎng)事故,墻壁結(jié)束了它。
問(wèn)題是,為什么一只鳥(niǎo)能摧毀飛機(jī)的大部分系統(tǒng)?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Was that brick wall at the end of the runway legal!
The aircraft could have slid onto grass at the end and maybe
lives would have been saved. Condolences to all concerned.
跑道盡頭的那堵磚墻合法嗎!
飛機(jī)本可以滑行到跑道盡頭的草地上,也許可以挽救生命。向所有相關(guān)人員表示哀悼。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Wall, the answer is the wall.
墻,答案就是墻。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Whoever put that wall in deserves prison time. Even Stevie Wonder could see that is a terrible idea.
無(wú)論是誰(shuí)建那堵墻,都應(yīng)該被判刑。即使是史蒂夫·汪達(dá)也能看出這是個(gè)糟糕的主意。
?@Spud607 so let the outsiders get into the runway is better idea?
那讓外部人員進(jìn)入跑道是更好的主意嗎?
@SylviaRay-y2h Ever heard of a fence? That wall isn't an exterior wall mate. It's there to prop up ILS beacons that are perfectly well able to stand alone using light material that crumples for this exact reason so a plane doesn't go up in smoke when it hits.
@SylviaRay-y2h 聽(tīng)說(shuō)過(guò)圍欄嗎?那堵墻不是外墻。它是為了支撐ILS信標(biāo)而建的,這些信標(biāo)完全可以獨(dú)立支撐,并且使用輕質(zhì)材料,以便在飛機(jī)撞擊時(shí)能破裂,避免飛機(jī)起火。
That dang wall… Even experts believe it’s a bad idea to have it there. Even if it was meant to be a barrier to limit damage, it backfired.
那堵墻……連專家都認(rèn)為把它放在那里是個(gè)糟糕的主意。即使它是為了作為一個(gè)防護(hù)屏障限制損害,但最終適得其反。
As a Korean, I've seen many videos on YouTube about this tragedy.
there are three points:
Bird strike – not for sure but something damaged engine and/or hydraulic system. So the pilot had to land immediately. There was no time to circle around to the right direction.
No landing gear and other slowing down systems.
THE WALL at the end of the runway (localizer).
1 happens quite often and no aircraft blows up by it.
2 happens less but I think pilots train for it, we've seen many long but safe landing cases without landing gear.
But 3 doesn't make sense at all. Nobody noticed it till now?
This is the shameful aspect showing lack of understanding and consideration about safety in Korea.
作為韓國(guó)人,我在YouTube上看過(guò)很多關(guān)于這場(chǎng)悲劇的視頻。
有三點(diǎn):
1. 鳥(niǎo)擊——不確定,但似乎損壞了發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)和/或液壓系統(tǒng)。所以飛行員必須立即著陸。沒(méi)有時(shí)間繞著正確方向飛行。
2. 沒(méi)有起落架和其他減速系統(tǒng)。
3. 跑道盡頭的墻(本地定位器)。
1是很常見(jiàn)的情況,飛機(jī)不會(huì)因此爆炸。
2發(fā)生得較少,但我認(rèn)為飛行員經(jīng)過(guò)訓(xùn)練,曾見(jiàn)過(guò)許多沒(méi)有起落架的安全著陸案例。
但3完全沒(méi)有道理。難道沒(méi)人注意到這一點(diǎn)嗎?
這是顯示出韓國(guó)在安全方面缺乏理解和考慮的羞恥之處。
Condolences from Poland to all my Koreans friends for this terrible accident which took the life of their citizens. Poland prays for victims of this tragedy.
來(lái)自波蘭的哀悼,獻(xiàn)給我所有的韓國(guó)朋友,這場(chǎng)可怕的事故奪去了他們公民的生命。波蘭為這場(chǎng)悲劇的受害者祈禱。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
A big concrete wall at the end of the runway .
跑道盡頭的一堵大混凝土墻。
Bird Strike took out the Landing gear? WTF?
鳥(niǎo)擊摧毀了起落架?什么鬼?
Yes, highly likely it took the hydraulic pressure down, but one can also lower them down manually by gravity. Perhaps pilots were too stressed out and ran out of time on the approach. It takes nerves of steel to stay calm while quickly controlling the fly. IMO, this was a combination of engines and hydraulics malfunction and no enough time for the pilots to react with an emergency procedure.
是的,很可能是降低了液壓壓力,但也可以通過(guò)重力手動(dòng)降下起落架。也許飛行員太緊張,在進(jìn)近時(shí)沒(méi)時(shí)間了。在快速操控飛行的同時(shí)保持冷靜需要鋼鐵般的意志。個(gè)人認(rèn)為,這是一種引擎和液壓系統(tǒng)故障的組合,并且飛行員沒(méi)有足夠的時(shí)間去執(zhí)行緊急程序。
?@manuelaraica3216 there was enough time; the pilot even made a U-turn to land on the other direction of the runway.
@manuelaraica3216 其實(shí)有足夠的時(shí)間;飛行員甚至做了一個(gè)U型轉(zhuǎn)彎,準(zhǔn)備在跑道的另一方向著陸。
@日本語(yǔ)learner
如果是波音的飛機(jī),完全可以。
?@michaelwang273 as a former air navigator, I can conclude that assuming the plane had one fully functional engine, the crew rushed into landing without executing an emergency checklist.
@michaelwang273 作為一名前航空導(dǎo)航員,我可以總結(jié)出,如果假設(shè)飛機(jī)有一臺(tái)完全正常的引擎,那么機(jī)組人員在沒(méi)有執(zhí)行緊急檢查單的情況下匆忙著陸。
Very strange accident. No gear, no flaps, no spoilers deployed, landing with tailwind, not diverting to another airfield with longer runway, no attempt to get it into the dirt to either side of the runway. I have never seen anything like this before.
非常奇怪的事故。沒(méi)有起落架,沒(méi)有襟翼,沒(méi)有展開(kāi)的減速板,逆風(fēng)著陸,沒(méi)轉(zhuǎn)到跑道較長(zhǎng)的另一個(gè)機(jī)場(chǎng),沒(méi)有嘗試將飛機(jī)引導(dǎo)到跑道兩側(cè)的空地上。我從未見(jiàn)過(guò)這樣的情況。
?@philosofiza it's a tragedy. I didn’t know that the mayday call was said just right before the landing, if that was the case, I don’t think diversion would have been possible...
如果他們能有更多時(shí)間轉(zhuǎn)移到濟(jì)州機(jī)場(chǎng)……或者他們可以選擇迫降在海上……
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Did the aircraft touch down quite late? There seemed to be very little distance between the touch-down point and the wall that it collided with.
飛機(jī)著陸是不是很晚?著陸點(diǎn)和撞到的墻之間似乎距離很小。
It came in hot because it had lost hydraulics (no flaps or landing gear) no flaps mean the normal landing speed is too slow to keep the aircraft from stalling.......... The pilot did an outstanding job of getting it down without the aircraft breaking up, problem comes when there is not enough runoff to scrub the speed off and the fact the aircraft had little friction with the ground meant it was never stopping in the length of the runway. 99% of runways around the world have runoff areas for exactly this!! They deliberately use lights and antennas etc that disintegrate on impact. There was only deaths because of a poor design of the runoff area (that simple).
它以較高的速度進(jìn)場(chǎng),因?yàn)槭チ艘簤合到y(tǒng)(沒(méi)有襟翼或起落架),沒(méi)有襟翼意味著正常的著陸速度太慢,飛機(jī)容易失速..........飛行員做得非常出色,成功讓飛機(jī)著陸且沒(méi)有解體,問(wèn)題出在跑道沒(méi)有足夠的減速帶,而且飛機(jī)與地面的摩擦力非常小,導(dǎo)致飛機(jī)無(wú)法在跑道長(zhǎng)度內(nèi)停下來(lái)。全球99%的跑道都有減速帶正是為了應(yīng)對(duì)這種情況!它們故意使用能在撞擊時(shí)解體的燈光和天線等設(shè)備。死亡的唯一原因是減速帶設(shè)計(jì)差(就是這么簡(jiǎn)單)。
It landed with 200mph with no braking mechanism, but just friction.
它以200英里每小時(shí)的速度著陸,沒(méi)有剎車(chē)系統(tǒng),只有摩擦力。
?@K2edg losing all hydraulics from a single bird strike sounds ridiculous. I assume the other engine was intact.
@K2edg 由于一次鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致失去所有液壓系統(tǒng)聽(tīng)起來(lái)很荒謬。我假設(shè)另一臺(tái)引擎是完好的。
I bet there are other airports that have concrete structures at the overrun area at the end of the runway. Somehow a safety review of the construction of the wall wasn't done. Multiple factors came into play that led to amplifying the emergency into a huge tragedy.
我敢打賭,其他機(jī)場(chǎng)的跑道盡頭也有混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)。似乎沒(méi)有對(duì)墻體的建設(shè)進(jìn)行安全審查。多種因素的結(jié)合導(dǎo)致了緊急情況的升級(jí),最終變成了巨大的悲劇。
It was actually start point not the end of the runway. But even still, it is crazy whoever constructed next to the runway. Such a tragedy.
其實(shí)是跑道的起始點(diǎn),而不是終點(diǎn)。但即便如此,誰(shuí)會(huì)在跑道旁邊建造這樣的結(jié)構(gòu)真是太瘋狂了。真是場(chǎng)悲劇。
Concrete structures are sometimes placed to protect residential buildings, but they are usually placed a much longer distance away. In Muan airport's case, there were open fields on both ends of the runway, with not a single building at risk. Building the wall was criminal.
混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)有時(shí)是為了保護(hù)住宅樓,但通常會(huì)放置在距離更遠(yuǎn)的地方。在務(wù)安機(jī)場(chǎng)的情況下,跑道兩端是開(kāi)闊的田野,根本沒(méi)有建筑物面臨風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。建這堵墻是犯罪。
@Bluey_00 It is dangerous either way. Planes can hit the ground before the runway, it has happened too. Example is British Airways Flight 38, where everyone survived because there was nothing to hit before the runway besides the ILS antennae.
無(wú)論哪種情況都很危險(xiǎn)。飛機(jī)也可以在跑道之前撞擊地面,這種情況也發(fā)生過(guò)。例如,英國(guó)航空38號(hào)航班,所有人都幸存了下來(lái),因?yàn)榕艿狼皼](méi)有其他障礙物,只有ILS天線。
@Bluey_00 There is no start-end position in any runway. If that's the start point of landing, then it's the endpoint of takeoff. And that's not considering emergencies. Runway overruns can happen during takeoffs as well and may have led to a similar accident anyway. The structure has no business being there.
@Bluey_00 任何跑道都沒(méi)有明確的起點(diǎn)和終點(diǎn)。如果這是著陸的起始點(diǎn),那它也是起飛的終點(diǎn)。而且不考慮緊急情況,跑道超跑也可能發(fā)生在起飛過(guò)程中,這可能本來(lái)就會(huì)導(dǎo)致類似的事故。這樣的結(jié)構(gòu)根本不該存在。
Bird strikes do NOT cause landing gear to not go down.
鳥(niǎo)擊不會(huì)導(dǎo)致起落架無(wú)法放下。
Why did they build a concrete wall at the end of the airport????
為什么在機(jī)場(chǎng)盡頭建了一堵混凝土墻?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Using Google Maps and the video footage, the plane is going 90-135 mph when leaving the runway, which is nearly 3 km long. The question is not only why there was something to crash into but why the pilots could or did not use the whole length of the 3 km long runway. The pilots were going way too fast or landed way too long into the runway. This lines up with what is being reported about them losing hydraulic power and the fact there is no landing gear. If they were unable to deploy the flaps, they would have had to approach much faster than normal, leading to the overshoot.
通過(guò)使用谷歌地圖和視頻資料,飛機(jī)在離開(kāi)跑道時(shí)的速度為90-135英里每小時(shí),而跑道幾乎長(zhǎng)達(dá)3公里。問(wèn)題不僅僅是為什么會(huì)有障礙物撞擊,還包括為什么飛行員沒(méi)有利用完整的3公里跑道。飛行員著陸時(shí)速度過(guò)快,或者著陸時(shí)距離跑道太遠(yuǎn)。這個(gè)情況與報(bào)道中提到的液壓系統(tǒng)故障和缺乏起落架的事實(shí)相符。如果無(wú)法展開(kāi)襟翼,他們必須以比正常情況快得多的速度進(jìn)場(chǎng),導(dǎo)致了超跑。
This, if they can't get it down with 9000ft of runway, an extra 200 ft isn't going to do much.
That's being said, it still baffles me why there is a wall there.
如果他們無(wú)法在9000英尺的跑道上安全著陸,那么多加200英尺也沒(méi)有多大用處。
話雖如此,我還是搞不懂為什么跑道盡頭有那堵墻。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
my condolences to all.
我向所有人致以哀悼。
It's disgusting everyone is making multiple videos of this sad accident to get clicked. While many questions need to be answered, the result won't be clear in months.
令人惡心的是,大家都在制作關(guān)于這場(chǎng)悲慘事故的視頻來(lái)博取點(diǎn)擊。雖然很多問(wèn)題需要回答,但結(jié)果可能要幾個(gè)月后才能明確。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
A barrier? It was a wall!
屏障?那是一堵墻!
Bird strike crippled the engine, not the landing gear.
鳥(niǎo)擊摧毀了發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī),而不是起落架。
The plane was full of fuel, for some reason the pilots didn't try to use up the fuel or dump it before landing... they were way too fast, with or without landing gear.
飛機(jī)滿載燃油,不知道為什么飛行員在著陸前沒(méi)有嘗試耗盡燃油或排放燃油...無(wú)論有無(wú)起落架,他們的著陸速度都太快了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Yes, let's forget about the insane placement of that wall that killed everyone.
是的,讓我們忘記那堵致命墻的瘋狂位置吧。
@thegafferlives No one forgot that, it was a factor but it's not the end all be all. Plenty of pilots have landed there with no issue, crashes have multiple reasons.
@thegafferlives 沒(méi)有人忘記這一點(diǎn),它是一個(gè)因素,但并非唯一原因。許多飛行員曾在那著陸沒(méi)有問(wèn)題,事故往往有多種原因。
@NegativeOpposite It is literally the 'be all and end all'. Everyone was alive until that wall. A structure that should NEVER have been allowed in that position.
@NegativeOpposite 它簡(jiǎn)直是“決定一切”。在撞到那堵墻之前,所有人都活著。那種結(jié)構(gòu)絕不應(yīng)該被允許放在那個(gè)位置。
Exactly. Planes are built to withstand birdstrikes and belly landings, and pilots are trained for them. 2.8 km is plenty of room, but the pilot did not dump fuel, warn the airport of gear-up landing, slow the plane, or touch down at the start of the runway. Also, he requested reverse direction landing towards the concrete wall!
沒(méi)錯(cuò)。飛機(jī)是為了抵御鳥(niǎo)擊和腹部著陸而設(shè)計(jì)的,飛行員也經(jīng)過(guò)相關(guān)訓(xùn)練。2.8公里的跑道足夠長(zhǎng),但飛行員沒(méi)有排放燃油,沒(méi)有通知機(jī)場(chǎng)準(zhǔn)備起落架著陸,也沒(méi)有減速或在跑道的起始點(diǎn)著陸。而且,他還請(qǐng)求反向著陸,朝著那堵混凝土墻飛去!
My condolences to all the families......
向所有家庭表示哀悼......
People are saying it's the wall but I think they've made it clear he landed in the opposite direction though. Condolences to all the families.
有人說(shuō)是墻的問(wèn)題,但我覺(jué)得他們已經(jīng)明確表示飛行員是在相反的方向著陸的。向所有家庭表示哀悼。
First aborted landing attempt was in the normal direction where the wall is on the approach side. Second attempt, pilot requested permission to land in reverse direction.
第一次中止的著陸嘗試是在正常方向,墻體位于進(jìn)場(chǎng)側(cè)。第二次嘗試時(shí),飛行員請(qǐng)求許可反向著陸。
The location of Muan Airport is a migratory bird zone, so there are many birds flying around.
And the outer wall at the end of the runway should have been originally installed with barbed wire.
Also, at that time, local residents strongly opposed it, saying that the ecosystem would be destroyed...
The problem is that accidents occurred because the airport construction was forced through while ignoring the spelling.
Muan Airport should be demolished. Otherwise, another major disaster will occur.
I don't understand why they installed the outer wall.
務(wù)安國(guó)際機(jī)場(chǎng)位于遷徙鳥(niǎo)類的區(qū)域,所以周?chē)泻芏帏B(niǎo)飛翔。跑道盡頭的外墻本應(yīng)最初安裝鐵絲網(wǎng)。當(dāng)?shù)鼐用裨鴱?qiáng)烈反對(duì),表示生態(tài)系統(tǒng)會(huì)被破壞......問(wèn)題在于,機(jī)場(chǎng)建設(shè)在忽視警告的情況下被強(qiáng)行推進(jìn),導(dǎo)致了事故的發(fā)生。務(wù)安國(guó)際機(jī)場(chǎng)應(yīng)該被拆除。否則,還會(huì)發(fā)生更大的災(zāi)難。我不明白為什么他們要在這里安裝外墻。
I'm no aviation expert but here's what I think happened. On approach a bird is sucked into the right engine. Shrapnel from the damaged engine damages the hydraulics and jams the right landing gear. The pilots try to lower the landing gear and realize the right gear is jammed. They decide that it is safer to land wheels up than with two functioning landing gear. So they raise the gear and come around and attempt a belly landing. Unfortunately, they didn't know that a moron decided to build a raised reinforced concrete wall to hold up some antenna a couple of hundred meters from the runway.
我不是航空專家,但我認(rèn)為發(fā)生了以下情況。飛機(jī)在進(jìn)場(chǎng)時(shí),一只鳥(niǎo)被吸入右側(cè)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)。損壞的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)碎片損壞了液壓系統(tǒng),并卡住了右側(cè)起落架。飛行員試圖放下起落架時(shí),發(fā)現(xiàn)右側(cè)的起落架卡住了。他們決定比起用兩個(gè)起落架著陸,輪起著陸更安全。所以他們收起了起落架,轉(zhuǎn)向并嘗試腹部著陸。不幸的是,他們并不知道,有人決定在離跑道幾百米的地方建造一堵加強(qiáng)混凝土墻來(lái)支撐天線。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
There must have been damage to all hydraulics somehow because flaps weren't extended either. That's why they had to land at higher speed.
一定是所有液壓系統(tǒng)都受到了損壞,因?yàn)榻笠硪矝](méi)有展開(kāi)。這就是為什么他們必須以較高的速度著陸。
The plane ran into an earthen berm with navigation aids, not the concrete security wall.
飛機(jī)撞上了帶有導(dǎo)航設(shè)施的土堤,而不是混凝土安全墻。
To be fair, it looked textbook gear-up landing!! 99% of airports around the world, that aircraft slides to a stop and all the passengers walk off with minor injuries and a crazy story to tell...
公平地說(shuō),這看起來(lái)像是教科書(shū)上的“起落架收起著陸”!全球99%的機(jī)場(chǎng),飛機(jī)滑行停止后,所有乘客都會(huì)毫發(fā)無(wú)損地走出來(lái),帶著一個(gè)瘋狂的故事講給別人聽(tīng)...
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@K2edg If they hadn't landed halfway down a 9000' runway, that's probably what would have happened.
@K2edg 如果他們沒(méi)有在9000英尺長(zhǎng)的跑道中途著陸,可能就會(huì)發(fā)生這樣的情況。
Bird strike caused the landing gear to fail?
鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致了起落架故障?
Pilots forgot to put the gear down then were surprised when they landed so tried to take off again, hence the speed of the craft.
飛行員忘記放下起落架,然后在著陸時(shí)驚訝地發(fā)現(xiàn),所以他們?cè)噲D重新起飛,這就是飛機(jī)速度過(guò)快的原因。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@pauleric8799 No dude, two pilots forgetting to do the one critical check? It's a mystery, something else was happening at the same time, maybe the windshield was shattered or something equally distracting.
@pauleric8799 不,伙計(jì),兩名飛行員怎么可能忘記做這個(gè)關(guān)鍵的檢查?這是個(gè)謎,可能是發(fā)生了其他事情,比如擋風(fēng)玻璃破裂或其他同樣令人分心的事情。
@pauleric8799 I think they were either trying to do a go-around and failed or the second engine failed.
@pauleric8799 我認(rèn)為他們可能試圖做一個(gè)復(fù)飛并失敗,或者第二臺(tái)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)發(fā)生了故障。
@pauleric8799 Nope, mayday was declared, it's not just the gear, there were no flaps or spoilers deployed either, and they landed the wrong way down the runway with the wind behind them. This is way more complex than one mistake.
@pauleric8799 不,已經(jīng)發(fā)出了Mayday請(qǐng)求,不僅僅是起落架的問(wèn)題,襟翼和擾流板也沒(méi)有展開(kāi),他們還錯(cuò)誤地順風(fēng)著陸。這遠(yuǎn)比一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤復(fù)雜得多。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@philosofiza I doubt the light wind that was reported at the time of the accident was a factor. They landed way late on the runway. Multiple serious failures happened.
@philosofiza 我懷疑事故發(fā)生時(shí)報(bào)告的輕微風(fēng)速并不是一個(gè)因素。他們?cè)谂艿郎现懱砹耍l(fā)生了多次嚴(yán)重的故障。
Hydraulics need engines to work. It seems the hydraulics failed, as there were no flaps or spoilers. The airplane appears to have missed the landing area, likely because the approach was too fast without flaps.
液壓系統(tǒng)需要發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)才能工作??磥?lái)液壓系統(tǒng)出現(xiàn)了故障,因?yàn)闆](méi)有展開(kāi)襟翼或擾流板。飛機(jī)似乎錯(cuò)過(guò)了著陸區(qū)域,很可能是因?yàn)闆](méi)有襟翼導(dǎo)致進(jìn)場(chǎng)過(guò)快。
My condolences to all of the families
向所有家庭致以哀悼
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
omLord. Have mercy on all families/loved ones.
天哪。愿上帝保佑所有家庭/親人
Bird strikes do not cause landing gear malfunctions! Maybe engine and nose damage at most, but not landing gear.
鳥(niǎo)擊不會(huì)導(dǎo)致起落架故障!最多只是發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)和機(jī)頭損壞,但不會(huì)是起落架。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Boeing (think Airbus and Embraer as well) planes hydraulic systems have triple redundancies, meaning there are three independent hydraulic systems built into the plane to ensure the system's safety. A bird strike taking out all three seems unlikely and would not explain why the landing gear weren't deployed. Even if there was a catastrophic total failure of the hydraulics, there is a mechanical emergency release that releases the physical locks that keep the landing gear up during flight. If the emergency release is triggered, the locks release and gravity causes the gear to swing down and into place. Blaming the bird strike just doesn't make sense.
波音(包括空客和巴西航空工業(yè)公司)的飛機(jī)液壓系統(tǒng)有三重冗余,這意味著飛機(jī)內(nèi)有三個(gè)獨(dú)立的液壓系統(tǒng)來(lái)確保系統(tǒng)的安全。鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致所有液壓系統(tǒng)失效似乎不太可能,也無(wú)法解釋為什么起落架沒(méi)有展開(kāi)。即使液壓系統(tǒng)出現(xiàn)了災(zāi)難性的完全故障,飛機(jī)也有一個(gè)機(jī)械式的緊急釋放裝置,它會(huì)釋放保持起落架收起的物理鎖。如果緊急釋放裝置被觸發(fā),鎖會(huì)釋放,重力會(huì)導(dǎo)致起落架下降到位。將責(zé)任歸咎于鳥(niǎo)擊毫無(wú)道理。
Some experts said hydraulic system can be damaged, but they still can use the electrical system to control the landing gear. Maybe the pilots forgot due to panic.
有些專家表示液壓系統(tǒng)可以受損,但仍然可以通過(guò)電控系統(tǒng)來(lái)控制起落架。也許飛行員由于驚慌而忘記了操作。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
@aungaisum8654 I doubt it. Pilots rarely panic due to needing to remain professional, even up to the point they know it’s the end. They just do the job they can until they can’t continue and try to save as many as they can. I find it amazing they executed a perfect landing in such a situation, but that wouldn’t have been possible in a panicking state.
@aungaisum8654 我對(duì)此表示懷疑。飛行員很少會(huì)驚慌失措,因?yàn)樗麄冃枰3謱I(yè),即使知道事情已經(jīng)到達(dá)盡頭,他們也會(huì)繼續(xù)執(zhí)行自己的職責(zé),直到無(wú)法繼續(xù),并盡力救人。我覺(jué)得他們能在這種情況下成功著陸真的很了不起,但如果他們處于驚慌狀態(tài),這是不可能做到的。
It was already so far down the runway though.
不過(guò)它已經(jīng)滑行得很遠(yuǎn)了。
Its the damn concrete wall in the runway...
就是那堵該死的混凝土墻...
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Boeing should just blame it on the Russian air-defense system. Problem solved.
波音應(yīng)該將責(zé)任推給俄羅斯的防空系統(tǒng)。問(wèn)題就解決了。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Why not wait for investigation and evidence instead of blame?
After evidence was provided, Russians have already apologized and admitted they shot at and jammed electronic signals on Azerbaijan Airlines Flight J2-8243 after Russian air defences engaged Ukrainian attack drones in that airspace.
4,400 Boeing 737-800 planes in current service for over 200 different airlines.
為什么不等調(diào)查結(jié)果和證據(jù)再做結(jié)論呢?提供了證據(jù)之后,俄羅斯已經(jīng)道歉并承認(rèn),他們?cè)诙砹_斯防空系統(tǒng)與烏克蘭攻擊性無(wú)人機(jī)交戰(zhàn)時(shí),對(duì)阿塞拜疆航空J(rèn)2-8243航班進(jìn)行了射擊并干擾了電子信號(hào)?,F(xiàn)有4000多架波音737-800正在為200多家不同的航空公司服務(wù)。
Maybe it would make more sense to put a giant pit of sand at the end of runways instead of a giant concrete wall. Or just anything except a concrete wall. How awful. Is that normal? To have a concrete barrier like that at the end of a runway?
也許在跑道盡頭設(shè)置一個(gè)巨大的沙坑會(huì)更有意義,而不是一個(gè)巨大的混凝土墻?;蛘哒f(shuō),至少不應(yīng)該是混凝土墻。真是太可怕了。跑道盡頭有混凝土屏障是正常的嗎?
Plane is not set up for a landing, seems odd to say a bird strike since it only hit one engine.
飛機(jī)沒(méi)有為著陸做好準(zhǔn)備,光是擊中一個(gè)發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)就說(shuō)是鳥(niǎo)擊,似乎不太對(duì)。
It took out the hydraulics so no flaps and no landing gear........ To be fair it looked like a textbook gear-up landing!! The pilot did a very nice job, it's just a shame some genius decided to build a solid structure in the middle of the run-off zone. That was the difference between 181 people walking off the aircraft with minor injuries and 2.
鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致液壓系統(tǒng)失效,因此沒(méi)有襟翼和起落架……公平地說(shuō),這看起來(lái)像是教科書(shū)中的“起落架收起著陸”!飛行員做得非常好,只是很遺憾,有人決定在滑行區(qū)中建造一個(gè)堅(jiān)固的結(jié)構(gòu)。這就是181人能夠帶著輕微傷情走下飛機(jī)和2人死亡之間的差距。
@K2edg Oh fair. I didn’t know if they confirmed hydraulic failure yet. Are those structures not common at a lot of airports? Is it not to stop a plane going on to a highway or some other infrastructure?
@K2edg 明白了。我不知道液壓故障是否已經(jīng)確認(rèn)。那些結(jié)構(gòu)在很多機(jī)場(chǎng)不常見(jiàn)嗎?它們不應(yīng)該是為了防止飛機(jī)沖到高速公路或其他基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施上嗎?
Floodwater contamination can lead to engine failure, loss of power, and fuel system damage, increasing the risk of a crash. That's why strict inspections are required to ensure fuel is clean and free from contaminants after flooding.
洪水污染可能導(dǎo)致發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)故障、失去動(dòng)力和燃油系統(tǒng)損壞,從而增加了事故的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。這就是為什么在洪水過(guò)后,必須進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格的檢查,以確保燃油是干凈的,沒(méi)有污染物。
So sad. My heart is with those affected by this.
真令人傷心。我的心與受此影響的所有人同在。
How awful. What a bad barrier or system.
太可怕了。什么糟糕的屏障或系統(tǒng)。
I think the bird strike disabled the hydraulic system of the landing gear, causing the landing gear to be jammed, and I think the cabin crew didn’t react properly to this incident.
我認(rèn)為鳥(niǎo)擊導(dǎo)致起落架液壓系統(tǒng)失效,導(dǎo)致起落架卡住,而且我認(rèn)為機(jī)組人員沒(méi)有及時(shí)正確反應(yīng)。
Putin didn’t do it.
普京沒(méi)做這件事。
No that was the other plane half the globe away.
不,那是另外一架飛機(jī),遠(yuǎn)在地球的另一端。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Bird strikes are common at low altitude and birds were feeding and roosting near the airport, but could a bird strike really cause this? Surely it was something else. Let’s see if there is more evidence to this.
鳥(niǎo)擊在低空飛行時(shí)很常見(jiàn),鳥(niǎo)類在機(jī)場(chǎng)附近覓食和棲息,但鳥(niǎo)擊真的能導(dǎo)致這樣的事故嗎?肯定還有其他原因。讓我們看看是否有更多證據(jù)。
1,400 Airlines reported birdstrikes in the UK in 2022 alone. Planes are built to withstand birdstrikes.
僅2022年,英國(guó)就有1400家航空公司報(bào)告了鳥(niǎo)擊事件。飛機(jī)設(shè)計(jì)時(shí)已經(jīng)考慮到能抵御鳥(niǎo)擊。
May all those who lost their lives rest in peace, and my heart goes out to all of the families and friends x
愿所有失去生命的人安息,向所有家屬和朋友致以最深的慰問(wèn) x
Don't blame the birds...!!!
別怪鳥(niǎo)...?。?!
Also, why is there a huge barrier at the end of the runway? If there was no barrier, the plane would have been easily stopped, right?
另外,為什么跑道盡頭有一堵巨大的屏障?如果沒(méi)有這個(gè)屏障,飛機(jī)應(yīng)該能輕松停下來(lái)吧?
Such a devastating accident! Condolences to relatives and friends of those who perished...
真是一次毀滅性的事故!向那些遇難者的親屬和朋友致以慰問(wèn)...
Was it an accident??? RIP to all those who lost their lives!
這真的是一場(chǎng)事故嗎??愿所有失去生命的人安息!
Korean media are not reporting on that concrete wall at all. Why might that be?
韓國(guó)媒體完全沒(méi)有報(bào)道那堵混凝土墻。這為什么會(huì)這樣?
Similar concrete structures exist in other airports in South Korea and abroad, said Ju Jong-wan, a director of aviation policy at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. It was built according to regulations, but the government planned to investigate whether the rules should be revised in the wake of the Jeju Air crash, he said.
韓國(guó)陸地、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和交通部航空政策局局長(zhǎng)朱鐘萬(wàn)表示,類似的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)在其他韓國(guó)和國(guó)外的機(jī)場(chǎng)也存在。它是根據(jù)規(guī)定建造的,但政府計(jì)劃在濟(jì)州航空的墜機(jī)事件后,調(diào)查是否應(yīng)該修改這些規(guī)定。
The only scenario that makes sense to me is that the pilots shut down the wrong engine then hurried to get the aircraft on the ground ASAP.
對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō),唯一有道理的情境是飛行員關(guān)閉了錯(cuò)誤的發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī),然后急于將飛機(jī)盡快降落。
Apparently the airline had previous issues with the quality of airplane maintenance. So sad.
顯然,這家航空公司之前曾遇到過(guò)飛機(jī)維修質(zhì)量問(wèn)題。真是太悲傷了。
Most likely a series of "Olympic level human errors".
很可能是一系列“奧林匹克級(jí)的人為錯(cuò)誤”。
The wall was solely not at fault. The rear end of the plane was already burning on air even more as it landed. The rear end was already grazing the ground, which triggered more burning. It probably reached the fuel tanks as it exploded just before it hit the wall.
墻并非唯一的罪魁禍?zhǔn)住ow機(jī)的尾部在空中已經(jīng)開(kāi)始燃燒,著陸時(shí)尾部幾乎接觸地面,這引發(fā)了更多的燃燒,可能在撞上墻之前,已經(jīng)到達(dá)了燃油箱并引爆了。
Prayers for those that lost their lives and their surviving families.
為那些失去生命的人和他們幸存的家人祈禱。
A concrete wall at the end of a runway!!!! WTF!!!!! The alignment towers don’t need a massive concrete barrier, just a metal structure!!!! This is a warning to other airports with this death trap!!!!!
跑道盡頭竟然有一堵混凝土墻!!!! 真是瘋了!!!!! 定位塔不需要這么巨大的混凝土屏障,只需要金屬結(jié)構(gòu)就行了!!!! 這是對(duì)其他有這種致命陷阱機(jī)場(chǎng)的警告!!!!!
How does a bird strike cause a hydraulic landing gear problem???
鳥(niǎo)擊怎么會(huì)導(dǎo)致液壓起落架問(wèn)題??
Seen a few 'wheels up' landings but none have ended like this. To have any kind of solid structure at the end of a runway/landing strip is mental. A comment I read said there were communications buildings and lights there. As in all these cases, many aspects need to be scrutinized, but I doubt it was pilot error. Not the crew's fault the wheels didn't engage. Tragic for all those families. And the only blessing is it was quick.
我見(jiàn)過(guò)幾次“起落架收起著陸”,但沒(méi)有一例像這樣結(jié)束。跑道盡頭有任何堅(jiān)固的結(jié)構(gòu)簡(jiǎn)直是瘋了。我看到的一條評(píng)論說(shuō)那兒有通訊建筑和燈光。像所有這些情況一樣,很多方面都需要仔細(xì)審查,但我懷疑是飛行員錯(cuò)誤。起落架未能伸出并不是機(jī)組的錯(cuò)。對(duì)于所有這些家庭來(lái)說(shuō),真是太悲劇了,唯一的安慰是結(jié)束得快。
IMO, the ILS system does not need a concrete wall, what they should build is a runaway airplane ramp similar to runaway truck ramps.
在我看來(lái),ILS系統(tǒng)不需要混凝土墻,他們應(yīng)該建造類似于高速公路緊急停車(chē)帶的跑道逃生坡道。
Survival would've possibly been much higher had that wall not been there. Crazy, sad and tragic.
如果沒(méi)有那堵墻,生還的可能性可能會(huì)大得多。瘋狂、悲傷和悲劇。
South Korea seems to have a lot of problems now. RIP to those people.
韓國(guó)現(xiàn)在似乎有很多問(wèn)題。愿那些人安息。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
That mound was nearly 2 miles after the beginning of the runway. Why was the jet traveling at what looks like in excess of 120 knots?
那堆土是在跑道開(kāi)始后近2英里處。為什么噴氣式飛機(jī)看起來(lái)以超過(guò)120節(jié)的速度行駛?
Engine out so no reverse thrust on one side, coupled with no landing gear brakes. Why the landing gear didn't go down is a mystery.
發(fā)動(dòng)機(jī)熄火,一側(cè)沒(méi)有反推,且沒(méi)有起落架剎車(chē)。為什么起落架沒(méi)有放下,真是個(gè)謎。
Especially since there are emergency systems in place that make it so the landing gear can be deployed without power. It's a mechanical lever that releases the locks that keep the gear up and lets them swing down into place via their own weight and gravity. The system is there specifically for the event of a catastrophic loss of hydraulics/power. So why the gear was up is indeed a big mystery.
特別是因?yàn)橐呀?jīng)有應(yīng)急系統(tǒng),可以在沒(méi)有動(dòng)力的情況下放下起落架。那是一個(gè)機(jī)械杠桿,釋放鎖定裝置,允許起落架通過(guò)自身重量和重力放下來(lái)。這個(gè)系統(tǒng)專門(mén)設(shè)計(jì)用于液壓/動(dòng)力災(zāi)難性失效的情況下。所以為什么起落架沒(méi)有放下,確實(shí)是一個(gè)大謎團(tuán)。
And there are structures with people in them beyond that wall. So the plane could have just ploughed into another two hundred people instead of heading the wall, it's a sad event. Either way, may they rest in peace.
墻那邊還有有人的建筑物。所以飛機(jī)本來(lái)可能會(huì)直接撞上另外200人,而不是撞到墻上,這真是一個(gè)悲劇。不管怎樣,愿他們安息。
Why did the pilot request permission to land in reverse direction towards the concrete wall?
Similar concrete structures exist in other airports in South Korea and abroad, said Ju Jong-wan, a director of aviation policy at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. It was built according to regulations but the government planned to investigate whether the rules should be revised in the wake of the Jeju Air crash, he said.
為什么飛行員要求反方向著陸,朝著混凝土墻著陸?
類似的混凝土結(jié)構(gòu)在韓國(guó)和其他國(guó)家的機(jī)場(chǎng)也存在,陸地、基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施和交通部航空政策局局長(zhǎng)朱鐘萬(wàn)表示,它是根據(jù)規(guī)定建造的,但政府計(jì)劃在濟(jì)州航空墜機(jī)事件后,調(diào)查是否應(yīng)該修改這些規(guī)定。
The airport is surrounded by water... why not do an emergency landing in the water...
機(jī)場(chǎng)被水環(huán)繞...為什么不在水中緊急著陸...
How about building runways that compensate for landing without gear?
為什么不建造能夠應(yīng)對(duì)沒(méi)有起落架著陸的跑道?
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
It was the wall that killed them all. The pilot was trying to do a maneuver like Sully from the miracle of the Hudson Bay but sadly there was a wall. Rest In Peace to all who died in this tragedy and may your families heal.
是那堵墻害了他們。飛行員試圖做像哈德遜灣奇跡那樣的機(jī)動(dòng)操作,但可惜有堵墻。愿所有在這場(chǎng)悲劇中喪生的人安息,愿他們的家人得以痊愈
Usually, they would circle around to remove as much fuel as possible before landing in that situation.
通常,在這種情況下,他們會(huì)繞圈飛行,以盡可能消耗燃油后再著陸。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
They can also jettison fuel if needed.
如果需要,他們也可以拋掉燃油。
The pilot was great, but the Muan airport was awful.
飛行員很棒,但務(wù)安國(guó)際機(jī)場(chǎng)機(jī)場(chǎng)太糟糕了。
Maybe passengers are already celebrating because they landed successfully, not knowing what's waiting for them at the end of a runway. Look how short our lives are.. just in 3 seconds, they are running on that runway.
也許乘客們已經(jīng)在慶祝,因?yàn)樗麄兂晒χ?,卻不知道跑道盡頭等待著他們什么??纯次覀兊纳卸喽虝?..就在3秒鐘內(nèi),他們就已經(jīng)奔跑在那條跑道上了。
S. Korea airfields are shared with the military... airports are surrounded by walls with razor wire on top... plane did not hit that wall... they hit the ILS structure...
P.S. - minimum control speed is 115 knots for the rudder on a 737
韓國(guó)的機(jī)場(chǎng)與軍方共享...機(jī)場(chǎng)周?chē)袊鷫Γ敳坑写探z網(wǎng)...飛機(jī)沒(méi)有撞到那堵墻...他們撞上了ILS結(jié)構(gòu)...
附言 - 737的最小控制速度是115節(jié)
Do Koreans have eyes and senses? Do they know the difference between a crash and a crash landing? The plane did not crash, but it crash-landed successfully, but the runway and the landing point were too short so the plane could not slow down and hit the wall and fence and exploded. If the runway was longer or there was no wall, fence, or dry ground, the plane and people would have definitely survived. The airport authorities know they did wrong and that's why they stopped the video of the plane crashing into the wall and fence, so we can clearly see that the plane was fine and didn't crash but because of the wall ahead, it hit the wall and exploded. How dirty these people are... They want to hide it, but foreign media clearly shows the impact. Jeju Air did not crash, but it landed successfully, but the landing gear was defective so it couldn't stop and hit the airport wall and fence and the plane exploded and people died... This is the airport's fault. This damn airport killed people.
難道韓國(guó)人沒(méi)有眼睛和感官嗎?他們知道什么是“墜毀”和“迫降”之間的區(qū)別嗎?飛機(jī)沒(méi)有墜毀,但成功迫降了,但跑道和著陸點(diǎn)太短,飛機(jī)無(wú)法減速,撞上了墻和圍欄,爆炸了。如果跑道更長(zhǎng),或者沒(méi)有墻、圍欄或干燥地面,飛機(jī)和乘客肯定能幸存下來(lái)。機(jī)場(chǎng)當(dāng)局知道自己做錯(cuò)了,這就是他們?yōu)槭裁赐V沽艘曨l顯示飛機(jī)撞向墻和圍欄的原因。我們可以清楚地看到飛機(jī)本來(lái)沒(méi)有問(wèn)題,并沒(méi)有墜毀,但因?yàn)榍胺接袎?,飛機(jī)撞上了墻并爆炸。這些人真骯臟...他們想掩蓋這一切,但外國(guó)媒體清楚地顯示了沖擊的畫(huà)面。濟(jì)州航空并沒(méi)有墜毀,它成功迫降了,但由于起落架存在缺陷,飛機(jī)無(wú)法停下來(lái),撞上了機(jī)場(chǎng)的墻和圍欄,飛機(jī)爆炸,導(dǎo)致人員死亡... 這是機(jī)場(chǎng)的錯(cuò)。該死的機(jī)場(chǎng)殺死了人。
This was suicide drone... there are no passenger planes without wheels.
這是一架自殺無(wú)人機(jī)...沒(méi)有沒(méi)有輪子的客機(jī)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯:龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
Russia did it again.
又是俄羅斯干的。
Why not fly around to buy time for emergency preparation and land in the ocean? If they knew there was a concrete wall there.
Couldn't they have done better in an emergency? Better calculation/decision to save lives? They knew the conditions, the speed, why???
Is this another incompetence like the Sewol ferry disaster (only 172 survived on the ferry and now 179 died on this plane)
The pilot did what he could.
Same things happened in Jamaica 2007, but the outcome was different because no concrete walls there.
為什么不繞圈飛行爭(zhēng)取時(shí)間進(jìn)行緊急準(zhǔn)備并降落在海洋中呢?如果他們知道前面有混凝土墻。
在緊急情況下他們難道不能做得更好嗎?是不是做出了更好的計(jì)算和決策以挽救生命?他們知道狀況、速度,為什么???
這是另一場(chǎng)像世越號(hào)沉船災(zāi)難那樣的無(wú)能事件嗎(世越號(hào)船上只有172人生還,現(xiàn)在這架飛機(jī)有179人死亡)
飛行員做了他能做的一切。
2007年牙買(mǎi)加發(fā)生了類似的事情,但結(jié)果不同,因?yàn)闆](méi)有混凝土墻。