Regulations & Safety
Jeju Air Flight 2216 Crash Caused by Pilot Error and Bird Strike
Jeju Air Flight 2216 crashed due to pilot error shutting down the wrong engine after a bird strike, prompting new safety measures in South Korea.
Jeju Air Flight 2216 Crash: Pilot Error in Engine Shutdown After Bird Strike
The crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216 on December 29, 2024, has become one of the most scrutinized aviation disasters in South Korea’s history. The flight, en route from Bangkok to Muan International Airport, ended in tragedy after a dual engine failure and a series of missteps during emergency procedures. The South Korea-led investigation has revealed that the pilots shut down the less-damaged engine following a bird strike, a decision that critically contributed to the loss of all thrust and the eventual crash.
This article examines the background of the incident, the investigation’s findings, industry reactions, and the broader implications for aviation safety. We aim to present a balanced, evidence-based overview grounded in verified data and expert analysis.
Background of the Jeju Air Crash
Jeju Air Flight 2216 was a scheduled passenger flight operated by a Boeing 737-800. On December 29, 2024, while approaching Muan International Airport, the aircraft encountered a bird strike involving migratory Baikal teal ducks. Both engines ingested birds, but only the right engine sustained critical damage. The aircraft lost thrust and failed to deploy its landing gear, ultimately skidding off the runway and catching fire upon impact with a concrete barrier.
Of the 181 people on board, 179 lost their lives. The only survivors were two flight attendants who managed to escape the wreckage. This made the crash one of the deadliest in South Korea’s aviation history. Investigators quickly focused on the sequence of events following the bird strike, particularly the pilots’ decision-making under pressure.
Initial findings highlighted long-standing concerns about Muan Airport’s vulnerability to bird strikes. Environmental assessments dating back over a decade had flagged the airport’s proximity to wetlands and migratory paths as a high-risk factor. In fact, a bird-strike prevention committee convened just ten days before the crash, acknowledging the lack of personnel and ineffective deterrent systems. Despite this, no significant changes were implemented before the incident.
Bird Strike and Engine Shutdown Sequence
Flight data and cockpit voice recordings revealed that after the bird strike, the flight crew mistakenly shut down the left engine, which remained operational, instead of the right engine, which was critically damaged. The captain issued the command to shut down engine number two (the right engine), but the fuel cutoff switch for engine number one (the left engine) was activated instead. The fire extinguisher was also discharged on the left engine, effectively eliminating all available thrust.
This error severely compromised the aircraft’s ability to maintain altitude and speed. Compounding the problem, the landing gear was never deployed. The aircraft attempted a belly landing at high speed, which led to the runway overrun and collision with a concrete barrier. The lack of thrust and gear deployment created a scenario from which recovery was virtually impossible.
The Aviation and Railway Accident Investigation Board (ARAIB) confirmed these findings in its interim report released in July 2025. The report emphasized that the left engine was fully functional prior to being shut down and that the right engine had failed due to the bird strike. The investigation also noted that the landing gear lever was never activated during the emergency procedures.
“Shutting down the wrong engine reflects breakdowns in cockpit coordination and procedural discipline during cascading emergencies.”, John Cox, former crash investigator
Expert Reactions and Industry Criticism
The interim report sparked significant backlash from victims’ families, pilot associations, and aviation experts. The Korea Civil Aviation Pilots Association criticized the investigation for focusing too heavily on pilot error while ignoring systemic issues, including airport safety and infrastructure. Families of the victims also expressed frustration over the ARAIB’s reluctance to release complete flight recorder data and accused the agency of downplaying the role of the concrete barrier in exacerbating fatalities.
Independent aviation analysts have pointed out that bird strikes alone typically do not result in complete loss of aircraft control. Alvin Lie, an aviation analyst, remarked that landing gear failures are not commonly associated with bird strikes and suggested that other factors, such as crew disorientation or procedural lapses, likely contributed to the crash. Matt Driskill, editor of Asian Aviation, noted that the high-speed belly landing indicated significant deviations from standard emergency protocols.
Experts have also highlighted deficiencies in crew resource management (CRM). The pilots did not follow standard checklists and made unconventional maneuvers after the bird strike, including a climb and a downwind landing attempt. These actions reduced the time available for corrective measures and increased the risk of a catastrophic outcome.
Global Context and Bird Strike Mitigation
Bird strikes are a well-documented hazard in aviation, particularly during takeoff and landing. According to the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), there were over 19,000 bird strikes in 2023, with a notable increase attributed to climate change and urban sprawl affecting bird migration patterns. Globally, bird strikes cause more than $1.2 billion in damages annually.
The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) recommends wildlife hazard assessments and the use of radar and thermal imaging systems for real-time bird detection. However, only a minority of airports worldwide have implemented these technologies. Muan Airport, for instance, relied on periodic patrols and loudspeakers, methods considered outdated and insufficient by modern safety standards.
In the aftermath of the crash, South Korea mandated the installation of bird-detection radar at all domestic airports by March 2025. This move aligns with practices at major international hubs such as JFK and Denver, where integrated detection and deterrent systems are already in place. These systems combine radar, AI, and habitat management to reduce bird strike risks effectively.
Conclusion
The Jeju Air Flight 2216 crash was a tragic convergence of human error and systemic failures. While the immediate cause was the shutdown of the wrong engine, deeper issues such as inadequate bird strike prevention, insufficient training, and flawed airport infrastructure played significant roles. The incident underscores the importance of comprehensive safety protocols and the need for real-time hazard detection systems.
Going forward, the aviation industry must prioritize proactive risk management, especially in regions with known environmental hazards. Regulatory bodies should enforce ICAO standards more rigorously, and airlines must invest in CRM training that prepares crews for complex, high-stress scenarios. Transparency in investigations and infrastructure audits will also be key to restoring public trust and preventing future tragedies.
FAQ
What caused the crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216?
The crash was caused by a combination of a bird strike that damaged the right engine and a pilot error that led to the shutdown of the functional left engine, resulting in total thrust loss.
How many people died in the crash?
179 of the 181 people on board died. Only two flight attendants survived.
What safety measures are being implemented post-crash?
South Korea is mandating bird-detection radar at all domestic airports and revising pilot training protocols to include more intensive emergency response simulations.
Photo Credit: SCMP
Regulations & Safety
EASA Proposes Take-Off Performance Monitoring Mandate by 2033
EASA Opinion No 07/2026 proposes mandatory take-off performance monitoring systems on new large commercial aircraft by 2033.
The European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has formally proposed mandating the installation of take-off performance monitoring systems on all newly produced large commercial aeroplanes by 2033.
Published on September 22, 2026, Opinion No 07/2026 recommends amending European Union regulations to mitigate the risk of runway excursions and aircraft upsets caused by incorrect data entry or erroneous take-off positions. The proposal follows an extensive analysis of historical incidents and targets a six-year implementation window after the rules enter into force.
Mitigating runway excursions and performance errors
The push for a Take-off Performance Monitoring System (TOPMS) addresses a persistent vulnerability in commercial aviation: incidents where incorrect data entry leads to degraded take-off performance. Common errors include entering the wrong aircraft weight, calculating incorrect reference speeds, or initiating the take-off roll from the wrong runway intersection.
According to data published by aviation outlet dlapilota.pl, EASA analyzed 118 events related to erroneous take-off parameters or aircraft positioning that occurred between 1998 and 2023. This dataset included 18 accidents, five of which were fatal. The agency estimates that the proposed TOPMS functions could have prevented 90% of these analyzed events.
The system is designed to monitor parameters and position before the take-off roll begins. For certain large transport aircraft, it will also monitor real-time acceleration and performance during the take-off roll itself, alerting crews if the aircraft is not achieving the required performance to safely become airborne.
The objective is to mitigate, using an on-board alerting system, the risk of large aeroplane accidents or incidents caused by the use of erroneous take-off performance parameters and erroneous take-off positions.
EASA noted in its regulatory filings that these specific errors have the potential to result in runway excursions and aeroplane upsets, which can lead to subsequent loss of control and collision with terrain or obstacles.
Implementation timeline and manufacturer impact
The mandate will apply exclusively to newly produced large aeroplanes used in commercial air transport. EASA explicitly stated that it does not propose mandatory retrofitting of previously produced aircraft. This decision limits the financial burden on current airline operators and focuses the regulatory effort on future production lines from manufacturers like Airbus and Boeing.
The compliance timeline requires the systems to be installed on newly produced aircraft six years after the implementing regulation enters into force. With the European Commission projected to adopt the amendments in 2027, the mandate will take effect in 2033.
The proposed regulatory material is intended to improve safety while limiting manufacturers’ efforts as regards the development and implementation of TOPMS functions to the most beneficial cases. A low-to-very-low cost impact is expected. No environmental and social impacts have been identified.
The regulatory path to Opinion No 07/2026
The publication of Opinion No 07/2026 marks the formal recommendation from EASA to the European Commission to amend Regulation (EU) 2015/640. The rulemaking process began on August 30, 2023, when EASA published the Terms of Reference for Rulemaking Task RMT.0741 to address take-off performance parameters and position errors.
Following nearly two years of development, EASA published a Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA 2025-01) on July 1, 2025, opening the rules for public consultation. The September 22, 2026 publication includes the final Opinion alongside the Comment Response Document (CRD 2025-01), which addresses industry feedback received during the consultation period.
The European Commission is now tasked with reviewing and adopting the proposed amendments, a process expected to conclude in 2027.
AirPro News analysis
The decision by EASA to exclude legacy aircraft from the TOPMS mandate represents a pragmatic approach to aviation safety regulation. Retrofitting complex avionics and performance monitoring systems into older airframes is technically challenging and cost-prohibitive. By focusing entirely on newly produced aircraft, EASA ensures that the next generation of commercial aeroplanes will feature a critical safety net against human data-entry errors, without grounding or financially penalizing current fleets. We view this as a targeted strategy that prioritizes long-term safety architecture over immediate, disruptive mandates, giving original equipment manufacturers ample time to integrate these systems into their production lines by 2033.
Photo Credit: EASA
Regulations & Safety
Aviation Coalition Lobbies EU Over Biometric Travel Rules
Five aviation organizations formed a coalition to oppose EU Digital Omnibus rules that could restrict biometric passenger processing at airports.
Five major aviation and travel technology organizations formed a coalition on October 1, 2026, to lobby European Union policymakers against potential restrictions on biometric passenger processing in upcoming digital legislation.
The Responsible Biometrics Travel Industry Coalition, announced in a joint press release, warned that the European Commission’s proposed Digital Omnibus package could inadvertently halt the rollout of automated biometric boarding and security gates at European airports. The group argues that a clear, technology-neutral regulatory framework is necessary to manage growing passenger volumes without requiring massive physical terminal expansions.
The push for a technology-neutral Digital Omnibus
The coalition includes the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Airports Council International Europe (ACI EUROPE), Amadeus, IDEMIA Public Security, and SITA. The group is specifically targeting the data and privacy components of the Digital Omnibus, a legislative package introduced to streamline the European Union’s digital rulebook.
The European Commission originally published the Digital Omnibus proposals on November 19, 2025, aiming to amend existing frameworks including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Artificial Intelligence Act. While a provisional trilogue agreement was reached on the artificial intelligence portion of the Omnibus on May 7, 2026, the data protection and privacy components remain under discussion in the European Council.
The coalition expressed concern that strict interpretations of these pending rules could restrict passengers from voluntarily opting into biometric processing. According to the coalition’s October 1 announcement, biometric technologies are essential for managing projected traffic growth. ACI EUROPE forecasts a 3.3% increase in passenger traffic at Europe’s airports in 2026. The industry maintains that automated systems are the only viable method to process these growing volumes without expanding the physical footprint of existing airport terminals.
Industry investment in paperless travel infrastructure
The aviation sector has invested heavily in biometric infrastructure to create paperless travel experiences, replacing manual passport and boarding pass checks with facial recognition and other identity verification systems. The coalition members represent a significant portion of the global travel infrastructure. IATA represents approximately 330 airlines comprising 80% of total air traffic, while ACI EUROPE represents over 500 airports across 55 countries.
The technology providers in the coalition supply the hardware and software underpinning these initiatives. Amadeus and SITA operate as major multinational information technology providers specializing in passenger processing systems for the global air transport industry. IDEMIA Public Security specializes in identity-related security services, including the facial recognition and biometric identification systems currently used at border control and airport checkpoints.
To support their lobbying efforts, the coalition cited IATA’s 2025 Global Passenger Survey, which found that 74% of travelers are willing to share biometric data in exchange for expedited processing. The group emphasized that any biometric implementation must remain voluntary, protecting passenger choice while ensuring data security.
The economic stakes of European travel efficiency are substantial. The coalition noted that travel and tourism contributed an estimated €1.9 trillion to the European Union’s gross domestic product in 2025, representing 10.5% of the regional economy.
AirPro News analysis
We view the formation of this coalition as a preemptive defensive maneuver by the aviation industry against regulatory creep. European airports and airlines have staked their future operational models on biometric throughput. If the Digital Omnibus imposes rigid consent architectures or localized data processing mandates that are incompatible with current biometric gates, the resulting bottleneck would severely degrade terminal capacity. The coalition’s emphasis on voluntary use is a calculated attempt to align industry efficiency goals with the European Union’s strict consumer privacy mandates, ensuring that the technology can still be deployed for the majority of passengers willing to opt in.
Photo Credit: IATA
Regulations & Safety
FAA Extends Solace Partnership to Modernize SWIM Network
The FAA extends its Solace partnership to upgrade SWIM with cloud APIs, supporting AI traffic tools including the SMART system trial.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has extended its partnership with enterprise data platform provider Solace to modernize the data architecture of the U.S. National Airspace System, establishing the infrastructure required for new artificial intelligence air traffic management tools.
Announced in a press release on September 22, 2026, the agreement focuses on upgrading the System Wide Information Management (SWIM) network to deliver Enhanced SWIM Cloud Services (ESCS). This modernization effort replaces legacy manual documentation with machine-readable Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), enabling the bidirectional data flow necessary for predictive traffic management systems currently entering operational trials.
Upgrading the SWIM data backbone
Since 2011, the FAA has utilized the Solace Platform to power the SWIM network. SWIM serves as the national aviation data network, distributing real-time flight plans, surveillance data, weather events, and airspace notices to airlines, the Department of Defense (DoD), air navigation service providers, and the flying public.
The transition to ESCS will shift the network to APIs built on the AsyncAPI standard. This upgrade is designed to improve bidirectional data flow and lay the foundational data groundwork for advanced decision support and next-generation data sharing across the aviation sector.
“When data moves in real-time across the world’s busiest airspace, there is no margin for error,” Joshua Carroll, Chief Technology Officer at Solace, stated in the release. “We are proud the FAA trusts Solace to help power that infrastructure, enabling the future of safe and effective air navigation services.”
Integration with predictive AI traffic management
The Solace partnership extension aligns with a broader multi-billion-dollar effort by the FAA to modernize the aging U.S. air traffic control system and transition from reactive to predictive traffic management, according to reporting by Nextgov/FCW.
The ESCS data backbone will directly support new AI-powered air traffic management tools, including the Strategic Management of Airspace, Routes, and Trajectories (SMART) system. On June 22, 2026, the FAA awarded an $875 million, 12-year contract to Boston-based startup Air Space Intelligence to build the SMART AI system.
According to Quartz, SMART ingests 200 disparate data streams, including airline schedules, weather forecasts, and airport capacity, to predict traffic flows and identify potential conflicts up to two hours before they occur. The live, bidirectional event streams provided by Solace’s ESCS are necessary for these advanced analytics and strategic flight-path optimizations.
The FAA began a 90-day trial of the SMART system on September 21, 2026, at three Washington D.C. area airports: Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA), Dulles International Airport (IAD), and Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport (BWI).
AirPro News analysis
The extension of the Solace partnership highlights a critical reality of airspace modernization: artificial intelligence tools are only as effective as the data pipelines feeding them. We view the transition to Enhanced SWIM Cloud Services as a necessary prerequisite for the FAA’s shift toward predictive air traffic control. By replacing manual documentation with machine-readable APIs, the agency is addressing the latency and interoperability bottlenecks that have historically constrained system-wide upgrades. As the SMART system enters its trial phase in the busy Washington D.C. airspace, the performance of this underlying data architecture will be tested under real-world operational loads.
Sources: Solace Corporation (via PR Newswire)
Photo Credit: Solace
-
MRO & Manufacturing4 days agoBoeing SPEEA Engineers Ratify Four-Year Contract in 2026
-
Commercial Aviation7 days agoGlobal Aviation Conference Frankfurt 2026 Opens with 600 Senior Executives and 11 Panels on the Industry’s Hardest Questions
-
Business Aviation4 days agoFAA Certifies Garmin Autoland for Epic E1000 AX Turboprop
-
Defense & Military2 days agoCoast Guard Awards $735M Contract for Six C-130J Aircraft
-
Space & Satellites1 day agoNASA Names SpaceX Crew-14 Astronauts for Spring 2027 ISS Mission