The investigation results regarding the aircraft engine of Jeju Air, which caused a disaster at Muan International Airport on Dec. 29 last year, are expected to be released as early as June. Depending on the investigation results, the extent of responsibility for Jeju Air and the engine manufacturer will likely be determined.
According to the aviation industry on the 10th, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport's Aviation and Railroad Accident Investigation Committee (ARAIC) will send the two engines of the accident aircraft to the manufacturer, CFM International, based in France, to conduct a disassembly investigation starting in May. The committee plans to verify factors influencing the accident on-site with seven members, including investigators.
The committee expects to determine the cause of the pilot's decision to opt for go-around instead of landing immediately after the bird strike, and also identify the source of the loud noise confirmed in a video just before the accident. It also plans to elucidate the situation where the aircraft's pilot intended to land on Runway 01, which has no hills, but was directed by the control tower to change to Runway 19, which has hills. The aircraft collided with a hill after the emergency landing.
At the time of the accident, the air traffic controller asked the pilot of the aircraft, who had communicated their intention to land on Runway 01, whether they would land on Runway 19. The pilot, upon hearing the controller's question, landed the aircraft on Runway 19, colliding with a concrete hill. The committee views the decision to land on Runway 19 as the pilot's judgment that landing on Runway 01 was not feasible, and plans to clarify the circumstances at that time through investigations, including the engine examination.
The disaster involving the Jeju Air passenger aircraft has complicated the analysis of the situation, as the flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR), which function as the aircraft's black boxes, were inactive for 4 minutes and 7 seconds just before the incident. Consequently, the committee is scientifically estimating the unrecorded situation through all possible investigations, including CCTV footage, communication records, and engine disassembly analysis.
In the aviation industry, there are predictions that if a variety of factors are identified as causes of the accident through the engine investigation results, Jeju Air could alleviate its burden of responsibility. If the disassembly investigation reveals manufacturing defects in the aircraft structure or concludes that there were issues with the control tower's judgment, the aircraft manufacturer and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport could share part of the responsibility for the accident.
O Se-cheol, an expert in aviation law, noted, "In the case of airlines, international agreements dictate that compensation must be provided for fatal accidents even if there is no fault, up to $170,000 (about 250 million won). He added, "If the investigation results determine that the primary responsibility for the accident does not lie with the airline, the airline can file a claim for indemnity based on the allocation of responsibility for the accident."
The penalties imposed in the event of a fatal accident can also be avoided depending on the responsibility. Under the Aviation Safety Act, if an air transport operator causes a fatal accident due to intent or gross negligence, their operating license may be revoked or they may face a suspension of aircraft operations. In the case of the Jeju Air disaster, with 179 fatalities, if the airline's negligence is found, the company could face a suspension of aircraft operations lasting between 150 and 180 days.