Bird Strike or Boeing’s Fault? Unraveling the Cause of the Fatal Jeju Air Engine Failure

The tragic crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216 in December 2024, which resulted in 179 fatalities, has ignited a fierce debate: Was it solely a bird strike, or did failures in the Boeing 737-800’s design and maintenance contribute to the disaster? While bird strikes are a known hazard in aviation, with approximately 47 aircraft strikes reported daily worldwide, this incident has raised serious questions about engine vulnerability, system redundancy, and pilot response protocols.

The Fateful Flight

On December 29, 2024, Jeju Air Flight 2216, en route from Bangkok to Muan, South Korea, experienced a bird strike during its approach to Muan International Airport. According to preliminary reports, both engines ingested birds, leading to a loss of thrust in the right engine. The pilots initiated a go-around, declared a mayday, and attempted a second landing. However, the landing gear failed to deploy, resulting in a belly landing that overran the runway and ended in a devastating crash.

Bird Strike: A Common but Complex Threat

Bird strikes pose a significant risk to aviation safety. The FAA maintains a National Wildlife Strike Database to track and analyze these incidents, with the goal of improving prevention and mitigation strategies. While most bird strikes cause minimal damage, the potential for catastrophic engine failure exists, especially when multiple birds are ingested or when larger bird species are involved.

Frequency and Impact: Hundreds of aircraft are struck by birds per 1 million flights. In roughly 3/4 of all cases there is no damage to the aircraft. In about 20% of all bird strikes on aircraft than one or more engines are affected. However, it is very rare that multiple engines are struck simultaneously. Only less than 10 % of all bird strikes on aircraft, i.e. 35% of bird strikes on engines result in engine damage that requires immediate repair.
Vulnerability During Takeoff and Landing: The greatest number of bird strike damages occurs at altitudes below 500 meters. This is correlated with the corresponding flight situations, i.e. takeoff, landing, and approach flight.
Engine Design Standards: Under US regulations, engines are required to withstand the ingestion of up to four one-pound birds without thrust dropping below 75%.

The Boeing Factor: Design, Maintenance, and Systemic Failures?

While the initial investigation pointed to a bird strike as the primary cause, the aftermath of the Jeju Air crash has led to scrutiny of Boeing’s role in the accident. Families of the victims have filed lawsuits against the aircraft manufacturer, alleging that failures in the 737-800’s design, particularly its electrical and hydraulic systems, contributed to the severity of the crash.

Outdated Systems: The lawsuits claim that Boeing failed to modernize the aircraft’s “outdated” electrical and hydraulic systems, some of which date back to the 1950s. These systems, it is argued, were not robust enough to handle the cascade of failures triggered by the bird strike.
Lack of Redundancy: Experts have pointed out that the Boeing 737-800 lacks a Ram Air Turbine (RAT), a device that provides emergency power in the event of a complete engine failure. The absence of a RAT meant that the pilots had to manually activate the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), a process that may have been too slow in the critical moments after the bird strike.
“Cascade of System Failures”: The lawsuits allege that the bird strike triggered a chain reaction of system failures, including the landing gear failing to extend, reverse thrusters not deploying, and the Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder going offline simultaneously.
Pilot Error: The interim report issued in July 2025 stated that the crash may have resulted from the pilot mistakenly shutting down the wrong engine after a bird strike.

Jeju Air’s Safety Record and Maintenance Practices

Adding another layer of complexity to the investigation is Jeju Air’s safety record. While the airline received an “A” grade in safety from the South Korean government a year before the accident, records show that it had been penalized more than any other South Korean airline for regulation violations between 2020 and 2022. There are also reports that Jeju Air’s aircraft utilization rates were higher than most other low-cost carriers globally, raising concerns about potential compromises in maintenance and safety practices.

Establishing Liability: A Complex Legal Landscape

Determining liability in aviation accidents is a complex process that involves multiple factors and potentially responsible parties.

Aircraft Manufacturer Liability: Aircraft and parts manufacturers are responsible for designing functional components, using materials of adequate quality, making parts that work as designed, and producing safe aircraft. If a manufacturer’s failure in any of these areas results in an accident, they could bear liability for the consequences and be held financially accountable.
Operator Liability: Operator liability is when the pilot or another individual or party charged with an aircraft’s safe travel makes a negligent error or oversight that leads to an aviation accident. In that case, the party responsible for the error — or the party that employs the negligent individual — may bear financial liability for the damages the accident causes.
Maintenance Liability: If mechanical or engine malfunction occurs after failure to keep up with proper maintenance, repair protocols, certifications, or other requirements (including recordkeeping), the party responsible for maintenance — often the airline — bears liability for any aviation accidents, injuries, or deaths that result.

The Path Forward: Lessons Learned and Safety Improvements

The Jeju Air Flight 2216 tragedy serves as a stark reminder of the ever-present dangers in aviation and the need for continuous improvement in safety standards. As the investigation continues and legal proceedings unfold, several key areas demand attention:

Engine Design and Bird Strike Protection: Enhancing engine design to better withstand bird ingestion and prevent catastrophic failures.
System Redundancy and Emergency Power: Ensuring that aircraft have adequate backup systems, such as RATs, to provide emergency power in the event of engine failure.
Pilot Training and Emergency Procedures: Improving pilot training to address single-engine operation, emergency landings, and decision-making in critical situations.
Maintenance and Safety Oversight: Strengthening maintenance protocols and safety oversight to prevent lapses that could compromise aircraft airworthiness.
Airport Wildlife Management: Implementing effective wildlife management programs at airports to minimize the risk of bird strikes.

The crash of Jeju Air Flight 2216 was a multifaceted tragedy. While a bird strike appears to have initiated the chain of events, questions remain about the role of aircraft design, maintenance, and pilot response. By thoroughly investigating these factors and implementing necessary safety improvements, the aviation industry can strive to prevent similar disasters in the future and ensure the safety of all passengers.

Disclaimer: This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have been affected by an aviation accident, it is essential to consult with a qualified attorney to discuss your rights and options.