Terrifying moment military plane nose-dives into the ground minutes after take-off in South Korea, killing four crew
The US-made Lockheed Martin P-3C Orion, went down on May 29 near the southeastern city of Pohang.
The P-3 aircraft crashed about six minutes after it left a naval base in the Nam-gu district at 1.43pm (4.43am GMT), the navy said in a statement.
The remains of the four crew members have been recovered and no civilian casualties were reported, the navy added.
Footage of the horror smash released by local media shows thick black smoke rising from the crash site, located in a forested area near Sinjeong-ri.
Mangled pieces of charred metal were seen scattered on the ground in the aftermath of the incident.
A Pohang emergency office said rescuers were dispatched after receiving reports from residents that an unidentified aircraft fell to the ground on a hill near an apartment complex and sparked a fire.
The US-made Lockheed Martin P-3C Orion, went down on May 29 near the southeastern city of Pohang, just seven minutes after taking off from a naval base
Shortly after the devastating incident, the South Korean Navy said in a statement that the aircraft had departed at 1:43pm for a routine exercise before it 'crashed near the base for reasons yet to be determined'.
It added that it had established a task force to investigate the cause of the crash and temporarily suspended all flights of P-3s.
Manufactured by Lockheed Martin, the platform is equipped with four turboprop engines and capable of deploying torpedoes, depth charges, and anti-ship missiles.
South Korea initially acquired eight P-3C aircraft and later added eight more upgraded P-3CK variants, modified by Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) from former US Navy P-3B airframes.
In total, sixteen aircraft have served in patrol roles across the East, West, and South Seas, with the P-3C earning a reputation as a capable 'submarine killer.'
The Navy previously marked two decades of accident-free operations with the P-3C in 2005 and 2015.
However, the crash this week coincides with the fleet's 30th year in service.
In 2017, a P-3CK mistakenly dropped six weapons, including Harpoon anti-ship missiles, due to crew error during a mission.
Following the devastating incident, the South Korean Navy said in a statement that the aircraft had departed at 1:43pm for a routine exercise before it 'crashed near the base for reasons yet to be determined'
A Pohang emergency office said rescuers were dispatched after receiving reports from residents that an unidentified aircraft fell to the ground on a hill near an apartment complex and sparked a fire
The incident comes after a Jeju Air passenger plane crashed at Muan International Airport in southern South Korea in December, killing all but two of the 181 people on board.
That crash was one of the deadliest disasters in South Korea's aviation history.
And in March, South Korean military investigators charged two Air Force pilots on with criminal negligence over an accidental bombing of a village during a training exercise, which injured at least 29 people and caused extensive property damage.
Defense Ministry investigators have confirmed that errors by the pilots when they entered coordinates into the aircraft systems were 'direct factors' behind the accidental bombing, the ministry's Criminal Investigation Command said in a statement at the time.
The pilots were charged with criminal negligence causing bodily harm, the command said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
India to defy Trump's threats and keep buying Russian oil, government sources say
India will keep purchasing oil from Russia, despite President Donald Trump threatening to impose penalties for doing so, two Indian officials said on Saturday Officials in India, the most populous country on Earth, told Reuters and That contradicted a statement from Trump, who on Friday told reporters his understanding was that India would 'no longer' be buying oil from Russia. "These are long-term oil contracts," an unnamed Indian official told Reuters. "It is not so simple to just stop buying overnight.' Last week, Trump said India would face unspecified penalties for buying Russian oil in addition to a 25 percent tariff on goods. However, China and Turkey, two countries that also purchase large amounts of Russian oil, have not faced similar penalty threats. India drastically increased its import of Russian oil after the Kremlin invaded Ukraine in 2022, while many other countries began to cut back it's imports. The cheap availability of Russian oil allowed India to reduce its reliance on other countries, such as Saudi Arabia or Iraq, who typically sell to Asian countries at a higher price. While India faced criticisms for doing so, the general consensus around India's increase in imports has been that it helps avoid a global surge in oil prices. It's unclear why exactly Trump has targeted India in reducing its import of Russian oil. The president has recently expressed frustrations with Russian President Vladimir Putin for failing to come to the peace talks table to negotiate a ceasefire in Ukraine. On Friday, India's external affairs spokesperson Randdhir Jaiswal said India and Russia had a 'time-tested partnership' and that India was analyzing its energy sourcing. "On our energy sourcing requirements ... we look at what is there available in the markets, what is there on offer, and also what is the prevailing global situation or circumstances," Jaiswal said, according to Reuters. India heavily relies on energy imports to sustain the needs of it's more than one billion population. It imports more than one million barrels per day.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
MAIL ON SUNDAY COMMENT: Forget nuclear bluster... only getting tougher can curb cruel Putin
This week sees the 80th anniversaries of the only two uses of nuclear weapons in war against human targets. The Hiroshima bomb will be commemorated on Wednesday. The Nagasaki bomb will be marked on Saturday. These actions, though generally believed to have brought the Second World War to an end, remain highly controversial, not least because of the large number of non-combatant civilians who died of appalling injuries. American military authorities prevented the publication of some pictures of the aftermath for many years. Some of the scientists involved in developing the bomb regretted it deeply. Albert Einstein, who had urged President Franklin Roosevelt to embark on the research which led to it, later said this was 'the one great mistake in my life'. But whatever we think now about President Harry Truman's decision to drop two bombs on Japan, such discoveries cannot be undiscovered. Several countries, including Britain, concluded that the best response was to build their own bombs, so deterring attack by any other nuclear power. This policy has, on the whole, worked. The 1961 Cuban missile crisis was defused because both Moscow and Washington had the sense to see that a compromise was better than the end of the world. Both backed down. Since then, most of us have believed that Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) would deter all but the crazy from taking actions which might lead to the use of nuclear weapons. The Russians have developed a grim system known as the Dead Hand, which would deliver a shattering nuclear response to an American nuclear strike, even if the Kremlin leadership were all dead in the ruins of an irradiated Moscow. It was this which former Russian President Dmitri Medvedev was referring to when he recently taunted Donald Trump over his approach to Russia. And Mr Trump duly rose to the bait, proclaiming that he had ordered two nuclear submarines to be 'positioned in the appropriate regions' in response to what he called the Russian's 'highly provocative' comments. This is probably bluster. Mr Trump's advisers will have told him that Mr Medvedev is not a significant figure. And the US Navy always has several of its 12 Ohio-class submarines, equipped with formidably accurate Trident multi-warhead missiles, within striking range of Russia. Even so, with a war still in Ukraine, it would be unwise to be complacent. MAD may have worked so far but the world is madder than for many years, with Russo-American relations tense, dogged by mutual incomprehension and personally unfriendly. Mr Trump may be unpredictable and erratic but the root of this problem is Vladimir Putin's cruel and lawless aggression, made worse by despicable bombing attacks on civilians. Mr Trump is right that it must stop, and it is Mr Putin who must stop it. If he does not, who knows where it might lead? Russia has relied too long on its nuclear strength to limit the West's response. The West must now deploy the most severe conventional military, diplomatic and economic means to bring Putin to the negotiating table and to obtain a ceasefire.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Broken altimeter, ignored warnings: Hearings reveal what went wrong in DC crash that killed 67
Over three days of sometimes contentious hearings this week, the National Transportation Safety Board interrogated Federal Aviation Administration and Army officials about a list of things that went wrong and contributed to a Black Hawk helicopter and a passenger jet colliding over Washington, D.C., killing 67 people. The biggest revelations: The helicopter's altimeter gauge was broken, and controllers warned the FAA years earlier about the dangers that helicopters presented. At one point NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy scolded the FAA for not addressing safety concerns. 'Are you kidding me? Sixty-seven people are dead! How do you explain that? Our bureaucratic process?' she said. 'Fix it. Do better.' Victims of the January crash included a group of elite young figure skaters, their parents and coaches and four union steamfitters from the Washington area. Here is a look at the major takeaways from the hearings about the collision, which alarmed travelers before a string of other crashes and close calls this year added to their worries about flying: The helicopter's altimeter was wrong The helicopter was flying at 278 feet (85 meters) — well above the 200-foot (61-meter) ceiling on that route — when it collided with the airliner. But investigators said the pilots might not have realized that because the barometric altimeter they were relying on was reading 80 to 100 feet (24 to 30 meters) lower than the altitude registered by the flight data recorder. The NTSB subsequently found similar discrepancies in the altimeters of three other helicopters from the same unit. An expert with Sikorsky, which makes the Black Hawks, said the one that crashed was an older model that lacked the air data computers that make for more accurate altitude readings in newer versions. Army Chief Warrant Officer Kylene Lewis told the board that an 80- to 100-foot (24- to 30-meter) discrepancy between the different altimeters on a helicopter would not be alarming, because at lower altitudes she would be relying more on the radar altimeter than the barometric altimeter. Plus Army pilots strive to stay within 100 feet (30 meters) of target altitude on flights, so they could still do that even with their altimeters that far off. But Rick Dressler of medevac operator Metro Aviation told the NTSB that imprecision would not fly with his helicopters. When a helicopter route like the one the Black Hawk was flying that night includes an altitude limit, Dressler said, his pilots consider that a hard ceiling. FAA and Army defend actions, shift blame Both tried to deflect responsibility for the crash, but the testimony highlighted plenty of things that might have been done differently. The NTSB's final report will be done next year, but there likely will not be one single cause identified for the crash. 'I think it was a week of reckoning for the FAA and the U.S. Army in this accident,' aviation safety consultant and former crash investigator Jeff Guzzetti said. Army officials said the greater concern is that the FAA approved routes around Ronald Reagan International Airport with separation distances as small as 75 feet (23 meters) between helicopters and planes when planes are landing on a certain runway at Reagan. 'The fact that we have less than 500-foot separation is a concern for me,' said Scott Rosengren, chief engineer in the office that manages the Army's utility helicopters. Army Chief Warrant Officer David Van Vechten said he was surprised the air traffic controller let the helicopter proceed while the airliner was circling to land at Reagan's secondary runway, which is used when traffic for the main runway stacks up and accounts for about 5% of flights. Van Vechten said he was never allowed to fly under a landing plane as the Black Hawk did, but only a handful of the hundreds of times he flew that route involved planes landing on that runway. Other pilots in the unit told crash investigators it was routine to be directed to fly under landing planes, and they believed that was safe if they stuck to the approved route. Frank McIntosh, the head of the FAA's air traffic control organization, said he thinks controllers at Reagan 'were really dependent upon the use of visual separation' to keep traffic moving through the busy airspace. The NTSB said controllers repeatedly said they would just 'make it work.' They sometimes used 'squeeze plays' to land planes with minimal separation. On the night of the crash, a controller twice asked the helicopter pilots whether they had the jet in sight, and the pilots said they did and asked for visual separation approval so they could use their own eyes to maintain distance. Testimony at the hearing raised serious questions about how well the crew could spot the plane while wearing night vision goggles and whether the pilots were even looking in the right spot. The controller acknowledged in an interview that the plane's pilots were never warned when the helicopter was on a collision path, but controllers did not think telling the plane would have made a difference at that point. The plane was descending to land and tried to pull up at the last second after getting a warning in the cockpit, but it was too late. FAA was warned about the dangers of helicopter traffic in D.C. An FAA working group tried to get a warning added to helicopter charts back in 2022 urging pilots to use caution whenever the secondary runway was in use, but the agency refused. The working group said 'helicopter operations are occurring in a proximity that has triggered safety events. These events have been trending in the wrong direction and increasing year over year.' Separately, a different group at the airport discussed moving the helicopter route, but those discussions did not go anywhere. And a manager at a regional radar facility in the area urged the FAA in writing to reduce the number of planes taking off and landing at Reagan because of safety concerns. The NTSB has also said the FAA failed to recognize a troubling history of 85 near misses around Reagan in the three years before the collision, NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said 'every sign was there that there was a safety risk and the tower was telling you that.' But after the accident, the FAA transferred managers out of the airport instead of acknowledging that they had been warned. 'What you did is you transferred people out instead of taking ownership over the fact that everybody in FAA in the tower was saying there was a problem,' Homendy said. 'But you guys are pointing out, 'Welp, our bureaucratic process. Somebody should have brought it up at some other symposium.'' ___
