[MoreMoore]

People keep saying that, but I don't see how it's excusable for there to be a massive concrete block against which planes disintegrate at the end of any runway. Maybe everybody would've died some other way, maybe only 10 people would have survived, who knows. But we won't know because somebody put a massive concrete block in the way.

We aren't talking about any of your examples in this crash. And it isn't relevant for many other places either. If you have an open field behind a runway and you put a concrete block directly at the end of it, you can't defend your decision with "well, in this other city it doesn't matter because you'll hit the terminal". It's some weird form of whataboutism that I simply don't understand.

It's inexcusable and it's tiring seeing people defend it as if it's okay.

[bonestamp2]

Apparently it is a structure that holds antennas to keep an aircraft centered on the runway. The antennas have to be there, but experts are saying that the structure supporting the antennas is way over engineered and even internal airport documents had raised concerns about it:

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/south-korean-officials-wer...

[kijin]

Yes, especially because the concrete block is against regulations.

A terminal beside the runway at roughly the same distance is not against regulations.

Almost every rule in aviation is written in blood, so if there's a rule about something, there's probably a damn good reason why.

[Affric]

Exactly.

Causality isn’t an equivalence relation with blame. A moral aspect has to be established.