Setting aside the aircraft handling aspects for a moment, the runway design looks notably poor, immediately at the end of the paved surface is an earth lip and a small drop (which has nevertheless broken the fuselage), and a vehicle track unnecessarily close to the runway end, followed by a flat grassed area out to the aerial array well beyond the aircraft, all withn the airfield fence. One day's work regrading with a bulldozer at the time of the runway construction, and some appropriate drainage, would have made a very adequate and level grassed overrun area. Quite what that earth lip achieves in civil engineering terms I cannot imagine.
Did anyone ever say "risk assessment" to the runway designers ?
Poor designed runway
I tend to look at anoother way. The airport designer initially looked at a much shorter runway with a nice flat overrun area as far as they could fill. Then along comes some big iron operators and says we will fly into your airport if you lengthen your runway as far as it can go.
So whose decision is it?
Is it poor design or poor decision making about the plane chosen to use the runway?
I've yet to see anything that regulates these kind of decisions in the mind of the pilots.