I wonder what will happen to this crew over this stunt?

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/369522-girl-blown-away-by-jet-blast/

Nothing will happen to the crew.....They have warnings all over that beach about jet blast. Not the crews fault she choose to ignore them:

 

The other problem with grabbing the fence like that and hanging on for dear life is she wouldn't be breathing much oxygen either. Jet Blast is exhaust from burning Jet Fuel so there would be a lack of oxygen for her to breath, and it stinks. Probably one of the reasons why she eventually let go.

 

I can't think of anyone who would stick their mouth behind the tailpipe of a car and take a deep breath of the exhaust fumes....this is kind of the same thing.

 

Cheers

I have to say that is one of the best Darwin videos ever!

 

After being in Sint Maarten before and having some great beers at the Sunset Bar and a nice time dancing on the water at Bliss, you see a lot of stupid people doing the same thing.

I've seen people do this numerous times in videos and I still can't come up with one stupidly logical reason why anyone would attempt this or think it would be safe.. Even after knocking back a few drinks any normal person should still be able to comphrehend how dangerous this is..

I wonder what will happen to this crew over this stunt?

 

When they have stopped laughing, I should imagine they will go for a drink... and then start laughing again.

 

The crew won't have to answer for anything, their responsibility is to the passengers sat on board their jet, not to some idiot who can't be bothered to take notice of the numerous signs all over that area warnrning about the potential danger, which even feature a picture of what happened to her. In fact you can see one of those signs in the shot right behind her when she is going &@($* over elbow. On the plus side though, she will become an internet legend.

 

Al

On another forum I frequent they are saying the pilots will have to answer for using the chevrons for takeoff.

On another forum I frequent they are saying the pilots will have to answer for using the chevrons for takeoff.

The crew probably needed the extra length for a safe take-off.

I'm afraid it is the girl that gets it. The responsability lies 100% with her.

They ought to send in a VC10 or Concorde they would blow away the entire beach!

vololiberista

On another forum I frequent they are saying the pilots will have to answer for using the chevrons for takeoff.

 

The two most useless things in aviation: fuel you leave on the ground, and runway that is behind you. Never mind the chevrons, with that big hill in front of me at St Maarten, and the ambient temps you get there, I'd have backed the bloody thing up till the APU was over her head LOL

 

Al

Indeed. She just had what she asked for. Well done, and hope it serves as a lesson.

The crew probably needed the extra length for a safe take-off.

I'm afraid it is the girl that gets it. The responsability lies 100% with her.

They ought to send in a VC10 or Concorde they would blow away the entire beach!

vololiberista

 

Well the Chevrons are not a part of the calculated runway so they would have been fine just taking the runway following the taxi line. Chevrons are used for stopways in the opposite direction and blast areas in the direction they were headed. Plus if a loaded 747 can takeoff there an A320 is not going to have a problem.

 

The two most useless things in aviation: fuel you leave on the ground, and runway that is behind you. Never mind the chevrons, with that big hill in front of me at St Maarten, and the ambient temps you get there, I'd have backed the bloody thing up till the APU was over her head LOL

 

Al

 

Those are true, but everything is calculated. If they really needed that much runway they would have offloaded weight. If they crashed an overweight aircraft because they were trying to squeeze extra runway for the weight then it would have been another great embarrassment to JetBlues crews. Before each flight we have to calculate exactly how much runway we need with operating equipment, location on the runway, temperatures, flaps, climb gradient, tailwind, derated thrust, and if it will be a rolling or static takeoff. I'm pretty sure this crew had all the same information and more because they are operating with an FMC.

Yes, I know that, otherwise my pilot's license wouldn't mean much, plus there is the fact that I have produced several Airbus cockpit SOP manuals for a number of Airbus variants, including the A320 (i.e. the manuals used by pilots on board the real aircraft). So I'm well aware of how they operate, and certainly I know the information that the crew had, because there's a chance it might have been me who wrote and tediously proof-read the manuals they learned all that stuff from LOL

 

But there is no escaping the fact that there is a bloody great big hill right after that runway which that aircraft if heading right toward after it lifts off, and if you lose an engine and go through the downdrafts coming off it, which there will be since you are taking off toward it into the wind, then every extra foot of altitude is one foot extra clearance from a CFIT. Whenever a theoretical take off clearance meets an actual mountain with a descending air mass coming off it, the mountain always wins. The fact a 747 is bigger and can take off in the space available and safely clear the terrain, is no guarantee that an A320 can; just because it is smaller does not mean it will have a faster climb out, or even a shorter take off run, particularly if it loses fifty percent of its thrust at V2 as opposed to a 747 losing 25 percent of its thrust, should an engine fail. With that in mind, every inch of runway you can find is worth rolling along.

 

Anyway, all that technical cobblers aside, it's the girl's own fault.

 

Al

Anyway, all that technical cobblers aside, it's the girl's own fault.

 

Al

 

Quite so!

On the apron and whilst taxying the crew obviously keep a look out for obstacles. But once lined up on the rwy if someone steps behind the a/c into the jet blast then it's their fault. This diagram shows the temperature and blast of the VC10 "Just" for breakaway thrust i.e. to getting the a/c moving! So you can imagine what it's like when they are wound up to full throttle!! (That's why I said above it would blow away the beach!)

vololiberista

 

LOL, how dumb!!!!

But she's gonna become famous!

 

Reminds me of the Fifth Gear video where they blow away cars with a 747!

A classic:

 

I'm tipping she wouldn't be having a drink I think she lost the teeth on the cement barrier. Silly girl. Always funny until someone loses an eye.:)

Yes, I know that, otherwise my pilot's license wouldn't mean much, plus there is the fact that I have produced several Airbus cockpit SOP manuals for a number of Airbus variants, including the A320 (i.e. the manuals used by pilots on board the real aircraft). So I'm well aware of how they operate, and certainly I know the information that the crew had, because there's a chance it might have been me who wrote and tediously proof-read the manuals they learned all that stuff from LOL

 

But there is no escaping the fact that there is a bloody great big hill right after that runway which that aircraft if heading right toward after it lifts off, and if you lose an engine and go through the downdrafts coming off it, which there will be since you are taking off toward it into the wind, then every extra foot of altitude is one foot extra clearance from a CFIT. Whenever a theoretical take off clearance meets an actual mountain with a descending air mass coming off it, the mountain always wins. The fact a 747 is bigger and can take off in the space available and safely clear the terrain, is no guarantee that an A320 can; just because it is smaller does not mean it will have a faster climb out, or even a shorter take off run, particularly if it loses fifty percent of its thrust at V2 as opposed to a 747 losing 25 percent of its thrust, should an engine fail. With that in mind, every inch of runway you can find is worth rolling along.

 

Anyway, all that technical cobblers aside, it's the girl's own fault.

 

Al

 

No, the overrun is not a part of the useable runway and cannot be used unless you're running off the runway during a landing mishap. Taxiing onto an overrun is no different than taxiing onto the grass. The coefficient of friction may be somewhat less than on grass, but you have still taken the plane off a useable surface. Who knows what kind of FOD may be waiting on that unuseable surface for you. Who knows what kind of damage you might be doing to the surface that was not meant for normal use. Who knows what kind of damage you could be causing behind you by setting takeoff thrust on a surface not meant for that. Using the stopway is an emergency procedure. You needed it to get stopped.

 

Using the sighting of terrain in the distance is no justification for going off the reservation and making up your own procedure in an airline operation. The aircraft was either capable or not capable of using the available takeoff distance. By the fact that they had blocked out and were moving the aircraft for the purpose of flight, meant that when they shut the door, they had determined that the aircraft had the performance to use the available runway, lose an engine at V1 and safely clear that mountain. There was absolutely no need to go offroading with that airplane. Except maybe to give the idiots behind them a better blast.