23 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Uh, that's not what I meant. That's is not a proper location for either the airport or the beach. I assume that the Dutch government wants to have it's cake (the airport) and eat it too (the beach). It's a question of safety. It's bad enough that Beacon Hill  Road is there also.

Since you've been there you know the terrain and there was and is no other place on the Dutch side of the island to put one. And there are other airports next to a coastline, Gustav at St Barths, the airport at Skaithos. To say nothing has been done in years is inaccurate.  There is an additional barrier fence that was erected outside of the airport fence, more warning signes were put up and the threshold was slightly adjusted so aircraft lining up aren't as close to the fence as they used to be. Unfortunately Murphey's law came to fruition and she was the one in the million. Condolences to her and her family. 

The airport is not the problem.

39 minutes ago, FrankSalo said:

 Unfortunately Murphey's law came to fruition and she was the one in the million. Condolences to her and her family. 

Not Murphy...Darwin.

Regards

 

1 hour ago, jabloomf1230 said:

The airport is not the problem.

You've got that right. I've spent more than a few days over the years sitting outside at the Sunset Beach bar watching folks hanging onto that fence. And I'll even confess to doing it a few times myself. There are more warning signs on that fence than you'd find in a nuclear power plant. People are going to do what people are going to do. Life isn't always about doing what's "safe"...............Doug

Yup seems pretty clear to me:

No policy change required

Now, videos have been noted by news outlets showing that this incident was only unique in that there was a fatality, rather than a previous 2012 incident which resulted in injuries. Also note that in the present video, people on the beach itself were knocked down and/or swept into the water. Most were just sitting sunning themselves. 

 

I wonder if the 737 had taxied into the overrun area.

Before this unfortunate incident, I spent some time watching videos of this location. In more than one example, someone would get knocked back and into/onto a concrete biking/walking path...might even be the roadway.

I was astonished that 1) people do what they do there and 2) that there would be a curb furnished concrete surface near the fenceline. The path is sticking up above the sand as erosion has exposed it. Sand isn't a very good foundation for building stuff; or so I'm told.

Cringe-worthy stuff. 

10 minutes ago, RichieFly said:

I was astonished that 1) people do what they do there

Sun, fun and alcohol.

I have been saying for years, this is why jet engines and beaches must be outlawed. How much more carnage will we allow as a society? We have a moral obligation to make sure this can never happen again.

There are clear signs illustrating the dangers of jet blast, if you choose to ignore common sense or the warning signs you are taking your life into your own hands, if you are injured or killed it is nobody's responsibility but your own, and its certainly not the governments job to think for you.  Still, I give my condolences to the woman and her family.

Obviously there are warning signs.  Obviously people have to be held responsible for not paying attention to them.  Equally, if the government or the airport administration really wanted to ensure safety, they'd fence off the area and extend the threshold down to the waterline.  The reason they don't is not to keep government small, and it's not to teach lessons about self-reliance - it's to keep a valuable piece of beachfront active, play nudge-nudge wink-wink games with a popular tourist activity, and keep the money flowing in.  It's got some similarity to the railroad level crossing problem - the technology exists to install impenetrable barriers, but neither railroads nor municipalities want to pay for it.  Cheaper to put up gates and lights and say "Hey, you were warned, you're on your own." I'll grant you it's Darwin-awards-level stupidity to drive around a closed railroad barrier when the lights are flashing and the bells are ringing.  But I'll guarantee you the reason you can do that isn't because some elected official or other is thinking about individual choice and how it builds character.

Bottom line - the beach needs to stay open... 
 

 

9 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Uh, that's not what I meant. That's is not a proper location for either the airport or the beach. I assume that the Dutch government wants to have it's cake (the airport) and eat it too (the beach). It's a question of safety. It's bad enough that Beacon Hill  Road is there also.

There is really no "proper" place at St.Martin for an airport, and certainly no other place to put it other than where it already is. The island isn't very large to start with, and those parts that aren't mountainous, are covered by settlements.

The airport is a modernization  of the old military  base and they are stuck with its location. The beach on the other hand, is in the absolutely  wrong location. To me, this situation is as about as dumb as putting a new public beach next to an existing sewage outfall and then putting  up signs saying "no swimming".

10 hours ago, jabloomf1230 said:

 I assume that the Dutch government wants to have it's cake (the airport) and eat it too (the beach). It's a question of safety. 

I can honestly tell you that if the Dutch government would've had anything to say about this idiotic situation this particular part of the beach would've been closed ages ago. The government of the dutch part of the island of St.Maarten has been officially autonomic atleast since 2010 and unofficially already years before. 

Like Alan's suggestion it probabely has all to do with local Big Kahonas who see this ridiculous situation as a free tourist attraction. Nothing to do with the Dutch government.  ( just speaking up for my country... ;-)