Surprised to see that not a lot of you mentioned the airport's or the authorities' responsibility, because to me, it's clearly theirs. There are basic safety elements to a runway which do not exist here or they are not large enough or they just don't follow ICAO numbers (runway strip, runway end safety area; clearway; approach and takeoff surfaces etc.) because the lack of space. These all can still be compliant IF the airport can show that the different realization and procedures give an equal level of safety like the normal procedures do. This can be very expensive and complicated to solve (to fill up the water with more land, or just to change the track of the road which is outside of the airport's boundaries), and thus it's the competent authorities' fault who still approved these conditions.

At least that's how it works here, in Europe. Just to compare: at the airport where I work, there is a dirt road between two of the approach lights 720 meters from the threshold and it still needs to be treated as a 5 meters high obstacle but in reality it gives much less risk than the road and the beach in St. Maarten. But a fully competent airport is a boring one compared to TNCM of course, no doubt.

TL;DR: normally a sign with big red letters is not enough in the industry of aviation. It was the lady's fault but the authorities' responsibility.

737max8 wrote:

Does anyone know how to find out if the beach is open? I have zero plans to hang on the fence so I don't care if they stop that, I just want to be on the beach/in the water and watch airplanes. Was thinking of going this Saturday.

The beach is currently open, there seems to be a security guard watching near the sunset grill tho. Haven't seen any planes takeoff yet so unsure what will happen if anyone tries to go on the fence.

spacecadet wrote:

TigerFlyer wrote:

Outrageous. How could this be allowed!?

Because most of the world isn't a goddamn nanny state.

Look, people. Nothing of consequence is going to happen from this. It's really sad for the person who died and her family. But it's not the rest of the world's responsibility to keep that from happening, and most of the world doesn't think of it as such. Everybody needs to be responsible for their own actions, and they are in most of the world.

It's a sad thing that happened, and we all should bow our heads and say a little RIP for the deceased. Then we get on with our lives. And SXM will continue on as it always has.

btw I've been there multiple times. Yes, it's dangerous - so what? So is rock climbing, but we don't outlaw mountains as a result.

I think you missed the sarcasm in my post. That's exactly the point I was making.

This was on my bucket list so to speak. Glad I got to visit SXM in January 2016 and was able to stand behind the blast. Probably not the smartest thing to do but i was very aware of the concrete curb behind me and the ramifications of letting go. You definitely need to keep a tight grip. I only stood behind a couple, the roughest being an American Airlines 757. I was too early for the widebodies. Anyway, i feel sad for this lady's family. Such a preventable thing.

See JSI:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thomson- ... kt4Q%3D%3D
barbed wire only - same function like a fence, but nobody can grab it for blast-surfing!
Btw: I like the "please" on the warning-sign!
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Blue-Pan ... kt4Q%3D%3D

redcap1962 wrote:

See JSI:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thomson- ... kt4Q%3D%3D
barbed wire only - same function like a fence, but nobody can grab it for blast-surfing!
Btw: I like the "please" on the warning-sign!
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Blue-Pan ... kt4Q%3D%3D

That's not barbed wire. You can hold on to barbed wire. That's razor wire! Yikes!!

Of course, one could crouch down and hold on to the guardrail alongside the road. Someday, I look forward to visiting JSI.

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

United787 wrote:

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

I guess it depends upon your philosophy on personal responsibility. Regarding Spain, and also SXM, if you do a bit of research the dangers are well known in both cases. I would not say you "deserved it" but I would say your death was caused by your own recklessness, and that was your responsibility.

QueenoftheSkies wrote:

Blast barrier soon to follow without doubt. All it takes is 1 to ruin it for everyone.

Uhh, I think she paid a pretty heavy price for "ruining" it for everyone else. I guess your empathy score is pretty low.

Having said that, it wasn't a very smart thing to do and definitely a lack of common sense.

Chemist wrote:

I guess it depends upon your philosophy on personal responsibility. Regarding Spain, and also SXM, if you do a bit of research the dangers are well known in both cases. I would not say you "deserved it" but I would say your death was caused by your own recklessness, and that was your responsibility.

I said nothing of responsibility... she was responsible for her death, no argument there. My point is that she doesn't deserve the harsh treatment she is receiving here. She paid with her life, isn't that enough, is there a need to drag her through the mud also?

Galwayman wrote:

In my experience the people not holding on to the fence , those standing further back and those who stand unanchored on the beach get debris in their faces and are blown about

I feel much more comfortable holding on to the fence although it feels like your face is starting to burn . It's just really important to hold onto the fence and not let go

Shame to hear about this death , may she RIP

Better idea: Do not hold on to the fence because you are not directly behind the aircraft. I once watched an episode of Mythbusters and watched a 747 blow a car over and over, like it was paper. This woman died in pursuit of a cheap and stupid shot of adrenalin. Everyone who is stupid enough to get directly behind a jet when the blast requires them to hold on to something in order not to be blown away, is a fool. The authorities need to crack down. I feel sorry for the woman but it was a complete waste of a perfectly good human being. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MLB0qadBPwU

Two security guards to enforce a helmet law and and helmet rentals and then the problem is solved. If people want to hurt themselves, who cares, but deaths should try to be prevented.

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

Safest place is to hold tightly to the fence and not let go . Nobody has ever been hurt that way

United787 wrote:

Chemist wrote:

I guess it depends upon your philosophy on personal responsibility. Regarding Spain, and also SXM, if you do a bit of research the dangers are well known in both cases. I would not say you "deserved it" but I would say your death was caused by your own recklessness, and that was your responsibility.

I said nothing of responsibility... she was responsible for her death, no argument there. My point is that she doesn't deserve the harsh treatment she is receiving here. She paid with her life, isn't that enough, is there a need to drag her through the mud also?

I think it's pretty common that when somebody dies from a particularly foolish or negligent reason of their own responsibility, people tend to be less empathetic. That's why the term "Darwin Awards" was invented. Given a large population of people hearing about it, you will get a range of opinions and empathies from "how sad and her family will suffer" to "she did it to herself".

Bald1983 wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

United787 wrote:

.....

.....

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

But you see, fence surfing does not fit to your list. Every one of them needs some license to do it (not Pamplona, that has historical value), and every one of them is an actual event or activity that you have to know about in general, and you also know the risks before you can do it. At SXM you are just there, ah, why not go to the fence? You won't pilot a GA plane or go base jumping accidentally. That's the problem.

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Welcome to the internet. Most people are generally quick to judge others without giving their actions any thought, and a.net is apparently no exception.

One could also argue that the very action of placing oneself in an airline seat and hurle through space in an aluminium can, is an action so risky, that those unfortunate to die in the process aren't worthy of sympathy at all.

I dread the day I die by either climbing a mountain, diving in the ocean, sailing across the Atlantic etc. only to be ridiculed by the usual mob of internet couch potatoes.

Is a blast fence as mentioned before a solution for SXM? How is the air from the engine blasts directed by a blast fence? Will approaches need to be adjusted because of blast fences?

A388

Sorry that someone has died, but as others have said - it's the woman's own fault.

I'm sure there will be an attempt at a lawsuit, and (win or lose) the result will be some restrictions on what has been one of aviation's unique experiences.

Why is the media suggesting she was holding the fence, in stead of just saying she was? Media is really a dead beat.
At 57 i would probably not be doing that. Was she jet-lagged? Drunk? Awful, especially if your half way around the world. and now was her time.

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

I would draw the line at do not risk your life for stupid stuff. Grabbing on to a fence and getting blown away by jet blast is stupid. So is running with the bulls and base jumping. With surfing, sky diving, piloting a plane, scuba, riding a motorcycle, and even hang gliding, there is a skill to perfect. Holding on to a fence not so much. This poor woman's death, over a stunt, was bound to happen and served no purpose. The authorities need to crack down.

dfwjim1 wrote:

How about if the the airport authority erected a concrete wall at this site to replace the guardrail and fence? Make it of such construction and height that it can not be scaled by humans.

Impossible. Could be a real danger for landing aircraft approaching "a little too low".

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

I don't know in what way they should "crack down". These people aren't breaking any laws except maybe jaywalking (good luck enforcing that law in the Caribbean - I'm not even sure that's illegal there, because where would you even cross otherwise?). Once on that side of the street, though, if they're outside the fence I don't see how you can even get them for trespassing.

There definitely don't need to be any *new* laws, which also won't be enforced anyway. The Caribbean is a very laid back place, and they like it that way, as do the tourists who go there.

Maho Beach is also a major tourist draw in itself specifically because of its airport proximity (go look at the t-shirt selection at the Sunset Bar and Grill if you don't believe that, or the shore excursions coming to Maho Beach from cruise ships), so good luck changing anything that makes it less appealing. That would hurt local businesses and probably even the economy of the island.

So I don't expect much to change. Maybe the airport will update the signage a bit; it was looking a little tatty last time I was there.

Edit: in fact I just checked the Maho Beach cam and there were people riding the fence during a takeoff, right now.

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

The only thing the authorities need to do (should have done a long time ago) is to replace the concrete curb with something less dangerous.

I know this is the internet and all and I shouldn't be surprised as humans never fail to amaze with their callousness, but I really can't believe a lot of the contributions on this thread.

We have a woman who has died tragically, doing something actually a lot of aviation enthusiasts would love the chance to do, and all a lot of people can do is make harsh judgements and call a person who they know nothing about stupid etc etc. Some posts border on saying this woman had it coming. The moderators really should be intervening.

Some of you really should take a good look at yourselves. For whatever glee you get talking about darwin awards and insulting someone with a family who just died, you're certainly not going to win any empathy awards, which is a rather significant show of actual ability to think with more than a reptillian brain. All a lot of you are proving is that humans really haven't moved far from our roots as apes.

I am sure that this woman was a much better human being than many of the people contributing here.

This was someone engaging in something they've no doubt seen many other people do every day, that carries risk, but I am sure many here would do. How many posts about SXM on this forum? Hell, we've even seen pilots seemingly deliberately starting their take off in the blast zone to add to the fun. They are people who know what a jet blast can do and should know better. The average person believe it or not does not know the physics of jet engines. I am sure many of you do things that many of the rest of us would consider stupid, sometimes hold back on the judgement, all it shows is a fragile ego that desperately needs to feel better than others. Someone died enjoying aviation, that is very sad.

And for those talking about 'ruining it for everyone else'. I have no words.

Bald1983 wrote:

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

I would draw the line at do not risk your life for stupid stuff. Grabbing on to a fence and getting blown away by jet blast is stupid. So is running with the bulls and base jumping. With surfing, sky diving, piloting a plane, scuba, riding a motorcycle, and even hang gliding, there is a skill to perfect. Holding on to a fence not so much. This poor woman's death, over a stunt, was bound to happen and served no purpose. The authorities need to crack down.

Well by categorizing some as "stupid" you are imposing your own value judgement on others. And your definitions will vary versus others.

And to another who replied, you certainly don't need licenses in many places for surfing, for scuba diving. In the US you can also pilot an ultralight without a license.

Planetalk wrote:

I know this is the internet and all and I shouldn't be surprised as humans never fail to amaze with their callousness, but I really can't believe a lot of the contributions on this thread.

We have a woman who has died tragically, doing something actually a lot of aviation enthusiasts would love the chance to do, and all a lot of people can do is make harsh judgements and call a person who they know nothing about stupid etc etc. Some posts border on saying this woman had it coming. The moderators really should be intervening.

Some of you really should take a good look at yourselves. For whatever glee you get talking about darwin awards and insulting someone with a family who just died, you're certainly not going to win any empathy awards, which is a rather significant show of actual ability to think with more than a reptillian brain. All a lot of you are proving is that humans really haven't moved far from our roots as apes.

I am sure that this woman was a much better human being than many of the people contributing here.

This was someone engaging in something they've no doubt seen many other people do every day, that carries risk, but I am sure many here would do. How many posts about SXM on this forum? Hell, we've even seen pilots seemingly deliberately starting their take off in the blast zone to add to the fun. They are people who know what a jet blast can do and should know better. The average person believe it or not does not know the physics of jet engines. I am sure many of you do things that many of the rest of us would consider stupid, sometimes hold back on the judgement, all it shows is a fragile ego that desperately needs to feel better than others. Someone died enjoying aviation, that is very sad.

And for those talking about 'ruining it for everyone else'. I have no words.

You are making some really harsh judgements here. What would be your solution?
Do you not think others have a right to opinions different than your own?

I have not been to SXM though it has been on my bucket list... So I am on a layover in PHL about to board a flight there today!

Here is my idea: why not just put a double fence in? Place it about parallel to the existing fence about 12-18 inches apart. Leave the ends open to allow public to walk between the narrow gap between fences. If someone doesn't hold on, he worst they are is pushed against the back fence!

Seems like a cheap and easy compromise!

Chemist wrote:

And to another who replied, you certainly don't need licenses in many places for surfing, for scuba diving. In the US you can also pilot an ultralight without a license.

Oh man. Okay, that's true, but they are still recreational activities (or sports) which, normally, are not occasional adrenaline shots but a series of training and learning OR a controlled, supervised touristic event. Fencing is just "a thing".

Instead of looking at how to prevent people from standing behind the jet blast why not remove the jet blast itself by placing blast fences to direct the jet blast upwards? Is that possible? With the displaced threshold there now it should affect approaches either because all aircraft have to come in at a much higher altitude. For those who apparently keep mentioning those "low approaches", that's illegal too so those blast fences will prevent that from happening too.

A388

A388

MartijnNL wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

The only thing the authorities need to do (should have done a long time ago) is to replace the concrete curb with something less dangerous.

No, they need to stop the practice and make the fools do something else for thrills. What are they going to do, use nerf material for the curb and road? Hit either one right, and death will ensue.

Chemist wrote:

Planetalk wrote:

I know this is the internet and all and I shouldn't be surprised as humans never fail to amaze with their callousness, but I really can't believe a lot of the contributions on this thread.

We have a woman who has died tragically, doing something actually a lot of aviation enthusiasts would love the chance to do, and all a lot of people can do is make harsh judgements and call a person who they know nothing about stupid etc etc. Some posts border on saying this woman had it coming. The moderators really should be intervening.

Some of you really should take a good look at yourselves. For whatever glee you get talking about darwin awards and insulting someone with a family who just died, you're certainly not going to win any empathy awards, which is a rather significant show of actual ability to think with more than a reptillian brain. All a lot of you are proving is that humans really haven't moved far from our roots as apes.

I am sure that this woman was a much better human being than many of the people contributing here.

This was someone engaging in something they've no doubt seen many other people do every day, that carries risk, but I am sure many here would do. How many posts about SXM on this forum? Hell, we've even seen pilots seemingly deliberately starting their take off in the blast zone to add to the fun. They are people who know what a jet blast can do and should know better. The average person believe it or not does not know the physics of jet engines. I am sure many of you do things that many of the rest of us would consider stupid, sometimes hold back on the judgement, all it shows is a fragile ego that desperately needs to feel better than others. Someone died enjoying aviation, that is very sad.

And for those talking about 'ruining it for everyone else'. I have no words.

You are making some really harsh judgements here. What would be your solution?
Do you not think others have a right to opinions different than your own?

There are many solutions in this thread, what we're really missing is a problem. Someone did a moderate-risk trick - and lost.
Shit happens. Next departure is 757 to NYC in 35 minutes.

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

Chemist wrote:

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

I would draw the line at do not risk your life for stupid stuff. Grabbing on to a fence and getting blown away by jet blast is stupid. So is running with the bulls and base jumping. With surfing, sky diving, piloting a plane, scuba, riding a motorcycle, and even hang gliding, there is a skill to perfect. Holding on to a fence not so much. This poor woman's death, over a stunt, was bound to happen and served no purpose. The authorities need to crack down.

Well by categorizing some as "stupid" you are imposing your own value judgement on others. And your definitions will vary versus others.

And to another who replied, you certainly don't need licenses in many places for surfing, for scuba diving. In the US you can also pilot an ultralight without a license.

Here is how life works: Stupid is a word because it means something. Smoking while you are filling up your gas tank is stupid. Climbing into a cage of tigers is stupid. Trying a You Tube stunt of holding a book and having your girlfriend shoot you through the book is stupid. (Yes, regrettably, this recently happened.) Holding onto a fence to get jet blast from large passenger jets is also stupid. Stupid can be absolute and not simply a value judgment. People who do what this poor woman did are being stupid. One of the reasons she probably participated was all the other stupids doing it, which made it seem less dangerous.

spacecadet wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

I don't know in what way they should "crack down". These people aren't breaking any laws except maybe jaywalking (good luck enforcing that law in the Caribbean - I'm not even sure that's illegal there, because where would you even cross otherwise?). Once on that side of the street, though, if they're outside the fence I don't see how you can even get them for trespassing.

There definitely don't need to be any *new* laws, which also won't be enforced anyway. The Caribbean is a very laid back place, and they like it that way, as do the tourists who go there.

Maho Beach is also a major tourist draw in itself specifically because of its airport proximity (go look at the t-shirt selection at the Sunset Bar and Grill if you don't believe that, or the shore excursions coming to Maho Beach from cruise ships), so good luck changing anything that makes it less appealing. That would hurt local businesses and probably even the economy of the island.

So I don't expect much to change. Maybe the airport will update the signage a bit; it was looking a little tatty last time I was there.

Edit: in fact I just checked the Maho Beach cam and there were people riding the fence during a takeoff, right now.

I did not say close the beach; I said get people off the fence. I do not care how laid back something is. I suspect it might also be illegal, but if not the Dutch authorities can make it so. All of the "stupids" can go find some other cheap thrill.

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

Part of government's purpose is to promote safety. That is why we have traffic regulations, and pilot's licenses. This fence surfing needs to be shut down.

Chemist wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Yes, she put herself at risk. Yes, the signs are plentiful and clear. But that doesn't mean she gets what she deserved like she is some criminal.

And, just because there are signs doesn't mean she truly understood her risk. She probably hadn't seen the videos like we all have to understand the magnitude forces of the jet blast. I am sure there are many people that regret riding the fence after doing it, after really understanding the risk, and probably won't do it again. There are danger signs everywhere nowadays... so many that at times people probably tune them out. They might think, if this was really that dangerous, we wouldn't be allowed to do it. Most of us have ignored danger signs before thinking we understand the risk, sometimes we do and sometimes we don't. Sounds like there are plenty of A-Netters who have riden the fence. Are they all idiots? If they were killed, do they deserve it?

I remember when I ran with the Bulls in Pamplona when I was 18. I had just arrived in town the night before, I was up all night drinking the night before, I had limited knowledge of the event since this was 1991 and had only seen occasional news clips in the US. Everyone we were with said "OK, time to go run with the bulls", we just all went. It was awesome but a couple of people got badly gored right behind me as I entered the stadium. The next day, I watched the event and was stunned, I didn't realize how dangerous it was, I could have easily been killed. Had I died, would I have deserved it?

Well said. I do nto want my remarks to be construed as me gloating over this. This activity is stupid and I think the authorities need to shut it down.

The problem is that a lot of things that have some dangers are enjoyable and result in no injuries for most participants. So where does that line get drawn, and do you want your governments controlling that?:
- running of the bulls in Pampaloma
- SXM fence "surfing"
- skydiving
- BASE jumping
- piloting a GA plane
- surfing
- scuba diving
- riding a motorcycle
- etc.

Part of government's purpose is to promote safety. That is why we have traffic regulations, and pilot's licenses. This fence surfing needs to be shut down.

spacecadet wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

I don't know in what way they should "crack down". These people aren't breaking any laws except maybe jaywalking (good luck enforcing that law in the Caribbean - I'm not even sure that's illegal there, because where would you even cross otherwise?). Once on that side of the street, though, if they're outside the fence I don't see how you can even get them for trespassing.

There definitely don't need to be any *new* laws, which also won't be enforced anyway. The Caribbean is a very laid back place, and they like it that way, as do the tourists who go there.

Maho Beach is also a major tourist draw in itself specifically because of its airport proximity (go look at the t-shirt selection at the Sunset Bar and Grill if you don't believe that, or the shore excursions coming to Maho Beach from cruise ships), so good luck changing anything that makes it less appealing. That would hurt local businesses and probably even the economy of the island.

So I don't expect much to change. Maybe the airport will update the signage a bit; it was looking a little tatty last time I was there.

Edit: in fact I just checked the Maho Beach cam and there were people riding the fence during a takeoff, right now.

I did not say close the beach; I said get people off the fence. I do not care how laid back something is. I suspect it might also be illegal, but if not the Dutch authorities can make it so. All of the "stupids" can go find some other cheap thrill.

Maybe it's worth reminding people that the very reason that SXM is so well-known around the world is because of all those photos and videos that make it seem like a pretty dangerous arrangement that wouldn't be allowed elsewhere. Any busy level crossing or even any open manhole in the road usually has better security around it to make sure people don't get hurt unless they're really, really trying to. (In fairness, in places like Phnom Penh that open manhole statement isn't always true - but that's one of the reasons most people don't aspire to making their hometown more like Phnom Penh.)

To be honest, I find the surprising amount of "that was just somebody being stupid"/"Darwinism at work" statements quite offensive (to not even mention deeply cynical). I'd turn that on its head - how stupid that somebody has to die before regulations are put in place and/or enforced.
For all we know now, the deceased was no more or less stupid or reckless than anybody else there with her on the day, or anybody else who's rode the fence before or since then, including those on this forum who've done so, those people you see in those Youtube clips of SXM, and those that say SXM was on their bucket list.
She was just the first truly unlucky one because she maybe let go a bit too soon, or got caught in just the wrong way to hit the concrete barrier in just the wrong way. She wasn't any more stupid than other fence riders. Just less lucky.

If nothing else, this thread has changed my view about the Darwin awards. They no longer seem such a morbidly innocent collection of oddball news stories; they instead appear to make people feel like they have permission to gloat over dead people and their families.

United787 wrote:

I am surprised by the lack of empathy displayed on A-Net right now. A woman lost her life, a woman that has a family and friends that are grieving her this very moment, have some respect.

Thanks for this and the rest of your post. Couldn't agree more.

Max Q wrote:

Sometimes people do need to be protected from themselves,
this needs to end.

Indeed. How this protection can be done would be open to debate, but really there is no argument that the current arrangement is completely stupid. No distance whatsoever between the end of a runway that regularly handles A330/777 and larger equipment and a popular beach, and maybe 50 or 100 metres between the position of an airplane that's about to take off and said beach. Only a small road and a fence in-between, plus some concrete blocks that maximise potential of injury (but that are there for protection in case cars get stuck behind the blast).

mandark wrote:

TL;DR: normally a sign with big red letters is not enough in the industry of aviation. It was the lady's fault but the authorities' responsibility.

That probably sums it up nicely.

spacecadet wrote:

Because most of the world isn't a goddamn nanny state. Look, people. Nothing of consequence is going to happen from this.[...]

Not everybody lives (nor wants to live) in the same dog-eat-dog world that you appear to be proposing.
Simply because the logically resulting "Yeah, let's get rid of safety regulations in aviation and everywhere else for that matter. What could possibly go wrong?" is a stupid enough proposal to not be subscribed to by most sane people. Although in fairness, the "he/she was stupid enough to do it" logic would still apply, except the full sentence would then read "Well, nobody's fault but theirs to be stupid enough to get onto a plane to begin with." Remember those days?

We seem to live in such a comfy world these days that it's easy to forget that there are literally millions of reasons why regulations are in place. Not just regarding the perimeter boundaries of airports (and their enforcement) but also regarding other things like what constitutes an airworthy plane, or a car that's fit for the road, or a working environment that's safe. I live in a maritime city with a large and busy harbour, shipyards, docks and everything included. They have plates commemorating those who died in the shipyards - up until the 1950s/60s, ten or twenty people killed in a year constituted an average-enough year. Around that time, the authorities finally started to put regulations in place and enforce them. Now, it's a bad year if a single person gets killed (last death on a shipyard in my city was in 2008; and no, that's not because they've all closed in the meantime).
That doesn't of course mean that each and every regulation truly makes sense. But it means that having regulations makes sense.

Bald1983 wrote:

With surfing, sky diving, piloting a plane, scuba, riding a motorcycle, and even hang gliding, there is a skill to perfect. Holding on to a fence not so much.

Therein probably lies the fallacy as well - fence-surfing appears easy. "Just hold on really tight, you'll be fine. Nothing to it. Look at all the other people who do it, no worries, nothing ever happened. It just *seems* dangerous. Come on, don't be a p*ssy. No more dangerous than jaywalking and we've all done that, right? Do something crazy for a change, you can be sensible again when you're back home from your holidays!"

Chemist wrote:

You are making some really harsh judgements here. What would be your solution?

I think he outlined that quite clearly.

Chemist wrote:

Do you not think others have a right to opinions different than your own?

In no way are anybody's first amendment rights infringed by Planetalk (or anybody else, for that matter) vehemently disagreeing with them, or finding their statements devoid of humanity and empathy.
The difference, by the way, between Planetalk's statements and those about that "stupid" woman blamed for potentially ruining "the SXM experience" is that those people Planetalk is directing his comments at are here and able to defend themselves/contextualise/change their minds/disagree/whatever.

anfromme wrote:

Not everybody lives (nor wants to live) in the same dog-eat-dog world that you appear to be proposing.
Simply because the logically resulting "Yeah, let's get rid of safety regulations in aviation and everywhere else for that matter. What could possibly go wrong?" is a stupid enough proposal to not be subscribed to by most sane people. Although in fairness, the "he/she was stupid enough to do it" logic would still apply, except the full sentence would then read "Well, nobody's fault but theirs to be stupid enough to get onto a plane to begin with." Remember those days?

We seem to live in such a comfy world these days that it's easy to forget that there are literally millions of reasons why regulations are in place. Not just regarding the perimeter boundaries of airports (and their enforcement) but also regarding other things like what constitutes an airworthy plane, or a car that's fit for the road, or a working environment that's safe. I live in a maritime city with a large and busy harbour, shipyards, docks and everything included. They have plates commemorating those who died in the shipyards - up until the 1950s/60s, ten or twenty people killed in a year constituted an average-enough year. Around that time, the authorities finally started to put regulations in place and enforce them. Now, it's a bad year if a single person gets killed (last death on a shipyard in my city was in 2008; and no, that's not because they've all closed in the meantime).
That doesn't of course mean that each and every regulation truly makes sense. But it means that having regulations makes sense.

There is risk associated with essential activities, and risk associated with non-essential activities.
I am not putting on a same page those who got killed on a job and those who was killed in for-fun activities. Being burned by a fire due to electrical short at home is not the same as being burnt by fireworks. Commuter killed in a car crash is not the same as motorcyclist doing wheelies on a highway.
If safety was the only goal, there would be no motorcycles, sports, fireworks, mountain hiking, non-military skydiving and many other similar things..

Like everyone else who fence surfs...she knew what she was doing was risky. She thought she could handle the risk and come out unscathed...or at worst, maybe bruised. I imagine she really didn't think it through, assuming the risk was more imagined than real...like a roller coaster, where the odds of getting seriously hurt are very small.

At some point, we have to accept responsibility for our own actions. Just because a cliff is there, doesn't mean I have to jump off of it...even if other people do and survive. Unfortunately, unlike bungie jumping or base jumping or skydiving...there are no rules to fence surfing. Except for other surfers, (all of whom may very well be novices like you), you have no instructors or harnesses to strap into.

For the average person, there is no possible way to gauge just how much jetblast one can deal with, without being flung against a concrete block. As most in here know, the average non aviation enthusiast, can barely remember the number of engines hanging from the wings, much less tell the difference between a heavy and a light jet...and calculate the force of its jetblast, and apply that to the maximum holding strength of your fingers in a chicken wire fence.

Yes...she saw the warnings and made a choice...but how could she possibly have known if she had the strength to withstand the blast? Thousands of people have done what she did and survived to laugh about it later. How hard could it be?

And there's the rub; there's no way to know if you can handle it, until you are doing it. You take a chance based on your guess of your capabilities in comparison to those who have succeeded...or failed, before.

So what if you tried it and survived. Maybe it was a lightly loaded 737, lined up down the runway. You are now experienced. What if the next time you try, it's a 747 lined up with its tail over the threshold. That's a different thing altogether...but if for you, a jet is a jet, you may have no perspective magnitude of the difference of the blast.

Yes...she screwed up...but how could she know she couldn't handle it? How does anyone?

I think there's a middle ground. I think it's possible to build a blast fence that would deflect most of the jetblast, yet let enough through for the thrill seekers. Back in the day, it was a risk taken by a few. Now, it has become so common that anyone can think they can do it, and the sense of danger and risk has been diminished to the point where any grandpa thinks they can ride the fence with impunity.

Maybe set it up like a bungie jump. Have personnel that can clip you into a little harness and fit you with souvenir goggles.

More and more people who really shouldn't be riding the fence are trying it. Maybe they're drunk, or their buddies goad them into it or they just feel like it...and more people are going to get seriously hurt or die. For the island, a bunch of people dying at a resort is bad press. I think it's in their own best interest to get ahead of this.

I imagine that the number of people who go to St. Maarten to ride the fence is miniscule compared to the total number of vacationers. I think they have much more to lose by people dying than by people not going there because they can't ride the fence.

No security presence here today, UNTIL the Air France A340 positioned for takeoff.

Then a police vehicle stopped traffic and spooked everyone off the fence...until the engines spooled up, then a few folks were back on the fence. After takeoff, cop found and stopped JUST me on the beach. Yelled a bit, asked if I saw the signs or would be sad if a family member was hurt. Then told me to have a nice day.. No ticket or arrest. I tool a risk, yes, but crossed it off my bucket list... and it was probably safer than sky diving.

Just a question regarding to the layout of the place: How about a second fence acting as a safety net ?

It would be just 1 meter behind the existing one, between the roadside and the road itself, so that fence riders could stay between both fences, and either hold on to the existing one, or just rest their back against the "safety net". Worst case for the fence riders is, they let the fence go, and are caught by the second fence, before they can accumulate any speed so they would not hit the curb ten meters further head first and get injured.
It should not spoil the view to anyone either.

Why not put multiple rows of fencing in place so that there is simply no room for anyone to go near the dangerous area?

While it saddens me that a woman died, I don't think the SXM government should do anything. There are plenty of signs up. The signs even say there is a risk of severe bodily harm and death.

At some point grown people have to take responsibility for themselves, it's not the governments job.

spacecadet wrote:

Bald1983 wrote:

The authorities need to crack down.

I don't know in what way they should "crack down". These people aren't breaking any laws except maybe jaywalking (good luck enforcing that law in the Caribbean - I'm not even sure that's illegal there, because where would you even cross otherwise?). Once on that side of the street, though, if they're outside the fence I don't see how you can even get them for trespassing.

There definitely don't need to be any *new* laws, which also won't be enforced anyway. The Caribbean is a very laid back place, and they like it that way, as do the tourists who go there.

Maho Beach is also a major tourist draw in itself specifically because of its airport proximity (go look at the t-shirt selection at the Sunset Bar and Grill if you don't believe that, or the shore excursions coming to Maho Beach from cruise ships), so good luck changing anything that makes it less appealing. That would hurt local businesses and probably even the economy of the island.

So I don't expect much to change. Maybe the airport will update the signage a bit; it was looking a little tatty last time I was there.

Edit: in fact I just checked the Maho Beach cam and there were people riding the fence during a takeoff, right now.

Exactly. This beach is a key attraction of the island. It is never going to close. They are never going to put up a blast fence. They probably won't even enforce fence riding. Rightfully so. Considering how many people "ride the fence" every year, and how many deaths there are per year (one so far - none in the last couple years) , this activity is probably way less dangerous than a myriad of other activities like rafting, skydiving, etc. So are we gonna shut those down? Nope .. it all comes down to personal responsibility, even if the risk is minimal.

A lot of people here are quick to diss the activity. My guess is that they've never been there. People are acting like it's suicide. But in real life, you hold onto a fence, it gets windy, and hot, for at most 15 seconds. The riskiest part is probably having your belongings blown away. In fact, Its pretty stupid to go to Maho and not ride the fence. It's the full experience that is awesome for me and many other people. There is virtually no risk to fence riding as long as you hold on the whole time. People get hurt because they quit and let go halfway through and hit the mid-street barrier, which should be removed.
Bad luck got her. She should've realized beforehand she would not be able to hold on. But may the woman rest in peace.

Ok I have an easy fix. Send a B-1B there and have it takeoff when the beach is at max capacity. Anyone dumb enough to stand behind that at such a close range would get everything they deserve.

Andre3K wrote:

Ok I have an easy fix. Send a B-1B there and have it takeoff when the beach is at max capacity. Anyone dumb enough to stand behind that at such a close range would get everything they deserve.

Well SXM did at one point have a Concorde land and takeoff. Wonder how that went. I don't think there's any photos of it taking off from SXM. There is certainly few photos of the Air France Concorde landing at SXM though.

I went to Maho Beach yesterday (honestly one of the best days of my life) and throughout the day many people still grabbed on to the fence, but far less than what I have seen in videos. In terms of authority enforcing the rules - a lady working at sunset bar came and told everyone to get off the fence before B6 took off, and a police car conveniently strolled past right before AF and put its lights on to tell people to get off it, but right as the plane started its takeoff roll about 7 people ran across the road to grab the fence. I remained right at the curb on the beach, and honestly the jet blast was huge even at that point and not having anything to hold on to made it even more exhilarating!

cat3appr50 wrote:

Assuming it was a Boeing 737 800, the distance from the aft end of the aircraft at normal takeoff position on TNCM runway 10 to the concrete barrier wall and fence would be around 230 ft. Based on Boeing published exhaust velocities (no wind, standard day) for a 737 800 at takeoff thrust, the approximate exhaust gas velocity at the fence line would be around 80 mph (or 117 ft/second). The enhanced Fujita scale for tornadoes puts this velocity in the range of an EF0 tornado winds (65-85 mph) and right at the edge of an EF1 rating. 50 mph exhaust velocities from a 737 800 can persist as far away as 1000’ from the aft end of the aircraft at takeoff thrust.

How many videos have been shown with lots and lots of people blown off the fence and tumbling backwards uncontrolled before this fatality occurred. May the person who lost her life RIP, but anybody standing directly behind an aircraft behind that fence that close to the aircraft during takeoff is simply foolish IMO.

Let's not forget that a 737 has engines that are much lower to the ground than other, larger, aircraft.

No doubt this has a greater effect on the people surfing the fence who are also much lower to the ground, then the engines on other, larger, aircraft.