Added: 5 years ago
From: lostinthetriangle
Views: 342,544
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (361)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Maybe he have afterburns ;D

  • in russia, plane takes off in -16 seconds!

  • thumbs up if you love this plane!

  • Awesome BIRD with great crew and efficient pilots, gives the word " FRIENDLY SKIES" its true meaning...I LOVE to fly American Airlines!!! <3

  • Great.Never seen before.

  • The turtle was the best part

  • I've never seen THAT before - ever!

  • very short

  • high headwinds = short takeoff distance. You can see the dust blowing accross the tarmac.

  • @poindexterdick thats what I was thinking too....

  • iba vacio o que?

  • u guys should see what a 777 can do, i had similar experience. the aircraft was empty.

  • @Apoic123 Yeah, this isn't really unique. I've seen many vids of other heavies with amazingly short takeoff rolls. The DC-10, MD-11, and 777 can all do takeoff rolls this short in the right conditions. Impressive video none-the-less.

  • @Apoic123 yeah... the a/c was empty.. these ignorant fools don't know about it..

  • Comment removed

  • @irvinmanohar to be honest, unless you have that manifest in your hands, you don't know how many people were on board. hope it was full just to prove you wrong.

  • @slates010 Don't underestimate me dude. I've tremendous knowledge about aviation. Heavies need longer runway to T/O.

    BTW, what the difference if it T/O on shorter or longer runway? The only importance is it can get airborne. Any aircraft if it is empty with low fuel level in the tanks take less runway length to T/O.

  • Pre 9/11 I was in the cockpit jump seat of an AA 757 with no pax at night MIA to HAV it was awesome!

  • jesus i thought the plane exploded at the end with that "turtle production" thing

  • @SuperDoucheMonkey Me too lol

  • This bird was built to fly

  • Airspeed alive, gear up.

  • i have travel on a JAL 747-400(@2011 feb)which is ~80% load ,and it T/O in ~30 Sec(Less then)

  • @PlaneKMT and the V1 speed is 131,VR 142 and V2 on 153 XDD

  • must have been empty + the 30 knot headwind enabling the aircraft wings to be utilizing their lift at a level that would be akin to the aircraft moving at 30 knots quicker - v cool. Britannia used to fly 767-3's into Corfu (may still do but not seen for while), and that runway is 7700 ish ft and remember v well the captain actively braking and revving the engines prior to roll to get up in the 7,400 ish usuable at full thrust, not advisable due to airport traffic road red lighted behind lol

  • empty aircraft thats why ........

  • She had to be near empty!

  • Its a plane taking off ! big deal ! Im not pilot so i don't know your little terms. Whats the big deal someone tell me ?

  • @Lastbreath187 how do i say this in a way you'll understand: plane fly fast off ground

  • @Lastbreath187 its the fact that it took off so fast usually its about a 35- 40 second takeoff for that plane for a 767 like that it needs to be at atleast 150 m/h to takeoff

  • when did it roll?....stupid video, i can go to the airport and film take offs too !!!

  • @Lastbreath187 brush up on aircraft knowledge before you make a statement like that...

  • @Lastbreath187 You fail at life

  • it runs on diesel oil

  • Wow, musta had a light load and significant wind.

  • wwwwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee­eeeeeeeeeeeeeee

  • Very impressive. 767 ER were the most profitable airplane Boeing ever built- the biggest heartaches they had were the door mechanisms

    Takeoff performance for twin engine passenger jets is extra fun because every passenger plane has to be able to complete a takeoff at max weight with one engine out. An A-340 or 747 has 4 engines, you can take off with 3. Ok. fine. On a 767, 777, 737, MD-80, A330, that means complete a takeoff on ONE engine, so when both are working and the load is light- WOW!

  • Considering it was American Airlines it was probably a light load. That always helps.

  • 762's can take off under 2000 metres, shorter takeoff run than a 737!

  • How could anyone dislike such a beutiful aircraft?

  • @767deltaairlines Boeing haters and Airbuss lovers?

  • probably empty..

  • Usually you do not allowed to take-off with a lot of thrust when the airplane is low on weight, this will result in very short take-off yes, but will also speed the things up so the take-off and climb will not be stable it may result in over speed during lift-off and high pitch climb-out a lot of things pilots do not like during take-off. You have to have just right amount of thrust for particular take-off for the things to go as smoothly as possible.

  • this video could have been recorded in my driveway haaha.What an impressive take off.

  • omg i wasn't looking at the screen properly and when the thing came up at the end i thought the plane blew up :O nice vid tho

  • the 767 is one of boeings fastest, reaching 100 mph in 6s, i remember reading that in the Boeing website (i could b wrong)

  • The title is a little misleading.

    As in roll I thought it was in refference to rolling.

    Not as in a video roll as in film. lol Good indecation though

  • too bad AA doesnt do this flight anymore. I once flew this flight in 1st class

  • it's coz of the strong headwind @ :43 or even lighter weight giving faster time to V1 then rotation

  • concerteza esse voo tava vazio apenas o peso do combustiveu

  • dang pretty quick

    

  • i remind you this is a dangerous action! it are to do a limit to the plane for make it to do the taking off when the human are inside because of to low speed are dangerous to do the take of when it are low speed because it is not fast and will not to the travel to the sky and will do like roll and not departure to sky and it make to have break like you know? fucking hard to do the stop before it can roll over for purpose to slam into car and also to not kill anyone!

    Greet from egypt

  • @AbudAisham it maybe without passengers or something...

  • @AbudAisham jesus, its hard to make any sense out of that speach....lol

  • @AbudAisham what the fuck are you saying......makes no sence at all..

  • @unmik2006 true.but your english is wrong too...

  • @AbudAisham Well put.

  • Lol?

  • I saw an empty Hawaiian 767 take off in 8 seconds.

  • @TravisaKaBiggie where..????

  • Its A 767 not a" crashbus" its probably not loaded or fully fueled

  • i bet the pilot was behind schedule or something

  • boeing 737? maybe 777? cant really tell.

  • @Al3xan6er it's a 767

  • The video reads Lost in the triangle...........that plane is taking off in Bermuda. The winds are pretty high there between Jan - March. It doesn't snow there, but we have one hell of a windy winter. Trust me that plane was full of passengers. I should know I live there.

  • man o man how i wish i will one day fly for a major airline!

  • im bettin that guy was empty, if he would have done that with passengers aboard they would have all shit their pants in unison.

  • sweet

  • This is 100% real, why are you calling it a load of crap (Don't get mad at me since I said crap instead of the other word)?

  • Very impressive! 767´s are great...even the smaller -200 series.

  • @MuCerq I prefer the 300ER

  • 767 sux

  • Friends don't let friends fly Airbus. Or should that be "Airsub", after those 3 water incidents of 2009?

    Remember, kiddos: "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going!"

  • @SenorSpode

    go fly with Concorde :)

  • Oscar: please return to the place of your birth. And take plenty of K-Y with you. And a hydraulic ram. Have a nice day. :-)

  • @SenorSpode

    what..?

    dude go get laid or summin

  • Dude, get an education or something. Keep it like that and you'll either be stuck doing fries at McD's or living off your girlfriend's foodstamps for th rest of your life. It's your call.

    Get eager, will you?

  • @SenorSpode

    fuckin loser

  • Oscar847: career welfare recipient. I was right, so you reply back with "fuckin loser". Is that the only derisive term you know or is that because you still believe Barney says you're special and thus everyone around you is nothing and thus a "fuckin loser"? You, pal, are a tool. You are pre-programmed with one purpose: to waste oxygen. "Loser", lol...get a vocabulary, will ya? Ya simpleton.

  • @SenorSpode

    fucking hell man

    get off my back, ur no any use

  • The Concorde aircraft was retired, so how can he go fly with them, idiot? He can't! And you probably sit on your fat lazy butt 24/7 eating potato chips and trolling on Youtube, because you're socially retarded, and you call SenorSpode a loser? You're the loser since you troll on here 24/7, not him. Just because he has better comebacks than you, doesn't make him a loser. Seriously, with your comments, you're only proving that you're a loser and you're stupid. Think before posting lame crap, idiot

  • @Oscar847 Your spelling "sux"

  • @texashorns76

    texas hold 'em

  • @Oscar847 Was that supposed to be funny?

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • maybe a very cold weather..

  • yeh now thats wota a strong head wind does for you.

  • agreeeeee!

  • two facts:

    -it is taking off at the sea level, which makes the air more dense, that way hotter soy it rises

    -and... probably there was a significant headwind...

  • wow 2 secs different?

  • 18 SEC no 16

  • Headwind + Flaps 15 + full power +rolling takeoff + light load = short takeoff run :)

  • and packs off :)

  • Don't the packs get put back on after the engines have been started? Excuse my ignorance I dont know a huge amount about how the packs work :)

  • Yes you are right, but when you do a short take off you put flaps 15 and packs off.... because the packs needs the energy of the engines to work.. so they put the packs off to have more energy at the takeoff... its the same in the cars if you put the air conditioner off your car will be more fast

  • what r "packs" ?

  • Air conditioning packs, they use up engine power.

  • you forget about  barometric pressure,

  • plus, humidity and density altitude.

  • alright... so you think your so smart, what if you are in a 747 taking off from St Maarten, you would use full power OK, its a common procedure in many other places too!

  • NO you DON'T! There is no arguing with anybody on this one! All jet airliner takeoffs are derated either from performance charts during pre-flight planning, or through a Thrust Mode Select Panel, you don't use full power on a turbine engine takeoff, that's just the dumbest fuckin' thing I've ever heard, in your comment. You don't even use full power on a go-around, it's a set thrust in the TO/GA Mode on any modern jetliner.

  • Amazing comeback! You're right, I just make all this shit up as I sit in a chair in my room with my finger in my ass, not like I learned any of it in Turbine Systems Ground School during training or anything.

  • i'm not saying you made it up, i mean i belive you because you obviously know more than me since i'm 14 but you would sound alot more belivable if you wern't a jerk about it.

  • i agree with you thats pretty much the take off KLM 747 does at st maarten . i've seen a delta 757 took off there after 10 seconds , at 1st it looked like he was going stall

  • yeah, sometimes if the chart does call for it you have to set full power, most "heavies" do at St Maarten too because you want every bit of altitude there haha :)

  • @genysys20 +low temp

  • @genysys20 that's a flap 5 mate... not 15

  • @carloraggio no, look at 0:23 the flaps are clearly set to 15 degrees

  • @genysys20 buddy i fly a real 767... that's a -200 on a short flight with headwind... that was a flap 5 takeoff.

  • Actually jet engines operate at takeoff thrust (below full power) depending on the OAT, so each takeoff produces different takeoff thrust but remains below maximum continous thrust.

    Full power takeoff decreases operation life and for a certain duration cause the compressor section to melt and EGT to rise.

    However in an engine out takeoff and to meet the climb gradient, obstacles the flightcrew can apply maximum continous thrust on the remaining engine.

  • @genysys20 yeh whatever GEEK. go play on your flight sim.

  • I imagine that if the wind had suddenly quit,

    he would have busted his rectal area.

  • Aircraft always take off into a head wind to reduce take off run and ground speed.Taken off in a 30 knt tailwind , would require a longer take off distance and faster ground speed to acheive the required airspeed. Landing and taken off into head wind ?yes. Crusing in a tail wind ?yes.which gives a faster ground speed.

  • Well, The Reason Why The 767-200ER Departed In 16 Sec, Is Simply B/c Of The 30 Knot Tail Wind Upon Departure, Read The Discription.

  • wouldnt it be a 30 KT headwind, since aircraft take off and land into the wind?

  • To hell with description... even though it doesn't mention direction. Look at the trees in the movie, you idiot! Tail winds DO NOT generate lift! Head winds do!

    Lrn2Physics

  • Right on Dude! That 767 must have been really light, look at the flap setting. Watched a 757 do that off Grand Cayman one time, looked like it rolled a couple hundred feet and climbed out at 45deg. Phenomenal.

  • Partially correct? Dude you are out of your fucking mind and know nothing about flying. All airplanes including hellos take off and land into the prevailing wind, that's why so many airports have runways going in so many different directions. Aircraft carriers always steer into the wind while launching and retreiving aircraft.I hope I didn't hurt your feelings but don't comment on things you know nothing about.

  • tailwind?tht would add 30 knots to the vr. it would take a LOT longer

  • 30kt tailwind and he would have departed the runway at the other end ;)

  • Prob a repo flight. No pax or cargo, just the flight crew. Climbrate like a rocket, I bet.

  • There's video of a 757 taking off from KSAN's runway 27, and rotated roughly within 1500ft.

  • man he wasn't mesin around

  • at 1:14 te plane looked like it expolded

  • lol 5*

  • just less fuel i imagine

  • If his rotation speed were 140 knots that day (total guess), after subtracting the 30 knot headwind, you filmed him rotating at a groundspeed of 110, while the indicated airspeed in the cockpit was 140kts. I think that what may have made the most difference was having 30kts of wind blasting into the engines... because what takes the longest time at the start of the roll is waiting for the engines to start getting enough air in them to start making some decent thrust.

  • Great explanation !

  • Thanks Zerocool!

    And I forgot to say at the start of my post, " In addition to being at a very light weight I also think...."

    Also, the rotation speed (and all others) is based on weight, so if this 767 was really light his rotation speed may have been really low also... especially since this was a -200 which is pretty light compared to a -300ER.

  • +1 :)

  • Also b/c he was already rolling when he hit the throttles?

  • You're a coward and a stupid web troll. You find it easy to curse me out from behind the safety and anonymity of your screen, but wouyld you do it to my face? No. You're pitiful. There was no reason for that. You're a great example of how YT brings out the worst in people. Just plain sad.

  • do you need waffles ... they make people smile

  • No thanks, I smile all the time......

  • The wind helped but was a remarkable shord take off 4 a 767, like a twin otter take off roll, lol.

  • Are airliners prohibited from taking off when head winds are TOO strong -- like 50 kts?

  • Doubt it, unless it's variable or crosswind.

  • he took of into high winds , that why the roll was short

  • Very cool video, that was a pretty short takeoff roll. I have been on a full 767 that I was hoping would get in the air before reaching the end of the runway. To see one just lift off the ground like that is pretty cool.

  • damnn!!!!!

  • strong wings + Empty plane = short takeoff's :)

    i seen many of these down my local airport =)

    good vid

  • yea that is short but it would be as it already has an airspeed of 30 konts before the groundspeed is above 0

  • because of the wind, cuz i live in Nice and when there is lot of wind , takes off are very short

  • faroolabjalmak

    We're so proud of your grasp on the English language...and fuck you dude...fuck Pakistan fuck you....USA up your ass

  • wow

  • damn

  • As I recall, the shortest/quickest takeoff I was on was a PSA BAe 146 from SFO runway 1L. He literally got a running start from the gate as it was the closest terminal to 1L. All the frequent PSA flyers were like, "Whoa...that was quick!"

    Loved PSA and the 146's.

  • If you look at the waves in the background and listen to the puffing of the mic you can see there was a substantial headwind. Actually the groundspeed and TO distance CAN be a lot less. Only thing that doesn't change is true airspeed. Judging by the that climb angle he was probably light and climbing like Endeavour!

  • omg...thats the most bull I ever seen in 1 paragragh. First of all the F-22 Raptor is a single seat aircraft. Second...family members can't randomly go on aircraft carriers for flights. Third USS Mississippi isnt an aircraft carrier!!! FYI...The last USS Mississippi was a Nuclear Guided Missile Cruiser CGN-40. On 31 July, 1997, USS MISSISSIPPI was officially decommissioned and was later towed to Bremerton, Washington for reactor core removal and storage

  • Yes, Danmcdonalds is full of it, and your response is thorough, but Dan is barely a teenager, I'm guessing just a kid with a good imagination!

  • Firstly - bullshit. And secondly I hope Air Force pilots enjoy their 150hrs a year they get to throw in their logbook cause in the commercial world we get 800-1000.

  • onto Trruckker's comment if you even had the smart sense to say USS Enterprize or The Nimitz you would of still been burned...the F-22 doesn't do carrier ops...way to make an ass of yourself

  • Closest I've seen to that was a fully loaded 757 liftoff in 15 seconds flat.

  • must have been flying around without freight and only few pax that day..

  • thats one hell of a tailwind

  • headwind double oh seven, headwind.

  • lol thats what i meant idk why i said tailwind

  • Yup!

  • Was one "hell of a headwind!"

  • Ive never seen a takeoff THAT short

  • Holy crab. Was that even a km? 767-200s can take off MTOW in less than 2km, but this is freaking short!

  • where is bda?

  • Bermuda

  • Yeah, that's some nice headwind. Listen to the popping sound on the camcorder's microphone. From this sailor's perspective, that does sound (and LOOK- on the water in the background) like a Force 5 or Force 6 wind (fresh breeze). Add that 30 knots wind to the overground speed and there you go.

  • thats simply amazing

  • wooooow that´s incredible

  • very low weight, no psgrs!!