Man dies after ride on Stardust Racers at Epic Universe

Here's a good look at the restraint down. It really shows what would be required to hit your head on that bar.

What about the metal handhold on the front of the restraint? Fall forward and smack that? (especially when you see how it's positioned on the riders in eightdotthree's linked photo)

The attorney claims that it was the bar at the front of the car.

Only if youre a contortionist. It’s at most 2 ft from your midline bend point. It has to be the backrest.

In order for his head to repeatedly hit the metal bar at the front of the car, his waist would have to be coming out of the seat, and he would be barely restrained by his upper legs above the knee. ...Which is possible, I suppose.

That's just not easy to imagine though.

It is easy for me to imagine his head bouncing between the orange bars that are beside the shoulders. Especially if he lost consciousness. Those parts of the restraint look like they are supposed to limit movement of one's head and torso from moving from side-to-side. They may be somewhat padded, but the impact may have been hard enough to cause injury anyway.

I am very interested to see if there is an explanation, and what that explanation ends up being.

Touchdown:

Only if youre a contortionist.

Or possessed.

I blame Satan.

Touchdown:

Only if youre a contortionist.

OhioStater:
Or possessed.

As far as the handhold. I dunno. I mean, I get it. But...

I still look at the pic eightdotthree 8.3 posted. I know most of us can't touch our foreheads to our crotch, but man, that dude in blue in row two. A slightly high lapbar, a slumped rider slides down in the seat a little. Or with a passed out rider, we don't know if they shifted and maybe the bar locked in another notch in an awkward position.

Hell, I can imagine a contorted scenario where that happens just as easily as someone hitting the front edge of the car itself.

But I digress.

eightdotthree:
The attorney claims that it was the bar at the front of the car.

Is that the final take? Because earlier stories (linked above) keep mentioning the restraints (in full or as well, at least):

Attorneys for Zavala's family said Monday they believe he hit his head on a restraint during the coaster's downward thrusts and that he was unconscious for most of the ride.

Crump also cited the Medical Examiner's report, noting that he believed "blunt force trauma" meant Zavala's head hitting some part of the ride, ride vehicle, or ride restraint multiple times.

So watch people ride. What exactly could one bludgeon themselves on while ragdolling?

https://www.tiktok.com/@rid...8932575519

Watching how everyone is positioned and moving in that tiktok video makes it even weirder. How do any of those people really hit anything with their head hard enough or enough times to kill them. Maybe pinablling around in the little corral created by the seatback and restraint sides? But even that would take a very specific position - which may be the case. Which goes back to my earlier strange fluke, perfect storm type stuff:

Handicapped rider passes out, shifts position, a slightly loose restaint locks down on the unconscious rider in a weird way causing them to knock about the ride in a way that's not reasonably going to be accounted for or happen again without powerball-levels of odds-beating. (And yes, that's a lot of speculation. I doubt that will be a problem in this thread)

I apologize if this has been mentioned, but is the idea that he passed out and then hit his head or that he hit his head then passed out? Or we're not sure?

Here's another theory. He dies on the ride, then his limp body ragdolls and gets beat up. Coroner cites the blunt force trauma, completely missing an actual (natural?) cause of death. (no wait, that's my pitch for an episode of CSI)

(and I hate that you guys got me wondering about this because up until now I thought it was kinda weird that we seemed so worried about the outcome - I mean, I'm curious, but, really... *shrug*)

I think "the coroner f'ed up" is less likely than a few other possible explanations. I mean, not impossible, but generally professionals get things right.

I'd put the odds in roughly the same area as "Man somehow budgeons himself to death on Stardust Racers" but here we are.

And yes, just having a little fun with it.

Brian Noble:

I mean, not impossible, but generally professionals get things right.

This is the most Coasterbuzz line ever.

---

10 minutes later:

EDIT - If there's one thing I still love the room for, it's making me go down rabbit holes I never would have otherwise. So thank you for that, you weirdos.

Turns out (with extensive research entailing one google search and the AI summary of said search) it's far more likely the coroner f'd up than the dude died on the ride in the first place:

I have to say the theories here are better than other places. I saw someone trying to argue that the restraint broke both his femurs creating another bend point. Even accounting for his disability, the femur is the strongest bone in your body. Breaking it on a ride would take a lot, but to have both be broken, on the same ride, in such a way to cause your body to be able to bend and hit the front bar is some final destinationesque happenstance.

Everyone going with the forward hit is also forgetting something important this is a launch coaster which emphasizes speed, all of the sudden accelerations are going in the forward direction until the break run. You don’t get slammed forward on rollercoasters except break runs, you get slammed side to side and can get slammed backwards but forwards? Name a ride where that happens (that doesn’t have a backwards portion) except the break run.

Lord Gonchar:

Is that the final take?

Apparently not. I was looking for the article that has him saying exactly that but now I find others that has him stating that he was likely thrown forward and hit his head on "hard structures".

Touchdown:
this is a launch coaster which emphasizes speed

It has a top speed of 65mph. It doesn't feel particularly fast but the airtime hills are very forceful and do tend press you into your seat in the valleys. I can see how an unconscious person could be thrown forward then back over and over again.

Reopening tomorrow afternoon.

...which suggests to me that the park thinks it's on pretty sure footing.

So maybe the coroner did f up? I guess we'll find out in due course. Or not.

Look, if you're not on board with my "the guy died on the ride of something else entirely, then went limp, fell into a weird position, the restraint locked down on him, bashing his head repeatdly on the handhold, and then the coroner incorrectly stated the cause of death" theory, then you clearly do not buy into Occam's Razor.

(winky face and so forth, just in case)

It's like Naked Gun meets Final Destination.

Ride Reopens Friday. The parks insurance company is signing off on this, so it sounds like it wasn’t malfunctioning.

https://www.clickorlando.co...eres-when/

Park may have reached a settlement with the family. If that is the case, likely won't be much further released in terms of details.

From the letter from the park in terms of changes:

To further assist guests in determining whether they can or cannot ride an attraction, we are updating operational procedures and attraction signage to reinforce existing ride warnings and physical eligibility requirements at Stardust Racers and other rides.

Will be interesting to see what changes they make (if any) beyond highlighting ride warning signs.

[edit: not really Occam’s Razor, because it’s not true, but I meant the absolute simplest answer that doesn’t require a billion to one odds style scenario would be the guest next to him being the source]

Occam’s razor is that guest seated next to him was the source of the blunt force trauma.

talk about the CSI’est of CSI episodes.

it will be VERY interesting to see what operational changes are made on SR (and all other rides) tomorrow morning.

No way in Hell that the park settles with the family today, indicating some form of fault, and opens the ride tomorrow with zero mechanical changes.

There could be some eventual settlement, to make the noise go away, but I think that would require an “alligator in my swimming pond with no sign showing said gator and child size snack” style of failure to warn.

I think there will be no settlement, but a reopening accompanied by a wholesale change to the way wheelchair/amputee individuals are allowed to access any dynamically aggressive ride. That I think is still to be seen come tomorrow, but I hope this “one in well beyond powerball” style odds event doesn’t mean a lack of access for an entire class of guests.

Settlement agreements typically contain clauses that expressly state there is no admission of guilt or fault. And are confidential (disclose terms and you lose funds received). Why would a party who isn't guilty or at fault enter a settlement? Litigation is expensive (even if you win, you still lose). PR headaches for public entertainment company. And juries are unpredictable.

If they make changes tomorrow in terms of operations, warnings, etc., is that evidence of fault? Legally subsequent changes would not be admissible (just like the settlement agreement would admit no fault/guilt from a legal perspective). Does the public feel the same?

Touchdown:

Ride Reopens Friday.

First in line?