I know what type of seatbelts those are, but the Beast wasn't a flawed safety system before the seatbelts were added. They were purely a redundant safety system that the park added to help ensure that people wouldn't get out.
The problem is that there are some guests who tend to do "some things some of us wouldn't try to do."
Think about the following comment and the fact that some of the people that post on this board have even noted that riding with the seat belt that tight "kills airtime":
He may have been referring to the practices of disallowing the lap bar from lowering to its proper position, loosening seat belts, and even standing up as some people have been known to do, all to increase the effect of "air time," the zero-gravity sensation enthusiasts crave when a roller coaster train crests a hill at high speeds.
"The enthusiasts stretch things to do what they can," he said.
...To put it nicely, the Intamin rides can't rely on a seatbelt system that someone could easily override. Unfortunately, because these rides are so big and so public, and this is America, the rides _have_ to be made so that they are as smart as the riders.
Quite unfortunately the current system doesn't ensure that riders can't unbuckle their seatbelts, but it does at least give the operators something they can tug on to make physically sure the seat belts are tight before the ride starts, and that they will stay that way throughout the ride as long as the rider doesn't unbuckle it. The type of belt that you are thinking of, if the mechanicism breaks, it does not hold it's place tight and instead can easily slip to the longest possible length, which could potentially be more dangerous.
I only saw at most two people yesterday get booted off the ride because they simply didn't fit & my biggest complaint was not the new bars or belts but the fact that the damn ride kept breaking down all 3 times we queued up for it.
Despite being stapled I still got the same amount of air out of that 3rd hill & the shin guards/side bars were not as painful on the legs as I heard they would be,at least Batwing(a.k.a the shake & break as I now call it) never broke down once the entire day...unlike the red & blue monument sitting right next door to it.
The safety community still generally considers physical, mechanical locks to be the highest safety standard for reliability with relay logic next, then computer control. I often design such systems. The biggest advantage of computers is that you can do complex logic that would be difficult if not impossible to do by other methods. We also often use computers or PLC's to monitor other safety systems as a double check.
I'm not arguing that point at all. As I said in my reply to your last post (on page 2 of this):
A flying B&M ride is locked by the use of a mechanical basis, but is monitored and controlled by a computer after that point. Even most of the ancient woodies you refer to have had computer systems built into them that monitor when a rides harnesses may and may not be released.
I'm not arguing that at all. I am saying that if we have computers that can monitor a ride's harness system, why are we not doing it? B&M rides lock just like Intamin rides, but B&M rides check to ensure that all of the harnesses are down correctly using computer systems, and Intamins don't.
I don't think that anyone in the safety community would say that the computers make the B&M rides less safe. Considering that safety is supposed to be the number one priority in building amusement park rides. You might not have to use it, but why wouldn't you?
You must be logged in to post