Posted
Pharaoh's Lost Kingdom has been ordered to pay $4.9 million to Paul Ricks of Rialto, for injuries he sustained when he fell from the amusement park's Ferris wheel. He was riding the Ferris wheel at the amusement park when his lap bar failed, causing him to fall 35 feet to the ground, according to the victim's attorneys.
Read more from The Redlands Daily Facts.
I'm not entirely convinced that the park was completely responsible for this, but Pharoah's Lost Kingdom is a death trap. I got cut by a sharp bolt sticking out from the lap bar pivot on a small powered coaster there, and could tell that most of the rides were in horrible dis-repair. The Chance Thunderbolt had a forward and backward shaking motion that just felt bad. This place does need to be taught a lesson, but I'm not sure if this is it.
-Ride_Op
I didn't say it was the park's fault and I didn't say it wasn't. What I said is that I have experience working that type of ride and, knowing what I know, even if the "spring was worn" I still have trouble seeing how he "fell out".
If the bar popped up because it wasn't locked, the guy wouldn't have had to lean forward to pull the bar back...he would have had to reach up.
Actually, the bar could have popped out of the lock but even then it would have fallen back down and rested on top of the locking mechanism. Worst case then is that it would be down but not locked.
Obviously I wasn't there so I don't know all of the facts but, at the very least, my best guess is that there had to be some type of contributory negligence on his part. That might lead to a decrease in the award.
Interesting to note that someone from the State and Eli Bridge Company "tested" the ride shortly after the accident and found nothing wrong but 3 weeks later the victim's lawyer tested the car and found the spring to be worn. The people who built the ride and the one's that inspect it found it to be in good working order but the victim's lawyer found something wrong.
Frankly, if the spring was worn, I think the bar would have been locked but the operator wouldn't have been able to unlock it. That springs purpose is to allow the operator to retract the lock so that the riders can get out.
I have no idea what this park's safety record is but it just doesn't add up.
I agree with Ride_Op's statement, that this park needed to be taught a lesson. More then anything this settlement is nothing. Here's a man who'll probably never be able to work again, and is screwed for the rest of his life.
Most minor injuries are the riders fault? Jim Fisher what's a minor injury to you?
-----------------
Helping The Injured Defeat The Amusement Park Industry Day After Day.
I can see partial responsibilty on both sides. Having operated a similar Eli wheel, yes, the bar does lift up-then out, but the motion is almost continuous, meaning there is no major point that the bar pivots. Had the bar popped out, yes it would, in most cases stay down. That would not preclude the bar going slightly forward first, then dropping below the lock (I witnessed this many times, usually when GP tried to lock their own bar). Seeing this, I can picture the mans reaction to reach out instead of up to get the bar.
You also have the rocking issue. The wheel I ran (hydraulic drive/clamp brake) had a tendency to rock...freely. Put a body in that seat, and your gravity point gets set so that you are slightly tilted back. Depending on the seat bearings, a slight movement could cause the car to rock forward a decent distance. To empty the foot rests of water (before our ingenious maintanence department figured out if you drilled a hole in them, they drain on their own) we would rock the entire wheel by moving the joystick forward/reverse rapidly. (don't ask why they did it that way...I never understood)
I can see this guy, turned around in his seat, thigh pushing up against the bar. Bar pops up, he swings around to grab it. Doing this causes his sit to lurch forward, spilling him onto the ground. I think any person in this situation, not having much working knowledge of the ride, would react with more intensity than you or I, causing a much more dynamic movement.
Should the guy have been turned around? No. Should the bar have popped up? No. Should the man be compensated, partially. I would compensate medical expenses, since the lock allowed the bar to release. He, however contributed to the accident by turning around and putting unnecessary stress on the lock mechanism. I would not award him punitive damages for this reason.
But you know as well as I do, we live in the lawsuit capital of the world. Trip on a broken sidewalk, sue the homeowner. Spill hot coffee on yourself, sue the coffee maker. Get fat, sue McDonalds. When will it ever end?
According to Rides 911, the judge in this case ruled that it was park negligence on the part of the operator (didn't check to see if the bar was locked) and on the part of the park itself (the ride was poorly maintained.)
It doesn't look like this is one of the "stupid guest" instances.
-----------------
If you could just see the beauty... these things I could never describe. Pleasures and wayward distraction; is this my wonderful prize? --Joy Division
About the minor injuries, I believe most minor inguries are dehidration and, like what Ride-Op said, cuts from bolts, or people tripping on that little lip when getting into a boomerang. Doesn't sound like that is the guest fault to me.
--------------
sorry my post got messed up by me so I have edited it... maybe it makes more sense now :)
*** This post was edited by GoliathKills on 1/2/2003. ***
*** This post was edited by GoliathKills on 1/2/2003. ***
GoliathKills says:
"They started up may of the rides including the coaster without doing a test run."
Unless you are at the park 24/7 I find that statement hard to believe.
Moosh
-----------------
Sig under construction!
-----------------
Please visit the small parks. We don't know what's happening behind the scenes
Woodencoaster.com
There's another thing that has to be considered now. All permantly installed rides in the state must be inspected by the State of California (or a qualified safety inspector licensed by the state). They were to have been in compliance by October or face fines and/or shut down. I have noticed some local FEC's around here have pulled rides off their property,probably due to flunking the inspection process in one form or another. This could be the result of mechanical problems, or the lack of documentation. The state is real big on the paper chase. I had to write a maintenance procedure manual for a ride that was originally built in 1890 and rebuilt in 1914. It's a good thing I've been in this business for thirty years or the owners would have been in a bind.
Let me re-hash my argument from that other forum:
My complaint with this is that we still don't know what happened in the incident. I have learned that it is an Eli Bridge 16-seat ground-mount wheel...I don't know whether it is an Eagle or an Aristocrat. On those wheels, you could safely ride all day *without* a lap bar. This guy was sitting on the ride minding his own business, when suddenly he was dangling from the lap bar, which broke loose and allowed him to fall out.
Now, the fact that the lap bar failed gives the plaintiff all he needs to suggest negligence. Either the bar wasn't completely latched, or the latch failed, or the bar was in poor condition, or whatever. That's all the plaintiff needs to know. Attorneys are interested mostly in placing blame, not in finding out why accidents happened.
But to know why the accident happened...to answer the engineering question...is, in my opinion, more important. Why did this guy end up hanging from the lap bar in the first place? Did something pitch the seat over? Was he rocking the seat? Is the park using the wrong kind of seat cushion? Was the seat improperly hung? Did the C casting on the footrest catch against a wheel spoke? I'd think every Eli wheel owner in the world would like to know how this one happened. $4.9M is a pretty expensive payout!
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
If this has been mentioned I missed it. If someones lap bar pops open it's pretty much a reflex to reach and grab it, even though it might be safer to just sit back. I suspect that this guys bar popped open and he then reflexively leaned forward to grab it.
If he was rocking before hand and the operator was doing his job the operator probably should have seen him rocking. I've heard no mention of this either.
The problem with lawsuits like this is that they sometimes do make it difficult to determine what the real cause of the accident was. As Rideman said, assuming that there was a mechanical issue, it doesn't seem clear what it was. I assume that Rideman would know if there have been any safety bulletins sent out on this since he is generally up on such things.
I don't buy the "It just popped open" comment. Even if the latch failed, recall that the end of that bar ends in a peg which goes down a few inches into the latch. In other words the actual latching mechanism is passive unless provoked. (Sort of like on a Scrambler). Even if the actual latch disengaged the bar should have rested nicely with the peg in the hole. (Unless the passenger were lifting directly up on the bar for some reason)
But we also know the car must have tipped far enough for the rider to fall out. I wonder if that latch and that bar were ever intended, or even strong enough to hold say 460lbs. of park goers in an inverted chair situation. A bar already weakend by unconfirmed reports of poor maintenance and/or an improperly latched bar couldn't have helped the situation.
The article about this incident that I read stated that the operator had NOT been checking the lapbar per the manufacturer specifed method, but the park claimed their method was 'suitable'. The article also reveals that the victim, sitting alone in one car was seated on the wheel such that the mother and child were in an ajacent car, and were said to be behind the car in which the father was seated. Since the accident happened at the top of the wheel, the car directly in back would have meant the mon/child boarded the ride after dad.
My armchair hunch says that Dad leaned over the backof the seat to either wave to Mom and Child, or take a photo, or whatever. As has been pointed out chairs on an Eli Bridge wheel are very suspectible to rocking even without the riders helping them out, and in fact that rocking/rolling action is necessary to ensure that under normal condition the chairs don't invert.
Now think about if you were seated on a Eli Wheel alone, habit would have you sit in the middle of the bench. When you get to the point where you want to turn around to look at the rest of the family in the car behind, you find your vision blocked by the hair guard. So in addition to turning backwards, possibly leaned over the back of the seat to get a good photo, he would have also had to slide laterally across the seat. A good operator could have brought Dad down to the bottom of the wheel for horesplay, and I don't know when in the cycle the incident occured, but suppose the operator had their hands full, loading the chair at the bottom of the wheel.
Am I close, I don't know.
-----------------
----
David Bowers
Mayor, Coasterville
You must be logged in to post