Plunge accident was third in recent years by ride manufacturer

There are some good arguments all around, but I'd have to side with the Intamin's Fault camp. Last year, I gained enough body mass at the end of the season to make locking the restraints on a B&M difficult. I realized that if the restraint hadn't clicked that last mark, I would not have been able to ride, and the ride ops knew it and told me so. The seat belt wouldn't go in above that last click.

 Since they are standard OTSRs, I felt that I might be safe, but the combination of the restraint clicking down far enough to fit the seat belt in is a good clue to the passenger that they might be asked to get off of the ride. Compare that with Millennium Force where I felt comfortable with the lap bar (and wondered how they managed to tell where it was safe to ride) and the seat belt that confused too many people. Until I got off of the ride, I didn't quite trust the seat belt as secure. Don't get me wrong, the locking mechanism is secure (and was explained to me here as a standard parachuter's restraint), but I couldn't be sure it was locked properly by looking at it from the sitting position, so I was always mindful that it might be loose and I wouldn't know it. Everyone else around me felt that if it locked in, it was safe.

Forwarding to the PP debate, that feeling by the GP that "if I'm locked in, I'm fine" line of thinking is what rules the populace. The park trains the ride ops and the ride ops have to make sure that the safety guidelines are followed. We have every reason to believe that the ride ops felt that the restraints were secured properly, otherwise they would not have let the woman go through. The fact that the restraint was found down and the seat belt still locked makes it very likely that the ride ops had checked the restraints as being secure and they were in the secured position when the boat came back.

That leaves the fault to the manufacturer. If the restraints are still in a secured position and someone is able to fall out without a problem (and if Coasterville Dave is correct, this is the second one with the same restraint system), then there is a big design problem that lies mainly with the engineers. If there is a fault of the ride op for allowing someone who didn't fit properly, then that should not go unpunished either.

The article states, "In the third accident, Joshua Smurphat, a mentally disabled 12-year-old from Sunnyvale, Calif., died in August 1999 in a fall from the Drop Zone Stunt Tower at Paramount's Great America amusement park in Santa Clara. The ride features a 22-foot free fall."

First of all, that's a pretty severe typo in the last line. Secondly, I know this is old news, but is it honestly safe for a mentally disabled person to be on such intense or dangerous thrill rides? It's possible to slip out of the restraints on many rollercoasters or other thrill rides, even with all the new systems and technology. Judging from my experiences with mentally disabled people, they don't usually have the capacity to consider the consequences of such an action. Just putting in my two cents.

-----------------
Shake 'n Bake: riding Meanstreak on a hot day

perhaps it is time to bring in strict guidelines that even restrict people who would be safe, make clearcut guide lines no waists over 45, or what ever even have some one at the gate watching for large people and have them measured and if ythey;re proportion is in the red zone they arent allowed to ride, then if they ar ein proportion give them an armband ro something do that for the rest of the day they can idetify that person as safe. then if some one is unsafe give them a black armband. and that way they will have a harder time trying to fool the ride ops. This would be a little deaminigng to some but we are talking about satey here. I thought it stupid I ha to take my swiss army knife off my key chain at BGW but I did it  none the less because it is for saftey and I am going to follow the rule becayse they don;t have to let me in.
-----------------
All at once the ghosts come back reeling you in now.

ok, i think i'm a bit behind but what is IAAPA.  Also, I was wondering if anybody knew if Perilous Plunge has reopened at Knott's. 

thanks.

Nick

I'm not ready to blame anybody for this one yet. And I have a feeling that when it is all over there will be plenty of blame to go around. But let's look at all the stages involved with this particular ride:
1. Does the ride produce forces that will not only eject a rider from his seat, but throw him clear of the boat? I have not seen an answer to that question yet, and I think it is critical: If the ride does not produce forces that can eject an unrestrained rider, then the case is solved, and it's a rider behavior problem.
2. We know from news stories and the like that the rider was likely secured by the lap bar and seat belt. Inadequately secured, but secured. It appears that the operator followed directions. Question is, was the safety belt...allegedly a measuring device to weed out the too-big...the correct length? In the OC Register story, there was a 15-inch discrepancy between what Intamin said the belt should be, and what Knotts said the belt was. Who is right? Which is it, really? If the belt is the wrong length, then it may be a problem of Knotts maintenance.
3. Are there problems with Intamin's design? I'll argue that bar position is less important than you might think...for instance, on Millennium Force, if the lap bar clears my knees, then it will adequately secure me, even if it is many inches from my beltline. The trick is that it has to be positioned to contain the rider's lap. If my legs were shorter, it would be necessary for the bar to come down further to insure my safety. So bar position isn't necessarily a panacea either. But is the design right so that anybody over 48" tall will have his lap in the proper position? As someone else pointed out already, perhaps the problem is that the seat isn't deep enough, so short-legged riders can easily drop their thighs and slide out from under the bar.

Well, there are some thoughts to start with...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

First off Amusement parks will NEVER set the guidelines of waist dimensions, doing so would cut large profits in their wallets and quite frankly would be a slap in most of the GP's face.

 People come in all shapes and sizes as well as colors. Discrimination is never the answer to a problem only the cheap way out. IMO Concessions for larger people should be a design factor in new rides (case in point X has multiple positioning restraints to accomodate people of all sizes), or a testing area outside of the rides line for people to check to see if they make the requirements before waiting in line.

As for this scenario, my finger is pointing solely at Intamin. If the lady was able to fasten the belt and bring down the lap bar, by all regulations she fit into the ride. The fact that she popped out clearly states that something is either wrong with their lap restraint, car design and/or seat design.

Having not ridden this ride I can't say how much force is applied on the drop, but seeing as this ride pretty much rolls to the edge slowly then drops I can't imagine it being much stronger than say Hypersonics -G's. It makes me wonder how quickly she popped out and whether or not she was even trying to hold on?? I mean think about it.. to pop out of two restraints without unbuckling them would require complete straightening of the body at the pivotal point to eject. Something just doesn't add up.

-----------------
Riding the rails from the East Coast to the West Coast

Consider this. Some people purposely avoid proper restraints. Either to be permitted to ride or to get greater "airtime". We KNOW this. The general manager of your beloved Cedar Point admitted doing this himself. I went to CP with my roommate (who happens to be 6ft+ and 300#+) and rode Raptor. We rode in the front and the operator stood on a rail in front of us, and forced my roommates OTR down with his foot until it cliked JUST ONCE!! We both assumed that this was safe, but in light of these events I now realize just how dangerous this was. Could the woman at KBF have just locked the seatbelt and sat on it, thus allowing the discovery of the locked belt after the accident? This is not an accusation, just a thought.With the increasingly extreme nature of modern amusement park rides we ALL need to take safety a little more seriously.

CoasterBearVA, you say discrimination is never the answer, but look at how many rides don't accomodate larger riders. I've seen obese people not fit in PTC trains with seat dividers, Vekoma's Invertigo, Hypersonic XLC, etc.. Are you aware of the cost to redesign every ride in a park to fit a small minority? It's never going to happen.

omg, im almost scared to go on MF again the next time im in that area, im a big guy (its not all in my hips tho) and the restraints worked fine, but im almost reluctent to get into those lapbars with the amount of air that is produced on that ride (to make it worse, they air is produced as high at 280ft).  so i dont know, but i really dont think that intamin was to blame, like someone said before, once its signed over to the park and intamin gave CORRECT precautions on the ride, then their work was done, it was the park's liability after that...

the ride's manufacturer is most likely at fault. a lot of the new restraints are a lot lower and go down to the upper thighs. so the woman who fell could have straightened out her legs at he time of the drop and just flew right out. that's why the seat belt and the lap bars were still locked in placed when the ride came back into the station.

Wait a second, virginiareelfan, you are going to blame the manufacturer because the rider effectively (if not actually) stood up during the ride? I agree with you on how she came out from under the lap bar, and I am not certain whether she did it deliberately or not. But the fact of the matter is, she had to assume a riding position which the manufacturer did not design for. Are you saying it is necessarily a design defect because the rider is able to assume a position which defeats the restraint system? If that is the case, then it effectively means that virtually any ride that does not basically immobilize its passengers shares the same defect! And if that's the standard for ride restraints, then perhaps I should just give up riding altogether!

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Mike E. Said:"Could the woman at KBF have just locked the seatbelt and sat on it, thus allowing the discovery of the locked belt after the accident?

Is this *really* a plausible theory? How many average people, upon seeing a seat belt on a ride would assume it is unneeded? Have you ever really *watched* people on amusement rides? Most tend to pull the restraints down as far as possible; 'staping' is seen as a good thing!

The only groups of people I've seen even 'non-chalant' about the restraints are teenage boys and so-called 'enthusiasts'. This would seem on the surface out of character for a mother riding with her kids.

In lieu of any conflicting evidence, the simplest answer is usually the correct one.
jeremy

-------------
A Nigerian Muslim sharia court sentences a pregnant woman found guilty of adultery to be stoned to death, but only after she has finished weaning her baby.
This is known in some parts of the Muslim world as compassionate conservatism

2Hostyl:  While I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you I have witnessed on MANY occasions the following scenario:

"Two people get in a coaster train and pull down the lap bar.  The ride-ops walk down the line, checking for lap bars and seat belts.  When they get to those two people they have to unlock the lap bars in that coach because those two riders forgot about or sat on the seat belts."

I saw this a number times just the other day on Ghostrider and I'd be willing to bet that it happens more often then you think. 

Mamoosh: I am quite aware of the situation you described. In fact, it happen quite regularly on Wild One @ SFA. BUT what makes the situation that Mike described extraordinary is the fact that the seatbelt is locked, moreover, locked by the rider. In the situation you described, the rider was oblivious of the belt. Therefore there is no reason to assume that the belt would be locked. Several *other* events would have to take place for an oblivious person to sit on a locked belt. Since we have no evidence that these *other* events occured, I again default to the simplest answer.

BTW: Dont the PP ops tug on the belts? The op on both Millie (CP) and S:ROS (SFA) tugged on the belts (similar restraints).
jeremy
-------------
"Nobody writes about the planes that land." Steve Salerno Washington Times 7-10-01

After reading through most of what is here, I have this to say. I am a large person at 6'3" and 260# and have a 38" waist. I can ride MF without a problem, and when I sit down, buckle up and pull on the restraint bar, I feel very secure.....that is, until I start up the lift hill. When going up, I feel gravity pulling me back into the seat, at which time I can pull farther back on the restraint bar. Has anyone noticed this? If you're like me and ride with your hands in the air through most of the ride, it's easy to miss doing this. In the 2000 season, the height restriction was at 54" for MF riders, and was reduced to 48" for 2001. That meant that my 7yr. old son could ride it as he was at 52", and believe me, after noticing that I could further restrain myself when going up the hill, I ALWAYS check on him before leaving the boarding station AND when going up the hill. He enjoys the thrill coasters as much as, if not more than I do. He is learning the terms and everything. What I am trying to impress into him is that they have to be ridden safely as well. He is all of 70#, tall for his age but skinny. I always find myself tightening his lap belt before we leave the station. I am not sure if the lap bar even hits his lap enough to restrain him in the event that the belt doesn't. The point of all this is that if Intamin feels that a ride of this magnitude is safe as designed, then I am also sure that the others are also done the same way. After re-reading what Coasterville Dave said in his different POV's, and reading the article from the LATimes website, I think the blame should fall on the rideop. As Dave said, the rideop knows the ride better than anyone, and knows how it looks, smells, sounds, etc...He/she should ALSO know what it looks like when a rider doesn't appear to be COMPLETELY restrained SAFELY. I'm not familiar with the rides at KBF, but I know that even though they check everything fairly well on MF, the amount of tension of the seatbelt restraint on my son has never been tightened on my son by the rideop, so I do it, and I always check twice before we leave the station. Also, at the entrance to Millennium Force, there is a seat, as most of you know, where a person can sit and "test the fit". Do they have this at KBF? Maybe the people who ride and the rideops should start using that as a basis for letting people ride. Thoughts?