Son of Beast closes

I got a report that son of beast was up and running this week... not to the general public of course

Hey that's kinda funny. Why wasn't SOB on that 'kill' list KI had with celebrities?

Oh, people only. Well, THAT would have been funny!

DantheCoasterman said:
Is SOB passing its inspection even a "good" thing? I mean, the way I look at it, this means that the ride caused a blood vessel in a woman's brain to burst when operating normally.

If anything, I'd think the inspection results would be proof that something needs to be done to the coaster.

The implication, of course, is that there are no mechanical defects with the ride. Dig a little deeper and you find that the State inspection is primarily aimed at insuring that the ride is in compliance with its design specifications. All the equipment is in good repair, the controls work as intended, the structure is sound, etc. The State does not claim to be qualified to judge the *suitability* of the ride for its intended audience, nor does the State concern itself with ride quality. Unfortunately the same is true of the ASTM F 2291 (design) and F 770 (operation) standards, which are the basis of the compliance inspection. The standards don't address rideability, and except for some poorly-understood limits on sustained exposure to high accelerations and a few minor restraint details, they have very little to say about biodynamics, and are virtually silent on the kind of impact accelerations that probably caused this rider's injury.

Fortunately for us, Paramount and Cedar Fair have worked with biodynamics experts to try and get a better handle on what their rides do to people, and they set some performance standards themselves. For the ride to operate it has to comply with the corporate biodynamics standards which are necessarily more stringent than the (mostly non-existent) industry or legal standards. But there really is no basis for those standards either; they are arbitrary, and probably based on successful ride operation more than any kind of hard science. Because it truly is still a bit of an emerging field. Personally, I think there ought to be softer padding in the coaster trains, but that's my butt talking; the parks are the ones with the hard data (and the hard seats) and they aren't sharing.

So what it amounts to is that if the ride is operating more or less the way it always has, it should be good to go. Riiiiiiiight.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

One other point. The woman that claimed to have had the burst brain vessel contacted the park and they voluntarily shut down the ride. In the time that has passed, it is possible that some of her tests results could have shown a pre-existing condition that was aggravated by SOB, but maybe not caused by SOB. If that was the case, why keep SOB closed.

This is pure conjecture and not based on any facts what so ever.

Yeah. The woman rode the coaster (just as millions of other people did) and suffered a brain injury. I am in no way making a judgment about the risk of riding the thing, but making a jump like this

DantheCoasterman said:
I mean, the way I look at it, this means that the ride caused a blood vessel in a woman's brain to burst when operating normally.

is exactly how people get the impression that roller coasters are inherently dangerous. Nobody here has the numbers in front of them, and even if they did you have to have the skill to interpret them. I'd imagine even with the best analysis of what happened it would still be very difficult to prove any sort of real causality in an isolated case like this, and all we have here on a message board is pure speculation and conjecture.

DaveStroem said:
In the time that has passed, it is possible that some of her tests results could have shown a pre-existing condition that was aggravated by SOB, but maybe not caused by SOB. If that was the case, why keep SOB closed.

My guess would be that they don't want to deal with the PR nightmare anymore. Having guests get injured repeatedly on a ride, even if they are all from pre-existing conditions, is no good. With its history, I would not be surprised if SOB garnered a lawsuit per year in its current state.

For the ride to operate it has to comply with the corporate biodynamics standards which are necessarily more stringent than the (mostly non-existent) industry or legal standards.

Is that what happened to Maverick's roll after the launch?

OhioStater said:

For the ride to operate it has to comply with the corporate biodynamics standards which are necessarily more stringent than the (mostly non-existent) industry or legal standards.

Is that what happened to Maverick's roll after the launch?

No, it was my understanding that Intaride concluded the heartline roll on Maverick would be too much for the trains, not the riders. That's why it was taken out.

As for SOB I say get rid of it. Ride gone, any future lawsuits would be non existant.

Jo
Lifetime Raptor flights: 2116 :)

I still think the ride would be a good one, with an MF articulated type of train.

I understand what you are saying, Matt, but you have to consider...this is Son of Beast we are talking about. One of the most rough, unrerideable coasters in this country (for the majority of us).

It's just hard to convince myself that, as rough as the ride is, it couldn't have caused the woman (and many others') injuries.

Maverick's roll was gone before the State had a chance to see it, I think. I don't know who decided it had to go, or why, but the decision was made by the manufacturer and by the park, not by the State. That's the main point.

Amusement park operators don't get up in the morning and say to themselves, "I wonder how many people I can maim or kill today!" In fact, the companies have a lot more at stake in running a park than any State inspector. For most operators, the State inspection is little more than a formal nuisance, but it is a nuisance that gives third-party credibility to the operator's own safety program. Kind of like those lifeguard certification programs we talked about when that unpleasantness happened at Kalahari: the certification doesn't make the lifeguard competent, but it gives credibility to his claim of competence.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

what did nobody like anything about SOB, if you sit in an even numbered row you get a pretty descent ride out of it... The trains are not designed for the coaster and i believe if they just change the trains the ride will be much better.... hey when the loop was installed that was probablly the best vertical loop on any coaster.... I dont know what you think about that one.

You mean an odd numbered row. The even rows are wheel seats.

Jimmy Boy said: what did nobody like anything about SOB, if you sit in an even numbered row you get a pretty descent ride out of it...

And everyone knows the earmark of a good coaster is that in order to enjoy it you must only sit in certain rows. (rolls eyes)

Perhaps thats why your BBW ride was rough Moosh? ;)

Could be. On the Arrow suspended coasters it seems the further back you sit, the rougher your ride experience. Unfotunately I didn't get another ride that day or I would have waited for the front and had a second ride to compare the first to.

I think the loop got more credit than usual because of the fact it was a part of the ride you would think, "Hey I'm not getting beat up at this exact moment!"

Gravity groups new coaster Voyage from Hades...Combining the height of Voyage with the insane length of an underground tunnell...There is room and can be a great ride...

raser said:
Gravity groups new coaster Voyage from Hades...Combining the height of Voyage with the insane length of an underground tunnell...There is room and can be a great ride...

That would be cool! I really thought Hades was a good ride, despite being where it is and how it's run. (was great on media day though!) People would really eat it up.

They could call it Son of my best friends' cousins wife Beast. Just call it Ferris.

DantheCoasterman said:
It's just hard to convince myself that, as rough as the ride is, it couldn't have caused the woman (and many others') injuries.

That's fine, just don't mistake convincing yourself to have anything to do with anyone else. :)

From the totally unscientific observations we enthusiasts can make it does seem like SOB may have had more issues for riders, statistically, than others. Looks really, really probable.

That being said, there are people with pre-existing conditions which can be aggravated by the most benign rides (or, stopping to quick in a car, or falling in the shower, or sitting in a chair too quickly, etc). Just don't forget, to really pin this one particular incident on SOB you'd have to first prove causality which would be really hard and then prove there's also little chance of this happening on any other ride, which I'm guessing would be damn near impossible because according to the reports the forces on SOB are not that out of line with those found on other rides. What you'd really want to look for is some sort of trend over time (and it does look like there could be one) but that's way beyond anything anyone can speculate on here accurately.

Another topic - I don't think the loop was loved just because of it's relative smoothness. The loop's huge size combined with the lap bars made for the craziest vertical loop I can think of. I can't put my thumb on exactly all the reasons the loop felt so, so different from others but it certainly was quite an experience.