Unsafe rollercoasters.

Saturday, February 10, 2001 7:42 PM
Earlier today in my newspaper I read an article on rollercoasters that kill. It said that little children may be effected my the extremes of rollercoasters today. One child has already shown effects from it as he got a stroke and is now in a coma. I hope that that poor little boy will be alright and will be shown metcy boy out lord jesus christ. Please put this boy in your prayers as I have. I also hope that Rollercoasters will be safe in the future.
Saturday, February 10, 2001 7:55 PM
RIGHT........ Dr Evil
Saturday, February 10, 2001 8:43 PM
Wait...back up the train here for a second. Is there any way you could post this newspaper article in the news section so we could read it. To me, it sounds like nothing more than a piece of Yellow Journalism, full of emotion, having no facts to back it up (or at least stretched facts) which is wrong. I would like to see this article, and if it were posted, I'm sure several members would rip it to shreds.
Saturday, February 10, 2001 9:10 PM
I should still have it. I'll go look in the recycling bin. If I find it I will post it as soon as possible. This is a terrible piece of news and I wish it was true but the sad fact is that it is not. I will find a copy of it and post it so we can reflect on this matter.
Sunday, February 11, 2001 5:43 PM
unfortunately I did throw that article away, but one of my friends has it still so I will contribute it shortly. Once again please keep this young child in your prayers.
Sunday, February 11, 2001 7:02 PM
I tried to find the article on Yahoo, and the best I could come up with is this http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,33606,00.html?tw=wn20000117 I hope the link works; it's so long. Any how, it seems to indicate you're more likely to die watching T.V., or using a garden hose than you are by riding a roller coaster.

My conclusion is that yes, the story is tragic if (big if!) it's true; but, if the stats are correct, he would have been in greater danger sitting at home watching Power Rangers!

On a side note, notice which coaster they describe as the world's tallest and fastest; too funny!
ATTENTION!!...This is the Alter Ego of Goliath Rocks; If he said something stupid, we're sorry, it's the "G"s talking... *** This post was edited by Goliath rocks on 2/12/2001. ***
Monday, February 12, 2001 4:19 AM
I have said it before and I'll probably say it again...

An even bigger problem is the Japanese physician's claim that the "higher and faster" coasters may present larger risks. To me, this shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the mechanism of injury in the first place. Height and speed are not the problem; after all, Japan has mountains higher than Fujiyama and railway trains faster than any of their amusement rides. The problem is in the accelerations (i.e. the applied forces). The honest truth is that as the coasters get larger, the forces applied to the riders are staying the same, or even declining. Don't believe me? Grab your Junior Physicist kit with the mass-and-spring-in-tube accelerometer, and take it to Cedar Point. Use it to take measurements of the vertical forces on Millennium Force (h=310', v=93 mph), then use it to take measurements on the Wildcat (h=048', v=36 mph) and see which one has the higher forces.....

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
                                                  |\  ***  HARD HAT AREA  *** 
|__ | \ .sig under construction
========= ____________|+|!&\ | \==# ##&\
========= OO oo=o
Monday, February 12, 2001 4:44 AM
Let's all remember when the steam engine train was introduced, "Tom Thumb" I believe, and everyone thought if you went more then 16mph you're skin would peel off.

Randy Hutchinson
You build it, I'll ride it...eventually
Monday, February 12, 2001 5:21 AM
There was at one point scientific evidence that PROVED you would be sucked out the windows of trains, by inertia, if the trains went faster than X miles per hour (I do not rememeber how 'fast' they had to go). Ah, the wonders of science.

LIfe is something that happens when you can't get to sleep.
--Fran Lebowitz
Monday, February 12, 2001 11:47 AM
The few articles I have read about this said that most people couldn't handle more than four g's. And yet I saw the crocodile hunter flying in an f-16 and they did about 8.5 g's and he passed out at 8 because he was not accustomed to the forces. So how can a 4 g coaster be so harmful to so many people when so many ride them everyday.

"One good thing about all this, with all this fresh air were gonna sleep like babies"
Monday, February 12, 2001 2:08 PM
S, when pilots and passengers are in a jet like that they wear G-suits, which use air bladders to keep all the blood from going to the legs and lower extreems so the brain still gets some. Whne the brain does'nt get enough O2, is when the person passes out.

The average person can handle 6-8 g's without a problem, 10 g's most everyone passes out, 12 g's...you die. Those numbers should be pretty accutare.

MF Drops-15
SOB Rides-2
Monday, February 12, 2001 4:27 PM
I think we can assume that the G-Forces on a roller coaster won't kill us ;)
Monday, February 12, 2001 5:11 PM
And even the most extreme force (6.5 g on Texas Tornado) is only held for a fraction of a second. It's not like it's a problem.

Secondly, that was Togo. Come on, most of their coasters have some kind of bad quality about them. :)
Monday, February 12, 2001 5:21 PM
These days everything is dangeous. I wish everyone would stop saying coasters are just sooooooo dangerous. People die every day from driving cars but I don't see the max speed on how fast a car can go, going down. I think its stupid.

Number 1 And Only Cedar Point
Monday, February 12, 2001 6:13 PM
And this still overlooks my point...
The physician implicated high speed rides. High speed high acceleration! If anything, the G forces on roller coasters are getting SMALLER as the designers better understand how to keep the forces under control.
High G forces are barely even an issue anymore!

--Dave Althoff, Jr

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC