Woman dies riding Texas Giant at Six Flags Over Texas

Their statement may have more to do with liability protection/public relations than anything else.

Andy's post made me wonder if the ride wasn't designed "by Europeans" for a more European body type. The lapbar may have functioned properly, but have been based around proportions that do not sufficiently restrain a rider of unusual body dimensions/shape. As discussed earlier, "fluff" doesn't maintain it's shape during rides....and may have slid out over the lapbar at a critical portion of the ride.

That's what I really, strongly assume happened. If the lap bar was not on her lap, and her gut came out over the lap bar, and there wasnt enough of anything else underneath to restrain, I could easily see it happening that way.

But its not exactly like the American body type is new.

Response to Superstew who said nobody did nothing wrong.

"Wow ! Well, I guess if we had to pick a scenario we'd rather find out caused this awful event, this would probably be the one ...

NO mechanical failure; NO rider misconduct; and for the most part, NO operator error ... Just a total fluke that SUCKS as bad as anything could" !

UH WRONG, The ride Attendant is the Final say, and if bruising someones feelings is necessary. Much better than Death I'd say. Its not that difficult to tell how far the lap bar is from someones hips/thigh even if the gut is covering the *LAP CREVICE*

I also know for a fact that if the bars have been set and for some reason they have to release them. that unlike the ratchets which will stay locked, These things pop up if there is resistance and must be reset or they will remain in the position they popped up too without being pushed back down.

The no Foul Play just means that nothing or nobody did anything deliberately wrong to cause it to happen. Id doesn't mean something wasn't done wrong.

This is very sad for the family. A day of fun turns into the most tragic day ever.

Too may rides are being designed with forces to eject the rider. Their safety depends too much on the restraints. A perfect example is the HUSS giant frisbee with outward facing seats. The riders are thrown against the restraints numerous times. Versus a KMG afterburner type ride where the centrifugal force keeps the rider in the in seat.

Chuck, that is absurd. The operator knows that the computer says "Go" or "No go." It's not the operator's job or responsibility to question the design - if the control system says "go", the operator should be able to dispatch the train without fear.

The real fault (if the control system did say "Go," which I assume it did or the train wouldn't have dispatched) is with the design. Somehow, the ride's control system was convinced that everyone was going to be safe when they clearly were not.

This kind of goes back to the ride op responsibility thing that we discussed in depth with the girl that hit the ground in that Wisconsin free fall contraption a few years ago.

I say you can't expect someone with a minimum wage summer job to be responsible for people's lives...you just can't.

And that ties in to the comment earlier that these rides have changed. They can kill you now...that always wasn't the case.

The fact that the computer told the crew it was ok to dispatch starts to become the failure. The restraint didn't fail - the system did.

It all comes down to money for the amusement park industry, as they do not want to offend over weight people by telling them they are too big to ride the rides. Lets face it some people do not belong on rides and that is the reality of the situation. How many parks rent electric chairs and wheel chairs? If someone is too big that they can't even walk around the park, do you think they should be allowed to ride the rides? I'm sorry but if i owned a park a person that is not able to ride, they wouldn't even be let into a queline so no ones time is waisted.

Your assessment is incorrect. The industry does not fear offending people at the expense of not killing them. That's absurd.

The problem is that we are a sue-happy, entitled country. I absolutely agree that the parks should be able to tell people they can't ride if they feel their safety is in question. The problem is the rejected riders get unhappy, go to the media and decide to sue.

I mean we have an example of someone who was denied entry to this very ride last year: http://coasterbuzz.com/Forums/Topic/man-without-hands-denied-ride-at-six-flags-over-texas

And then we have another guy who is suing Six Flags/SFOT for not being let on Aquaman Splashdown http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2013/02/weatherford-man-born-without-hands-sues-six-flags-over-texas-after-being-kicked-off-aquaman-spashdown-water-ride.html/

Parks get bad press and are sued if they deny people, and then get bad press and are sued if they allow people and someone gets hurt or dies. Yes, the latter is a lot worse, but how do you win? How do you convince these people its for their own good?

Superstew said:

Wow ! Well, I guess if we had to pick a scenario we'd rather find out caused this awful event, this would probably be the one ...

NO mechanical failure; NO rider misconduct; and for the most part, NO operator error ... Just a total fluke that SUCKS as bad as anything could !

I would personally say its still a serious design or operator failure. Either the design did not include proper indications the restraint was unsafe (perhaps that it was too high/resting on the person's torso rather than lap), or if the ride does have such indicators (and the ride indicated it was not safe to dispatch), the operator's failed to operate the attraction properly. Some posters have stated there are "green lights" for each seat that indicate when it is deemed safe. Does anyone know if that information is relayed to the attendants and it is their responsibility to verify each light and only then give a clear signal/dispatch? Or does the control panel verify that information and not allow the train to dispatch unless each lap bar is at a certain position and it isn't the attendant's responsibility? To me, that is the determining factor if you're looking to place blame for what happened.

Either way, something failed in a big way. Also, the fact the woman apparently expressed concern before the ride was dispatched and the fact there weren't any redundant safety devices like a seat belt in place (seat belts also offer another means to measure and determine if rider's dimensions are safe for the ride) is disconcerting and needs to be looked into. Very sad for the victim's family.

Jglonick83, you win the post of the week. People can't demand 100% safety and then get upset when to achieve 100% safety, it means denying them the opportunity to ride. It's unpleasant, I know, but sooner or later we have to accept the fact that this hobby can't be for everybody if safety is to be maintained.

Just out of curiosity, does the Texas Giant have a test seat out front?

Lord Gonchar said:

I say you can't expect someone with a minimum wage summer job to be responsible for people's lives...you just can't.

And that ties in to the comment earlier that these rides have changed. They can kill you now...that always wasn't the case.

The fact that the computer told the crew it was ok to dispatch starts to become the failure. The restraint didn't fail - the system did.

Totally agree Gonch. The ride op's responsibility doesn't really go far beyond checking to make sure that someone hasn't given themselves some wiggle room, and to make sure that a gentle tug on the bar won't pop it loose (and we all know that most of the time the ops don't even do that). If the computer says it's ok, and the op can see that the rider is nice and snug, then any ensuing accident has to be a design flaw or mechanical failure, both of which are unacceptable.

I was under the impression that on modern rides, the computer will not allow a dispatch if the restraints aren't all "green" (sufficiently locked). In this case, if the woman's restraints showed green, is it the low-wage ops responsibility to second-guess the rides' engineers? Possibly, but the point of the computer checking proper restraint posision is to take as much of that responsibility and decision out of the ops hands. I believe this will come down to failure of restraint design, or a failure of that seat's restraint switches to identify the bar was not down far enough. Very tragic, and preventable, considering past similar fatalities :(

Capitalize said:

Some posters have stated there are "green lights" for each seat that indicate when it is deemed safe. Does anyone know if that information is relayed to the attendants and it is their responsibility to verify each light and only then give a clear signal/dispatch? Or does the control panel verify that information and not allow the train to dispatch unless each lap bar is at a certain position and it isn't the attendant's responsibility?

It's been a while so my memory isn't perfect, but on Power Tower the panel has a digital display with boxes for each seat that show red if the restraint is open and green if it is closed. The computer would not allow you to dispatch the car until all the lights were green.

ApolloAndy said:

Chuck, that is absurd. The operator knows that the computer says "Go" or "No go." It's not the operator's job or responsibility to question the design - if the control system says "go", the operator should be able to dispatch the train without fear.

The real fault (if the control system did say "Go," which I assume it did or the train wouldn't have dispatched) is with the design. Somehow, the ride's control system was convinced that everyone was going to be safe when they clearly were not.

I don't call it absurd at all. We've all had the "Can I get another Click'? or "I need to give the bar a Push" and I being of bigger size have also had the "Sorry Sir, I don't think it's safe for you to ride" We all complain about loading procedures like on Gwazi and some other rides, with the double checks etc. But whats the accident rate on those?

Im also inclined to believe the continuous loading may have rushed both riders and operators in the dispatching of trains. (This is my hunch)

Now there are reports of the bar actually breaking or failing.

All is speculation without fact, But I'll stand by my Operator is the final determination of if someone is safely restrained or not. Not that its easy to tell sometimes but on rides with more less than 0g and beyond vertical and horizontal. Bars should be PUSHED into and checked to make sure that sit properly (Over the thigh).

If the bar clicked and the indicators were green then the ride operator is off the hook. I agree with Gonch. I WAS that kid make minimum wage at 17 years old. In reality a multi million dollar lawsuit should not come down to me at 17. If that is the case then my kids will never work in the amusement park business.This is all speculation at this point and that is all it can be. We may never know the real truth. But the media and our own speculation is making this even worse. Everyone in that park was safer riding those rides than they were getting to the park in their cars. It is a safe industry that can always be made safer and hopefully this investigation will do just that. Make it safer.

I don't think you can design a go/no go lite system that would assume everyone is properly restrained, Just that the restrains are locked in some lowered position.

A guy with big thighs and rear but no gut could ride safely if the bar came into his lap and over the thighs. A guy with a big gut and skinny legs if they could not get the bar into the lap would not be safely secured yet the bar *MAY BE DOWN* far enough to secure other riders of other shapes.

Nobody but the Ride Op could tell. Yet We'd all be the ones complaining about cycle times if the proper procedures were followed 100% of the time.

Better to be Offended by One than carried by Six.

I often complain about B&M restraints but their accident rate speeks for itself. No matter what ride of theirs your on, Your basically within a CAGE. Even the Speed Coasters are a total circle around the waist and come down into the lap area, not into or on top of....

Charles Nungester said:

I don't think you can design a go/no go lite system that would assume everyone is properly restrained, Just that the restrains are locked in some lowered position.

Exactly what I was trying to get at.

And I think this is the point of failure in the overall system on ensuring the safety of riders.

Newer rides are designed with forces that will throw an unrestrained rider. Lap bars become uneffective once a rider's midsection becomes too large for the lap bar to rest on the lap. Minimum wage kids can't be expected to make that kind of judgement call. The computer only knows how far the bar as moved, not where it is sitting on the rider.

I don't have an offer for a solution, just painting the scenario the way I see it.