PDA

View Full Version : Ride Safety - How Big Of A Concern Should It Be?



coronamouseman
02-04-2002, 07:00 AM
There was an article in the LA Times today about a report made in the Annals of Emergency Medicine concerning alleged brain injuries incurred by riders of rollar coasters (note the very precise use of the term alleged).

As both a coaster-rider and the parent of coaster-riding children, I find myself in a quandry about how safe some of these attractions actually are.

Yes, there is the school of thought (or maybe more like non-thought) that says you don't belong on a coaster if you aren't willing to handle the risks or something to that effect.

But at the same time, it doesn't make sense to strap yourself into a contraption that is going to pull more g's on your body than the space shuttle or an F-16 doing a tight turn at full speed.

The writer of the article mentions that there are, at present, no published reports on g forces in roller coasters but that seems small-minded in terms of thinking about the issue - there are undoubtedly volumes of research available from the US Armed Forces and/or NASA which address the issues of g forces on the human body and their potential ramifications.

The question I would pose is this: Is it the job of Disney and other theme park operators to provide their customers with something more than the simple admonishments regarding back problems, pregnancy or heart problems or is it the job of individual state governments to regulate those rides in their jurisdictions?

Would it make a difference if a company such as Disney published a detailed description of the forces exerted on each ride and what the possible effects might be to someone with an existing medical condition? Or is the legal climate such that this would only be an invitation to future lawsuits based upon the validity of those claims?

Personally, I think it's a question of what any individual decides themselves what they tolerate but with the emphasis on newer and greater thrills each year, it is possible that rides are now being built or will be built that could be pushing the limits of human endurance (for some types of people) into an area of extreme risk ...........

Comments?

justagrrl
02-04-2002, 07:11 AM
How interesting that you would post this. Just as I finished reading this message, my dh came in and said that Eric Spillman (ch 5 morning news) just did a report on roller coasters and safety. Something to the effect of brain injuries increasing 95% over a time period whereas park attendence rose only 6%.

Great topic.

There is a thread on another site that discusses this also:

http://www.themeparkinsider.com/accidents/highlights.cfm

justagrrl
02-04-2002, 07:30 AM
What I wonder is how adults differ then children... I would guess that there is zippo for research of g-force on children.

My husband, relaying the news report, noted that it could be something like shaken-baby syndrome.

Which makes it much scarier as a parent to "let" dh take the girl to Magic Mountain. She's a new roller coaster enthusiest (it was only last year she was too afrain to ride on story book land because you went into a whales mouth and she's now riding screamin with her hands up the whole time.)

socabch
02-04-2002, 07:42 AM
Very interesting item to ponder. If the info is alleged then I would think parks don't need to post more signs yet. I myself know the limits I will put on my body. But I am older and more cautious than years ago. I won't go on Ghostrider at Knott's because it gave me a headache. Too much banging around. Wooden coasters are the worst for banging you around. To me the coasters at Disneyland are pretty tame compared to other parks. Matterhorn being the roughest. Is the supposed damaged caused by faster g-forces or rattling & jerky coasters?

Each person has to be responsible for their decisions. The problem today is that some people will make a decision and not like the outcome. So they sue someone else instead of taking responsibility for the choice they made. If companies make a reasonable effort to inform based on facts then that's all that is needed. Example: At Great America a few years ago. An older child rode the Drop Zone. He paniced and wiggled out of his restraints. Sorry to say he fell to his death while his guardians watched. They are suing. The catch here is the child was mentally handicapped. With the reasoning of a three year old. He should not have been on the ride (or at least without someone he trusted). The person sitting next to him tried to get him to calm down. How sad:crying: The responsibilty should been on the guardian. How would the park employees know if he wasn't able to decide he really couldn't handle the fear of the ride.

Sorry about be long post. You've got my brain working in overtime.

MonorailMan
02-04-2002, 07:47 AM
I say this:

Better to go off and have fun, then sit in a corner worring about what could go wrong.

We only have 1 life, live it! :D

I'm still not idotic enough to ride the "Temp. Carney" rides though. :)

MammaSilva
02-04-2002, 08:06 AM
being the parent of 3, two with average intelligence and one special needs, I have to say that until they were in their teens I made the choices for which rides the older two could or could not go on.. sometimes I was the "bad guy" and that is a parents job....I still and always will make the decisons for Brandy, there are several rides at Marine World that I won't let her ride, one called the V2 has very high G forces....not that one ever...she loves coasters but I won't let her ride anything that does the fast foward, fast reverse thing.. . they may be as safe as any other but the G forces concern me on those style of rides. That youngster that died on drop zone, that was so his guardian/parents responsibilty...drop zone is a scary ride for anyone much less someone with special needs, I have to wonder if he was there to use the "backdoor" pass so that his companion could save a few minutes wait in line..... that may sound harsh but I still have to wonder....

socabch
02-04-2002, 08:15 AM
re: sometimes I was the "bad guy" and that is a parents job

I know what you mean. My oldest daughter is 14 and because she has a seizure disorder I sometimes have to protect her from rides she wants to go on. Not all strobe lights effect her. Only constant strobing for the whole or most of a ride would cause a seizure.

Good point about the back door pass. I never thought of that. How horribly sad (if they did that) to take advantage!

Cadaverous Pallor
02-04-2002, 10:23 AM
ooops, please ignore this

Ghoulish Delight
02-04-2002, 10:24 AM
Yet AGAIN I forgot to log Cadaverous Pallor out. I even reminded myself of it before I sat down. Anyway.........

I'm not sure of my opinion on this, but I have an interesting anecdote to share.

CP and I were standing in line for Matterhorn, a few months before they instated the height limit. We were in the next to last switch-back, at the corner, so we were right next to the loading area. A woman and her very young looking child were next in line. The CM asked the woman "How old is he?" The woman replied "Three." The CM replied "Are you sure?" pause, "because this ride causes permanent brain damage."

She didn't say can cause, might cause, has been alleged to cause. She says causes.

Cadaverous Pallor
02-04-2002, 11:08 AM
Yeah, hearing them say "causes permanent brain damage" was freaky, but I'm sure they meant "can cause permanent brain damage in small children".

My feelings on coasters are the same as my feelings on caffeine, smoking, and some other less legal activities - you only live once. I heard the same report. They always accentuate a percentage increase, but no one ever talks about the actual odds. Coaster injuries DID jump in the 90's - to something like 15 people (I forget the exact number, but it was around 15). That's 15 people TOTAL, FOR THE WHOLE DECADE. 15 people out of the hundred millions living in America. I'm willing to take those chances.

As for children.....everyone has the right to control their children's behavior. That's all I'll say about that....;)

Gemini Cricket
02-04-2002, 12:21 PM
When it comes to rides @ DL or any amusement park, I feel safety should be everyone's main concern and the park's primary issue. The last thing a place like DL needs are more lawsuits and ride closures. If the safety issues are dealt with early on when the ride is created, the longer it's lifespan will be.
I understand how hard it could be to forsee what inattentive guests are going to do, but by now, DL should be prepared for just about anything to occur.
:)

Ace
02-04-2002, 12:44 PM
my concern is only having Small World break down while I'm inside it... besides that, no worries, mate.

blusilva
02-04-2002, 01:17 PM
It's pretty easy to dismiss stuff like this and say "oh, people should just take responsibility. They should just know this stuff is bad for you." But sometimes it's pretty unforseeable what could happen.

I never gave a second thought to weight and how that could affect a person's chances of being injured on a rollercoaster or water ride until that woman fell to her death at Knott's last year and they blamed it on her being "obese". How was she supposed to know that the manufacturers of the ride built it with a specific body type in mind? How do I know if I'm too "obese" for an attraction, simply because I'm not 5 feet 5 inches and 135 pounds, or whatever the ride designers used as their "average" rider?

And if the park employees allow a rider on a ride, aren't they (or their employer) automatically assuming responsibility for the safety of the rider?

Even if a park advertises a rollercoaster on the basis of the "g" force or how "x-treme" the ride is, I automatically assume it is safe for me to ride. Unless there are height, weight, age or other restrictions made available for all to see (and IMHO, BEFORE one pays admission to a park), one can only assume that the rides are "safe" for "everyone".

Cadaverous Pallor
02-04-2002, 01:57 PM
Blusilva is right - any and all height, weight, etc restrictions should be made publicly known, and available wherever you can get info on the park. In case any of you didn't know, the Orange Stinger has a weight limit. It is clearly posted at the entrance to the ride. One of our friends couldn't ride, and we knew it was for the best.

Simply knowing the limits of your safety systems is a MUST for any amusement park.

MouseWife
02-04-2002, 02:30 PM
I think they should post any restrictions on the same site where they list rides that are restricted to the handicapped. {I think Knott's has handicapped restrictions under Safety or something like that.}

I heard that the parachutes that they used to have had an either 350lb. or 400lb. limit. I learned this {although I do think they did end up posting it, on the baskets?}by my sister telling me a story of a lady {or a couple} going on the ride and it breaking down and they had to get a crane to get her down.

Okay, this could be an Urban Legend or a different park but it still stuck with me.

Post the weight limits~some can be if they are too small or too big. I think it should be posted on the internet or available by mail to those planning vacations.

And, people who you would not think to be over weight can still weigh a lot. I was surprised at Knott's at the 'Guess the age/weight/birthday' game. Some bones must weigh a lot. :D