PDA

View Full Version : New Restraint System for Splash Mt.?



Pages : [1] 2 3 4

coronamouseman
02-15-2002, 06:23 AM
In reading Al Lutz's update this morning regarding rumored safety changes to DL's Splash Mountain logs, it seems to me that the amusement park industry is suddenly finding itself having to come to grips with a number of different safety issues which have heretofore not been considered significant issues .......

(1) New ride designs which push the "envelope" of what might be considered to be putting riders at risk should they have particular physical restrictions or ailments

(2) Concern for safer operations in some attractions which had previously been considered safe by virtue their "track records"

As "thrill parks" like SFMM race to put in taller, faster and more exotic megacoasters, the "bar" for ever greater thrills get raised that much higher. Now, if one is a healthy and realtively young thrill seeker without any physical problems, then there is no problem with rides such as SFMM Viper, X, Deja Vu, Colossus, Batman, etc. .........

But in parks such as Disney's, which are designed to cater to all ages, is there not some greater risk if some thrill rides in those type of parks place extreme physical demands on the ridership?
For example, WDW's new Space attraction is rumored to use a centrafuge technology similar to those devices used to prepare astronauts for space flight - will there be any concern on Disney's part to evaluate the wealth of data which is most likely available from NASA or the USAF regarding effects of a centrafuge on the human body?

At a simpler level, one can clearly see why Disney's legal arm would be concerned about safety on Splash Mountain - there was the recent event at Knott's regarding the Perilous Plunge attraction and Disney themselves has just emerged from the Roger Rabbitt incident - in both of these cases the rides had run for some time without any incidents but afterwards changes were made or are still being contemplated to provide even greater safety to the riders. That there have been many hours of safe operation of the ride until now has very small bearing - once there is a perception of risk than it needs to be averted lest new events ocurr and extensive/expensive litigation take place.

Personally, I welcome any and all changes to make rides safer for all riders. In the case of Splash Mountain, this seems like some fairly simple changes.

But what I really wonder about is how park owners such as Disney are going to deal with the newer technologies that they employ and how they are going to handle the issue of ride safety on attractions that present extreme physical demands on the rider - where do you draw the line between a ride which is "pleasurable" due to it's extremes versus a ride which places a probablity of risk to certain persons with physical limitations?

Anybody out there care to comment?

stan4d_steph
02-15-2002, 09:01 AM
Okay, I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but whatever happened to personal responsibility? I can understand that Disney legal wants to cover it's own behind, but I think people in the US have become rather accustomed to blaming others for incidents that are ultimately their own fault. I don't think Splash needs a restraint system. It's not that violent of a ride. However, to protect people from themselves, it may be necessary in the minds of lawyers. I can't believe they might even be contemplating an over the shoulder harnesses. You don't go upside-down on Splash, so this is overkill, and I agree with Al's assessment of needing to be able to exit if a vehicle should possibly capsize.

I also don't think that you need to make all rides for all people. If you provide information to the rider and let him know that he shouldn't ride if he has a certain physical condition, this should be enough. However, in the US today, I realize this is an unrealistic scenario. So until then, the lawyers will stay very busy.

justagrrl
02-15-2002, 10:11 AM
That over the shoulder restraint system is downright silly. Why do you need an over the shoulder one?

Next - everyone on Small World and Pirates will be wearing seatbelts (at the least - or do those require something more extensive also?) And what about the Train - someone could just jump right out - not realizing of course they should stay inside a moving vehicle...death could result in a tunnel perhaps? Indiana Jones seems like a rougher ride - what about that restraint system? And what's to stop me from falling out of the storybook boats?

I mean - couldn't they say that about anything anywhere? The potential is there...

Gemini Cricket
02-15-2002, 10:29 AM
Originally posted by stan4d_steph
Okay, I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but whatever happened to personal responsibility? I can understand that Disney legal wants to cover it's own behind, but I think people in the US have become rather accustomed to blaming others for incidents that are ultimately their own fault.
Disney guests leave the idea of their very own mortality at the gates. I have seen guests at the park do tremendously stupid things because they think nothing will happen to them at such a fun, enchanting place like Disneyland:
I've seen a teenager put his his legs over the sides of the log during the last drop on Splash, his arms outstretched... I was coming around the bend in my own log where you can see other logs take the final plunge... I couldn't believe my eyes. The picture at the photo station at the end confirmed my concern.
I've seen people stand up during the drops on Pirates.
I've seen people change seats while their cars were in motion on Fantasyland's dark rides.
I've seen idiots rocking the Storybookland Canal Boats.
Guests do not think about safety concerns at the park. There is a level of guest personal responsibility (don't stab yourself with your fork during dinner) but CMs basically have to be nursemaids for guests who aren't bright enough to find the castle at the hub! Guests can be stupid. Not all. But a lot!
I'm all for safety precautions @ DL. I don't want to see a ride close forever because someone gets hurt and sues Disney. (My safety concerns stem even further to say that they could jeopardize lives on Splash w/a shoulder harness in the event a boat capsizes...)
I'm glad the Mouse Lawyers are taking precautions now. If it means Splash is to be closed longer, so be it. :)

DisneyDody
02-15-2002, 11:50 AM
I'm new here but here's my opinion for what it's worth--
I think the over the shoulder restraints are a bit much for this ride but a simple seatbelt isn't a big deal-- like the matterhorn belts. It's my understanding that MOST injuries and all but one death at Disneyland were the fault of the riders and not the ride. So in a way it makes sense that Disney is trying to protect themselves from the stupidity of some guests. If people would just pay attention to the warnings and such there would be no issue at all... but people don't pay attention- they don't believe anything "bad" could happen to them at Disneyland. That leads DL to have to take extra precautions to make up for some peoples stupidity. It's a shame but it all makes sense. Although I do think that the shoulder harness is a bit much for SM. Just my 2 cents.

JoeCanadian
02-15-2002, 11:57 AM
The fact that Splash Mountain even needed a restraint system completely went over my head. Why? Because the force of gravity seems to be more than enough to keep you from flying off your seat.

As for lawsuits, like someone said before, North Americans have a tendancy to go overboard on the whole lawsuit business. Disney could more than easily win the lawsuits it faces from retarded guests too stupid to realize when they put themselves at risk. I'm sure it's the thought of waging a war in the eye of the media and public that keeps them from going all out on stupidity. Bad publicity simply means Disney's bound to just hand out settlements.

Quite frankly, I'm surprised evolution hasn't "off'ed" the less intelligent yet. Everyone knows the principles behind the survival of the fittest. Well, if someone is stupid enough to stick their leg out of a Splash Mt. log...

hbquikcomjamesl
02-15-2002, 12:06 PM
Actually, I'd say that, to a large extent, most amusement park ride vehicles and procedures are already downright paranoid about guest safety, particularly in Disneyland. This is particularly true if you compare ride vehicles with real-life counterparts to those real-life counterparts.

Consider trains. On long-haul trains, and most of the longer, heavier commuter lines (like BART, CalTrain, and probably Metrolink), passengers are free to get up and move about, and to freely pass from car to car. Other, shorter lines (like the L. A. Metro Red Line) have "emergency use only" signs on the doors between the cars, or (like the Metro Blue Line or the S.F. MUNI Metro) don't have doors between the cars; similarly, when antique rolling stock is used for short excursion or tourist lines (such as Knott's Ghost Town and Calico, or the CSRM's Sacramento Southern), the passageways between cars are usually closed to passengers while the train is in motion. Still in those cases, passengers are generally allowed to move about within the car. But consider the various trains at Disneyland: the DRR, the Casey Junior, and the Monorail. Passengers are expected to remain seated while the train is in motion, even aboard the Monorail's fully-enclosed cars. (At WDW, the Monorail cars are set up to accommodate standees, but not at Disneyland.)

Or buses and streetcars. You don't see standees aboard any Main Street vehicles (with the possible exception of the horsecars), but you see them on any real-world city bus (including the WDW bus system) or streetcar; moreover, on the MUNI's cable cars, you see them packed in like sardines, and out on the running boards, clinging to grabirons.

That doesn't mean that we shouldn't do everything possible in ride vehicle design to thwart the efforts of even the most determined suicidal maniacs. Indeed we should, and we should remember that nothing can ever be completely foolproof, because fools are so ingenious.

Horace Horsecollar
02-15-2002, 01:37 PM
I believe that there's one more factor here other than the Roger Rabbit accident. The Mouse lawyers are probably concerned about people climbing out and walking around in Splash Mountain, which happened at WDW (I understand) last year.

Shoulder harnesses (or "horsecollars") would be a bit much, but I could see how lapbars or seatbelts might work.

JoeCanadian
02-15-2002, 02:10 PM
People hopping off the logs and walking around...that's hilarious. I know I wouldn't mind a souvenier AA. <laughs> I wonder what they look like without pants.

SimpTwister
02-15-2002, 02:19 PM
Over-the-shoulder restraints would ruin Splash IMO.

- They're uncomfortable
- They make it next to impossible to turn your head to look around
- They could potentially bash your ears on the drop (ever been on the Revolution at MM?)
- They're ugly
- They make for slow loading


I will grudgingly admit that lap bars or seat belts might not be a bad idea.

But OTSRs? On a LOG RIDE?!?! Ridiculous.

hbquikcomjamesl
02-15-2002, 02:20 PM
Actually, I used to know someone who actually DID routinely hop off before the drop, and walk the rest of the way. She got away with it because of some sort of arthritic condition (I never asked her about the details, but it looked like some sort of combination of rheumatoid and gout). Very nice person, and the best photo lab technician I ever dealt with. If I ever had a roll of film shot under unusual lighting or exposure conditions (e.g., in an ice rink), I always requested her by name, because unlike the other technicians, she almost always got the corrections right the first time.

disneynut
02-15-2002, 02:32 PM
This is going to sound harsh. But I think that people need to bring their brains when they come to any amusement park. I can't ever recall being on a log ride anywhere that has restraints on it--let alone over the shoulder restraints. It's too bad Disney can't have people sign liability waivers when they buy their tickets. What is really too bad is that there are the few who ruin it for everybody. And that we are such a lawsuit happy nation.

Because of these idiots I can understand Disney's need to put some sort of safety system in. I'm just sad that it has to come down to this. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.

Mouse
02-15-2002, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by SimpTwister
Over-the-shoulder restraints would ruin Splash IMO.

- They're uncomfortable
- They make it next to impossible to turn your head to look around
- They could potentially bash your ears on the drop (ever been on the Revolution at MM?)
- They're ugly
- They make for slow loading


I will grudgingly admit that lap bars or seat belts might not be a bad idea.

But OTSRs? On a LOG RIDE?!?! Ridiculous.

I fully agree with you SimpTwister. Splash Mountain is a ride where most of the time is spent in rather calm waters while guests observe the scenery. Without the ability to look around I can imagine a rather boring ride of looking forward just for the few little bumps and one drop at the end. I am an advocate of safety on coasters but this is not a "coaster" it is a log ride!

Shoulder harnesses would severely detract from the enjoyment of this ride.

Al also mentioned the danger of not being able to get out of a log that is flipped over. I know water rapids rides have had deaths resulted from flipping over (and I totality agree with Al's point that in the event of capsizing a seat belts would be preferred) but has anyone ever heard of an incident when someone was injured/killed when a log ride flipped over? Has a log on splash ever flipped over?

Gemini Cricket
02-15-2002, 03:36 PM
Didn't someone get struck by an on-coming log after he got out of his log on Splash? I think that's really what they want to prevent, people from getting out period. I don't think they've considered the drowning in the flipped log factor yet...

bluepearl
02-15-2002, 03:49 PM
I got a question - is there a regulatory agency that oversees this sort of thing? Like the Health and Safety Commission or something.

And I'm with the general sentiment that over-the-shoulder restraints would detract from the scenery of the ride. They're not particularly attractive. I was really looking forward to getting on the refurbished Splash Mountain in March, as the last time I was on it was at the end of summer (I have a friend that hates going on that ride). Looks like I'm going to have to wait a lot longer than that.

Ace
02-15-2002, 04:34 PM
ugh.... If people weren't so stupid then this wouldn't be an issue.... the only way to fall out on Splash Mountain would be if you were not sitting down... it's close to impossible to fall if you're sitting down. If they add restraints, I will be seriously upset.

coronamouseman
02-15-2002, 05:48 PM
OK - so many people in this thread think that additional restraints on Splash Mountain would not be neccessary if people just did not act stupidly ......... well, since this is the real world and literally millions of people frequent the Disney parks expect that a certain percentage of people will act stupidly and thus Disney lawyers will get their way ..........

But what about attractions which push the envelope of human sensory experience to levels which might prove to be destructive to certain persons with disabilities or medical conditions? What is the effect of the g-forces generated by a 0-60 acceleration on something like the RnR Coaster (whose launch has been roughly equated to taking off a carrier deck in an F-18) What is the effect on a person's brain from the sudden shifts in direction encountered on the Indy Adventure?

There are begining to emerge papers and articles in medical journals and magazines which address the effects of g-forces and turbulence on the human body - to what extent should a park operator such as Disney be accountable for providing guests with a complete technical description of all of the forces exerted by a ride on the rider so that each rider might determine if there was any danger to them? Yes, a little farfetched but then again, if a person were taking a particular blood pressure medication which left them susceptable to stroke or blood clotting at particular levels of g-forces then they would probably like to know if a ride they were considering going on exerted those forces ........
And, perhaps more intererstingly, you can be pretty sure that most ride builders would already know what those forces were since they had to build the ride using those calculations lest it fall apart .........

Anybody else have a take on this?

HBTiggerFan
02-15-2002, 06:38 PM
MP ate my post.....so here we go again


I think that people do check their brains at the desk and are way to sue-happy. They need to start taking responsiblity for their own behaviors and quit blaming others for their stupidity.

That being said, I also think that if they are going to add something to Splash with the purpose of keeping people from climbing out regular seat belts won't cut it and over the sholder are overkill. A padded lap bar would work. But if the purpose is to keep people from flying out, then a seat belt or 3 pt harness could work.

But it really irks that DisneyLawyers can say this about Splash, and so much $$ needs to be spent retrofitting the boats or bringing in new ones since additional backrests will need to be added if they do anythng but seatbelts, when it doesn't need to be done to the ride to begin with. Whats keeping management from just closing down the ride cause its gonna cost to much $$ to fix it?? And why can't DisneyLawyers say this about other rides that need so much work done???

mousey_girl
02-15-2002, 06:45 PM
Everything has been mentioned about not wanting the OTS restraints... There is one factor the powers that be will need to consider, the bottom line. How many of us, over the years, have purchased one of those great DL moments pictures at the end of SM?

Who will purchase one that shows a big, bulky shoulder harness?? This could really take a bite out of the picture selling and make the picture during the drop a thing of the past.

innerSpaceman
02-15-2002, 07:01 PM
Well, it would take a big bite out of ridership period, in my opinion. As has been duly noted, this is a dark ride with one drop, not a rollercoaster. How in the world are you supposed to look around with a shoulder restraint that blocks all peripheral vision?!?

Personally, I don't believe this is anything but a rumour, as it's just too ridiculous of an overkill reaction. If Disneyland's Splash Mountain has operated for 11 years with no mishaps and no restraints whatsoever, then why would accidents start happening all of a sudden? The incident that occured on the Florida ride was an injury to a castmember when the ride was started again when the all-clear was given without proper investigation. Yes, that incident was instigated by a guest who purportedly got out of the log, but note that it was not the guest who was injured, but a cast member hurt by the incompetence of his fellow cast members.

If it is more than a rumour, then I will always treasure the great times I've had on Splash Mountain, cause I will never be riding that ride again. I will tolerate those uncomfortable, claustrophobic over-the-shoulder restraints if I'm going to be shaken and stirred, rolled upside down and catapulted at g-forces that would rival a space shuttle launch, but I will not put up with it just to visit my laughing place.

MonorailMan
02-15-2002, 07:10 PM
I think that SM is fin as it is, I still think the lawyers are taking it too far, Look at other "Log Flume" rides, no one has been killed, s SP should be fine :)

MammaSilva
02-15-2002, 07:13 PM
I'm with Innerspaceman, if they put seat belts on the ride, I can hang with that... I think it's dumb, but hey legal has to do what legal has to do, but if they go with the kind of over the shoulder things they have over on Screaming, Splash is a ride of the past for us....with the single file rider set up I wouldn't be able to make sure my daughter was secured and then get MY restraint in place in the load time limit and besides that would kill the "fun" of that entire ride, hello they don't have shoulder restraints on grizzley!

HBTiggerFan
02-15-2002, 07:30 PM
I will NEVER ride SM again if they use the over the shoulder harness. That will also kill the end of the ride pictures. I am with innerspaceman. I will wear the over the shoulder things when I am being flipped upside down, twisted in corkscrews, shot off like a jet but not to visit my laughing place.

Ace
02-15-2002, 07:51 PM
Originally posted by coronamouseman
OK - so many people in this thread think that additional restraints on Splash Mountain would not be neccessary if people just did not act stupidly ......... well, since this is the real world and literally millions of people frequent the Disney parks expect that a certain percentage of people will act stupidly and thus Disney lawyers will get their way ..........

But what about attractions which push the envelope of human sensory experience to levels which might prove to be destructive to certain persons with disabilities or medical conditions? What is the effect of the g-forces generated by a 0-60 acceleration on something like the RnR Coaster (whose launch has been roughly equated to taking off a carrier deck in an F-18) What is the effect on a person's brain from the sudden shifts in direction encountered on the Indy Adventure?

There are begining to emerge papers and articles in medical journals and magazines which address the effects of g-forces and turbulence on the human body - to what extent should a park operator such as Disney be accountable for providing guests with a complete technical description of all of the forces exerted by a ride on the rider so that each rider might determine if there was any danger to them? Yes, a little farfetched but then again, if a person were taking a particular blood pressure medication which left them susceptable to stroke or blood clotting at particular levels of g-forces then they would probably like to know if a ride they were considering going on exerted those forces ........
And, perhaps more intererstingly, you can be pretty sure that most ride builders would already know what those forces were since they had to build the ride using those calculations lest it fall apart .........

Anybody else have a take on this?

for everything I read about coasters being bad for you, I read something that says they're just fine.

stan4d_steph
02-15-2002, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by coronamouseman
... Anybody else have a take on this?

Well, I'm not exactly sure what your position is, but I think that there is a certain point where you take risks regarding your own personal safety. If you are taking medications or have serious medical conditions, you should know how these will affect your life, not just going to a theme park, but all aspects. You take a risk, however small, when you go on a ride that something could happen. There are risks to everything we do, and if you don't want to take those risks, then you can choose to ride something else. I don't think the theme park needs to go into great detail, beyond warning those with certain conditions to ride at their own risk. It probably wouldn't hurt to give details about the forces at work, but it's doubtful that the general public would be able to translate the information into anything meaningful to their own health.