Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Girl dies after fall from drop tower in Brazil

ECG

ECG

East Coast(er) General
Staff member
Administrator
A 14-year-old girl fell 98 feet to her death on the La Tour Eiffel drop tower at Hopi Hari park in Vinhedo, a suburb of São Paulo, Brazil on Friday. The ride was dropping from a height of 230 feet when her restraint apparently opened at the moment the brakes were applied and she fell through the air the rest of the way to the ground. She suffered a blow to the head and died before doctors had a chance to treat her.

Source:
http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=722652&vId

Official park site ride page:
http://www.hopihari.com.br/kamindamundi/conheca_kamindamundi_latoureiffel.aspx

5394982028_870c70eb4e.jpg


5662665170_19b6b5a992_z.jpg


Here's an off-ride/on-ride video I found on youtube:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5UbPrLwWH1Q[/youtube]
 
Yes, it's a second generation Intamin drop tower.
 
Absolutely horrific! I'm sorry to say this, but as innovative and groundbreaking as Intamin are, they have an appalling safety record.
 
The ride was dropping from a height of 230 feet when her restraint apparently opened at the moment the brakes were applied and she fell through the air the rest of the way to the ground.
Click to expand...
I don't understand that bit... Surely if the restraint came open just before the brakes she'd have been fine as she'd be forced downwards into the seat? I guess this just suffers from a communication problem between the news company and the park/press release.
 
Don't the harness' normally have belt straps on them, preventing this sort of stuff?

But anyway, this is **** is just horrible, its the kinda stuff that nightmares are made out of, it must have been so horrible for everyone involved, and even those not involved, just how horrible must it be to witness something like this!?

:(
 
So do we think it may have been the ride op's fault, partially. Because as Martyn just said, aren't their straps? Perhaps the ride op didn't check her restraint properly. Who knows.

(Well, the park probably knows but...)
 
This is absolutely terrible, thoughts to the family and all that, but yeah, I'm not going to stop going on any...
 
Hixee said:
The ride was dropping from a height of 230 feet when her restraint apparently opened at the moment the brakes were applied and she fell through the air the rest of the way to the ground.
Click to expand...
I don't understand that bit... Surely if the restraint came open just before the brakes she'd have been fine as she'd be forced downwards into the seat? I guess this just suffers from a communication problem between the news company and the park/press release.
Click to expand...

Nah, I reckon if you're slight you could easily slip out. The seats aren't tilted back and there's not a lot to them to hold you in. Your under a lot of braking force so it's quite feasible.

FaceYourNemesis said:
Absolutely horrific! I'm sorry to say this, but as innovative and groundbreaking as Intamin are, they have an appalling safety record.
Click to expand...

The thing is, how often is the fault proven to be Intamin's? It's usually maintenance not using the right bits, or ride operator/park operations at fault.

Karen said:
From the pics I don't see any belts on the harnesses. Poor kid!
Click to expand...

I dislike these rides because they play my fear of falling. I really hate them if they don't have a belt as a secondary measure, even if they don't need them. I'm pretty sure that they will have a fail safe built in in case the primary lock fails. However, this incident proves that even then you can have catastrophic failures.

Terrible news :(
 
Eugh, watching that onride video made it worse for me, I can't imagine how horrific it would be. Especially for those who watched the ride and saw it, they'll be scarred for life. :(

Thoughts go out to her and her family, this is terrible.
 
The thing is, how often is the fault proven to be Intamin's? It's usually maintenance not using the right bits, or ride operator/park operations at fault.
Click to expand...
I still think it's too much of a coincidence. Yeah, the accidents wouldn't happen if the park's own maintainance was better... But the point is that Intamin either require more maintaining than other companies, parks neglect Intamin rides more than other companies, or it's a coincidence. It's most likely to be the first of those

But anyway...

It's always terrifying to hear of restraint failures, especially in cases like this. Poor girl. :(
 
Well, the problem is with Intamin we aren't just talking accidents but "problems". And numerous parks have had Intamins with "problems", sometimes resulting in accidents, who also own B&Ms... Which haven't had so much as a fart. Why?

And you could argue that selling rides to places with poor safety standards is irresponsible in itself.

Like you say though, their hands in every pocket of the industry. All levels of quality, all kinds of rides. They make a LOT of different things. So the chance of an accident is higher by default...? Yeah definitely. And it probably makes the incidents at the more prominent parks look worse if there is a high number of accidents happening at smaller, **** parks.
 
See, I'm having an issue with the labeling of Hopi Hari as a "lower-end" park. We know this how?

Looking at their ride collection (3 out of 5 coasters brand new when the park opened, a new 10-inversion cooaster being built, plus numerous "high-end" flats and water rides), it suggests anything but to me.

Sorry, I just find it irritating to label the place as "low-end" based off the fact it's "little-known" on the enthusiast map thanks to its location.
 
By this point, if Intamin had any common sense, they'd realize that there are too many ride operators without any common sense and would start idiot-proofing all of the restraint systems they sell.

But no. You can still dispatch their rides with restraints wide open, even the newest ones, despite the technology to prevent this being available within the company itself. (as a previously qualified operator of a 2nd gen Intamin drop tower, I know that those restraints MUST be closed sufficiently to dispatch, lap belts or not.)

I'd be willing to bet that this particular tower didn't even get the retrofit of the safety systems after the SFKK/Lassiter "accident" like the 6F parks all did.

I just don't get how it isn't a problem that they don't idiot-proof their rides adequately. I call that a dangerous side effect of fanboyism
 
As for the parks who own B&Ms...well, as I said - it could simply come down to how "idiot-proof" your system is.
Click to expand...
I guess my problem is, what if this was cars we are talking about? You expect machinery that the public can utilise to be idiot proof. Accidents happen, problems happen, but we make a fuss out of them when they are not the obvious fault of the individual using them. Idiots make up a good 90% of the population, and the ignorant make up the majority of the rest. :p Who CAN ride and operate an Intamin safety?

If you do blame Intamin, well - then surely you blame PTC for the woman ejected from Holiday World's Raven a few years back after she decided to one-click the lapbar during an ERT event? Do you blame Intamin for the man with no legs who was ejected recently from one of their hypers?
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Why has this never happened on a B&M? Is that luck, or that it couldn't physically happen on a B&M? I suspect the later. And if B&M can make it so it will not happen, then the other companies could, which means the other companies are not safe enough by comparison.

It's just that it's really impossible to draw a line. These rides, as all rides do, rely on their operators for safety and maintenance. Intamin like to push the limits a little, which has resulted in some nasty accidents. As for B&M...well, putting aside the fact they only operate in roller coasters (taking the drop towers, water rides, etc. out of the equation) - don't you think it's a little unfair to judge the two coaster manufacturers, when B&M basically deal exclusively in chain lifts and OTSRs, with 11 exceptions?

I'm not saying Intamin is flawless, I'm just asking you to look at the numbers a little more objectively.
Click to expand...
Yeah I get what you're saying here. The sheer number of Intamin rides makes an accident more likely. But this does mean that, eventually, we should see a terrible accident with B&M. Maybe you can work out the probability of that happening, based on the number of accidents and faults with Intamin roller coasters per number of roller coasters? :p

Why has a B&M hyper never flung someone. Luck, or that they are safer?

I just don't get how it isn't a problem that they don't idiot-proof their rides adequately.
Click to expand...
Yeah me either. That said, UC has a point about them still being a prominent company. If it was THAT much of an issue, parks would stop buying them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top