Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Girl dies after fall from drop tower in Brazil

I remember having a similar argument with Leighton about the Hydro incident.

It was determined that the fault was with the ride operator who didn't check the safety belt or restraint. It was then proven that the ride operator hadn't been given adequate training by the park and wasn't qualified to run the ride. So the park was at fault.

My view was... "Why was the boat allowed out of the station with an open harness, or (if it was this whole plastic coat stuck in the mechanism thing) how was the safety mechanism compromised by a teenage girl?"

We know that B&M coasters can run with restraints open, but if they're closed, they have to be locked at a certain "B&M quantified" safe position. If Intamin had this, then maybe two lives could have been saved? I understand that the final responsibility is with the park and operator, I just don't understand how an engineering company can have a "the final safety is in the hands of a human" rather than automated. It just seems odd to me.

I've also seen the phrase "common sense" thrown around here a lot recently. The average IQ range is between 85 and 114 - this is "common sense". Anyone claiming common sense or suggesting that common sense should be used is not an idiot by these standards, but should surely be asking for uncommon sense? Most people are pretty lackadaisical in the brain processing department and we should always assume "people are thick" when developing systems they will be using - especially as ride design engineers are probably well beyond the average*.

Maybe this is the problem? Engineers assume common sense is what they possess, when in reality they have extraordinary sense? ;)

In this instance however... We have only read that the "restraint opened". That suggests a failure of a locking mechanism somewhere. So the restraint was down when the girl went up. I don't know if the safety system notes that a safety mechanism is securely in place with a closed restraint before it can operate? It does seem though like either the lock didn't activate before the ride went up, or the lock failed as the ride dropped.

That suggests more maintenance than design fault in this case. Need more information though...



*Sorry, I appear to have forgotten the sarcasm punctuation mark code :lol:
 
^ ؟ is : then S then ). :p

On topic, this is really awful. I can't imagine how horrifying it must have been for those watching... that height is no small drop! :(
 
Furie, only early B&M's can be dispatched with open restraints. Since Raging Bull, all have on board sensors.

Also, Half the issue is that we KEEP having this discussion about Intamin rides. Again and again and again.

:(
 
What an awful tragedy. Such a shame how a life can be lost over something as simple as a fairground ride with a fault.
 
rollermonkey said:
Furie, only early B&M's can be dispatched with open restraints. Since Raging Bull, all have on board sensors.
Click to expand...

I was just about to post here actually to see if anyone with experience could confirm what I'd said.

I remember now Leighton also saying that there wasn't a sensor system on the trains. So B&M restraints can run "unsafe" and it's still down to the ride op.

Now, I honestly can't remember if that's true. Certainly on Air, the ride ops will be passed to a specific row and seat to check the restraints. So Air has an onboard check.

However, I seem to remember on Nemesis the ops checking with the control box if they were struggling to get a restraint down on a large person. So I always assumed there was a system that could light up if a restraint was locked or not (locked either open or in a safe ratchet position).

However, I seem to remember Leighton explaining it in detail about how it actually worked, but it seems to contradict my experience in the station. That doesn't mean he was wrong though, it could easily be that I'm misinterpreting the system employed and mixing it up in my mind with Air. So there's a "Ride Op sanctioned" safe notch point the restraints must reach, but it's not monitored, it's a visual thing.

I honestly can't remember though, so it needs somebody who has operated a B&M coaster to confirm. Can you release the train if the restraints are in any position at all? I really don't know, but people like Leighton who have studied the systems say they CAN run unsafe.

Of course, the point is moot I think. Are there any B&M sit downs/floorless/inverts that run without belts too? If not then the restraints have a secondary backup if the OTSR fails or is sent out "unsafe" (plus the first element on a B&M usually locks the restraint tighter anyway). So they're safer from the start.

The coasters with B&M clamshells are also a lot safer because it's rare forces are exerted that will eject a rider. I'm not saying they could be run without restraints at all, but the rider follows the flow of the coaster much more than on an Intamin ride. If you get what I mean?
 
Okay, quote the vekoma deaths then :p

sent from my bum via a fancy phone.
 
I operated Raging Bull.

I could tell what row had a lap bar that wasn't far enough down by a light on the main panel.

I've been on many newer B&Ms that the operator could tell the attendants what row to check, Floorless, Inverted, Flying, and Dive Machine. I can't remember if it was Griffon or Sheikra, but the op was narrowing it down to a pair of seats the attendant needed to check.

On Bull, I could NOT dispatch a train if a lap bar was not down sufficiently. Part of the pre-operation safety checks included trying to dispatch a train with an open lap bar. Did that every morning, every train.

Friends who worked at USF in the Winter when 6FGAm is closed performed the same checks at Dueling Dragons.

Whether it's a sensor on the train or in the station, there's information being sent to the main computer concerning the restraints.

Maybe B&M doesn't install/program these same safety interlocks into European or Asian installations due to a lower idiot quotient, but based on everything I've been told, every B&M coaster after Raging Bull cannot be dispatched with open restraints.
 
Looks like the seat the girl was riding in has a bit of history:

First of all, from what I’ve been told, the actual seat the girl was riding in was said to have been made off-limited and inactive since 2003 by the park. I’m told that the reason this action was taken by the park was that it was determined in 2003 that the Eiffel Tower themed decorative structures that surrounds the lower half of the ride comes a little too close to that particular seat. While your average rider was in no danger of striking it on the way down, if a very tall rider with long legs were to ride in that particular seat, there was a possible danger. To ensure no one would sit in this seat, the local story being told is that it was supposed to have been welded shut, never to be used again. As the seat was taken out of order before the park added the extra crotch belt, it was apparently never fitted with the safety belt.
Jump ahead nearly a decade to today and it seems that either the seat was never welded shut, or that someone in the maintenance department may have fixed it so that it would open once again. A rider operator is also seemingly to blame here for allowing the girl to ride in the off-limits seat, and for failing to tug on the crotch belt to ensure it was locked… because there was likely no belt to lock at all. This all falls even further to show a training failure for the ride operations team.
Click to expand...
From Screamscape
 
The debate of who is at fault when one of these accidents occurs is definitely an interesting one. The system that rollermonkey describes definitely sounds like a secure one and may be the reason why, as Joey says, B&M seem to be immune to these kind of incidents. Out of curiosity, does Intamin have any equivalent system that ensures the lap bar is far enough down?

In my eyes, one cannot lay responsibility on a ride-op manually checking restraints for hours on end. If the above is true, then the lack of seatbelt must have sent alarm bells ringing, but in a general case I don't think it's fair to blame the individual.

Does this also suggest that the criteria for those operating rides should be more strict? I mean, you need a qualification for virtually everything else these days. I'm not familiar with the training of ride-ops to know if there are any form of "tests" which new employees in theme parks must pass, but surely there must be some form of competence test? It would be appreciated if anyone could shed any light on this.
 
The follow up on Screamscape makes this pretty clear the park's maintenance is at fault here. They disabled the safety system, but didn't make the seat unusable.

Hopi Hari, you lose. Go directly to jail, do not collect 200 dollars.

I can only speak for the park I operated rides at, but after a period of training, I would get a qualification checklist signed off by a supervisor or lead. I would take that to another location and take a written test. (as few as 20 questions for 2nd attendant at a flat ride, and 50 or more for operator at a coaster.) periodic refresher training would be given on the major attractions to each crew at least 3 times during the season, more if you had a good lead or if something needed to be addressed. Requalification in a subsequent season was ordinarily just to retake the test.

Skycoasters are different, as they are leased by the parks and have a similar but more difficult qualification process.
 
So, the way I'm seeing it based on the Screamscape reports and the video:

1. That particular seat was "closed down" permanently because of a clearance issue and welded shut.

2. The locking mechanism was removed/disabled in the process (video shows it didn't have one) since it was redundant given the seat permanently out of use.

3. The seat somehow became "usable", though how is anyone's guess, sans lockable restraint.

4. Operators were unaware of "non-use" of said seat, plus clearly didn't check the restraints.

5. Splat.

Unless the restraint has been deliberately disabled for the purposes of testing the ride post-accident? I have no actual clue what tests would be carried out. Is it feasible that the authorities would want to see how the ride would behave if the restraint was disengaged completely?
 
Well I have worked on two Intamin coasters.

Rita: Has a Minimum closing position for the largest guest. Which the train can not be dispatched if the this light is not illuminated on the Host panels.

Thirteen: Can be sent with the restraints open, or could be in 2010. Apparently last year there was an update and again had the same minimum required closing position for the largest guest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top