Categories
Uncategorized

Because It’s Been Removed

A local news station published the engineering report from the incident where a child was killed on an Orlando thrill ride. Scribd has since removed it. I have the text from the report, and I will publish it here, so that it will be archived.

This reminds me of the movie “Idiocracy.” We have people who are poorly educated that are making adjustments to complex machinery with no idea how it works. This is because we are busy teaching CRT and SEL instead of math. The ride won’t work unless the light is on, so we will make adjustments to ensure that the light comes on: problem solved.

Brawndo has what plants crave.

8 replies on “Because It’s Been Removed”

It’s disheartening to see just how complete the corruption and destruction of the U.S. has become. Government, health care, business, education, “law” enforcement, selective prosecution and lawfare, and now things like this. Hopefully, the park gets sued into oblivion and looks less to skin color and more to best qualified, regardless of color.

Equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

It’s not a theme park. It is one ride owned by a company. The family can sue, but they aren’t going to get anything more than the assets of the company. If the attorneys of the company knew their business, those assets will be limited to the ride itself.
My rental property is the same way. The rental house is owned by a company whose only assets are the house itself and the bank accounts associated with the rental. That is how corporations work. They shield the owners from personal liability.
That is why you get a separate bill from the Doctor when you go to the hospital. The hospital and the doctor are two separate companies

Now, multiply that error to industrial scale. Remember the Bhopal disaster? Among the causes the investigators found defective safety devices jumpered out rather than repaired.

Initial thoughts after digesting this report and thinking about it for about 10 minutes:

1. The harness of seat 1 (and 2) had either a manufacturing/installation defect or had been damaged at some point.
2. The proximity sensor was adjusted to allow the operation of the ride without correcting the defect/damage.
3. The person that adjusted the proximity sensor may or may not have understood that the problem was with the seat, not the sensor.
4. Does the referenced manual address a standard procedure to follow when the safety lights for any individual seat will not light? If so, is adjusting the sensor the SOP or is it something else? Was it followed?
5. Are there maintenance logs and do they address individual seats? Do they address the referenced adjustment of the sensor?
6. What was wrong with the “decommissioned” seat?
7. Why did the person in seat 2 not fly out?

If I had commissioned this analysis/report I’m afraid I would have to send them back to the drawing board. Perhaps the specification for the required report product was lacking, I’d like to see that as well in order to determine whether or not it was satisfied by this product. Were there preliminary reports? How many? Who were those distributed to and what sort of input did they have on the final product? Who is the consultant and who are the individuals at that firm that were involved with the production of this product? What are their qualifications?

As is normal following any sort of forensic investigation/report, some questions are answered but many more pop up. The poor kid died; this is a rather poor effort to get to the bottom of it in my view.

The problem wasn’t with the ride or the seat. The problem was that the seats were designed for people who fit within a size range. When people exceeded that range, the seat harness was unable to close to the point where the gap between the seat and harness was within the design parameters, the lights wouldn’t light, and the ride wouldn’t operate. This caused many complaints from large riders who were then unable to ride.
The company operating the ride solved it by adjusting the sensors to permit riders who were out of spec to ride the ride.

Are these your conclusions or is there another report out there?
All of my questions/concerns with this report are still valid.

There was a similar accident with a similar root cause many years ago on a then new stand up roller coaster at Six Flags over Mid America. A woman was thrown from the the ride while in operation because the harness (really more of a clamp type device that restrained the upper body by looping over the shoulders) couldn’t properly contain her as she was over size/weight for the ride, and the restraint failed to keep her in. Probably because it didn’t fully lock into place, or released unexpectedly from being strained past it’s safe mechanical limits,in my admittettly now fuzzy memory of the incident.

Anyway, people being too damn big for safe use of an amusement park style ride has been a problem for a long time, and is a much bigger (heh) problem now, owing to the fat-assedness of America. Instead of telling these pork bellies they can’t ride, idiots try to circumvent the safety limitations. It is striking how often they get lucky in doing so, as I’d honestly expect a much greater number of these types of incidents in catering to a corpulent customer just so the ride operator doesn’t have to listen to them bitch about how unfair it is.

Comments are closed.