Married5Times
Well-Known Member
#40 is nicely explained
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Will WDW Add Weight Limits to Ride Signage?
- Thread starter DisneyCane
- Start date
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
Absolutely!!!! Extremely high chance he would have not fallen through the gap.
if a belt were secured between his legs like Dr. Doom(which attaches to the pull-down restraint) he would very likely lived
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
I apologize for triggering you.
Was I scolding you? I did not realize. I apologize.
I thought there was a buckle between the legs. I got it mixed up with the fear fall at Universal.
You are of course correct. free fall has is no buckle between the legs.
The pictures (if you allow me to trust the pictures) shows the rider was way too big to ride.
IN MY OPINION, this rider was too big to ride.
IN MY OPINION, since there is no buckle, this was an accident waiting to happen.
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
and sending riders 400'up I would hope, HOPE, that there would be redundancy in safety restraints
as well as redundancy in ALL aspects of safety on any ride anywhere where great bodily injury or death is possible
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
I stand corrected. Thanks.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I stand corrected. I am getting beat up over my incorrect post
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
Thanks. I stand corrected. I am getting beat up over my incorrect post
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
to clarify
my like on your #47 was not for you getting beat up........ it was for you being humble
my like on your #47 was not for you getting beat up........ it was for you being humble
flynnibus
Premium Member
The low degree of tilt is probably what made things worse for this accident.It doesn't tilt that far..Icon's goes at 30 degrees...
Compared to Busch Gardens Falcons Fury at 90 degrees..
While Fury does have belts I'm not sure if Icon's did....Plus, shouldn't they have had a Test Seat..I know the Sea World and Universal parks have them..I would have thought they would as well..
If you assume the OTS restraint sits vertical on a small rider.. when the tilt is at 90 - the harness is completely under the rider and flat. The further the seat tilts past 90 to 180... the more it puts the deceleration force into the OTS and its mount - the deceleration pushes the rider into the OTS restraint itself. This is good from the perspective of supporting the rider in the plane of deceleration (not comfortable or as safe on the body - but from a geometry point.. getting to 90 and more is directing the load into the OTS, which you assume is stable).
But when the seat tilts less than 90, the force of the rider decelerating is less on the OTS restraint, and more on the seat or what's between the seat and OTS. And in this situation.. that means the GAP. So at a 30 tilt... it basically forces the mass of the rider to the gap at the base.. and less towards the OTS restraint or seat. The lower the tilt, the more the OTS job's is to hold the rider into the seat.. and the seat is the support. So at the extreme of no tilt, the seat is all the support in the plane of deceleration.
But in the in between angles... you're taking forces off the seat and aiming them forward of the rider.
Unfortunately in this accident, I'm wagering they are going to find the guy just slide off the seat and through the gap.. where the gap was larger than normal because the OTS wasn't advanced as far as it was vs other riders. And instead of being held INTO the seat by the OTS.. the 'squishy' element of a person of this size meant their body deformed and moved around the restraints rather than just being held by them. Basically not enough support to keep his lower portion back in the seat.
A combination of the intermediate tilt angle aiming the deceleration forces at the least supported portion of the rider along with the ride design allowing the OTS restraint to provide too big of a supported gap while still being secured combined with the final element being the deformable nature of a heavyweight person.
correcaminos
Well-Known Member
Eh no worries. I know I make mistakes too. Sometimes mishearing or misreading happens. No big deal. Though I gotta say it's refreshing when people just go "oops my bad" and move on.Thanks. I stand corrected. I am getting beat up over my incorrect post
flynnibus
Premium Member
A buckle in itself isn't a cure-all.
Sit on a bike seat.. you're supported in the middle by the seat's horn.. yet it's very easy to fall to either side and off the seat. Because while the belt (or the horn of a seat) could provide a support your body won't pass through... if you are unsupported on the sides, your body just rolls around that support and your motion continues.
The body needs to be held into the seat.. from all sides. If you don't have that lateral support, the forces will push you in those unsupported directions. A ride restraint like this really needs deep bucket seats to support you.. and less your body is in that deep bucket seat.. the less effective the restraint is.
The freaky part is, if this ride had a buckle and the OTS was allowed to be in the same position.. it's likely the victim would have still come out of their seat, but likely had their legs get hung up... which could have lead to gruesome dismemberment.. or maybe he doesn't come all the way out of the restraint before the deceleration stops. Maybe he survives.. but it wouldn't have likely prevented an accident. It's just not enough to support the body trying to move past it in unsupported directions.
Another angle the buckle could help is to say "you know the restraint is down enough" - but in this case by the ride design (or at least as it was operating) the restraint was already considered 'down enough' .. so a buckle here wouldn't have helped that issue.
Sit on a bike seat.. you're supported in the middle by the seat's horn.. yet it's very easy to fall to either side and off the seat. Because while the belt (or the horn of a seat) could provide a support your body won't pass through... if you are unsupported on the sides, your body just rolls around that support and your motion continues.
The body needs to be held into the seat.. from all sides. If you don't have that lateral support, the forces will push you in those unsupported directions. A ride restraint like this really needs deep bucket seats to support you.. and less your body is in that deep bucket seat.. the less effective the restraint is.
The freaky part is, if this ride had a buckle and the OTS was allowed to be in the same position.. it's likely the victim would have still come out of their seat, but likely had their legs get hung up... which could have lead to gruesome dismemberment.. or maybe he doesn't come all the way out of the restraint before the deceleration stops. Maybe he survives.. but it wouldn't have likely prevented an accident. It's just not enough to support the body trying to move past it in unsupported directions.
Another angle the buckle could help is to say "you know the restraint is down enough" - but in this case by the ride design (or at least as it was operating) the restraint was already considered 'down enough' .. so a buckle here wouldn't have helped that issue.
PuertoRekinSam
Well-Known Member
you are thinking of the aqua-duck on the fantasy and dream. The aqua-dunk is on the Magic and is one of those slides where you are standing up and they drop the floor out from under you.
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
Absolutely! That is a must when talking about theme park ride safety.
I'm not understanding this part: legs hung up and ultimately dismemberment ??? I don't get what you mean here.
I'm thinking if there were a belt between the legs and the rider slipped out of the seat due to the tilt, the rider's body and close to all of his weight of 345lbs(minus the weight from him presumably grabbing on for dear life to the steel and cushion pull-down restraint) would still be supported preventing him falling through the whole ride and very likely living.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Do you think you could balance and sit on a seat belt just sitting still?
The 340 lb 14 year old was calling his family member saying that ICON park ride operators were denying him to ride because of his size except for the free fall ride which he was allowed to ride and he then fell to his death. It is a sad situation .
Married5Times
Well-Known Member
as far as I know yes,........ a big yes IN CONJUNCTION with my hands grabbing the pulldown steel restraints for lateral balance
if I had no hands then I'd think I would very likely fall out
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Even if you did realize in the fraction of a second that you were still in motion, nobody has the strength to hold on and it actually work out.
JIMINYCR
Well-Known Member
For whatever reason the company that designed the ride and wrote the manual thought the harness and locking system was enough. Tragically a death was the result of their error in standards and now will probably affect changes to many other ride systems.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
There were two locking systems in the harness, so they had redundancy. This though doesn’t appear to be a failure of the harness locking system, but the harness being allowed to lock in a position that was not actually secure.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It's not so much about the rider 'slipping out of the seat' as much as the critical point of how much of the rider's body is directly supported to prevent movement when hit with sudden forces. By not being fully in the seat, more of the rider's body is not directly supported - giving vectors the body can move. A single vertical strap in the middle would be like trying to balance on a post - you can't do it, you will 'fall' to either side.
So if the body isn't fully back in the seat, it can move sideways more. You can't balance on the single strap.. so the body will not go through the strap.. but it would not stop the unsupported portions of the body from moving. So you could end up with the situation where the rider fall downward still, but now rotates around the fixed strap (like falling on a bike and hitting the cross bar). The strap blocks one point, but the lack of lateral support from not being in the seat fully allows the force to simply make the body 'go around' it. Because of the tight spaces they could actually get hung up as the body rotates (example, the leg opposite of the side the body accelerated to) , and no limb can withstand being held while the rest of the body yanks away
It's a gruesome thought, but it's important to understand the role of the strap... the strap isn't there to support the body.(and the same reason you don't have complaints about the strap and hurting male riders on other rides... it's not there to physically resist the body movement in that direction)
Last edited: