News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers

[flynnibus]

It's not "illustrative," it's literally singling out a class of people based on an assumption that they may not meet the rider requirements, as many visibly disabled guests will in fact meet the standards that Universal have set, while many ambulatory guests with invisible health conditions will not.

No one ever said they would only question someone in wheelchairs - it was an example of the type of interaction. You're being disingenuous even after the correction. So no point in going further.

 

[flynnibus]

Medical conditions aren't always "obvious or visible." The whole point is that you can't start singling out people for inspection, confirmation, or whatever else you wish to call it unless you're going to do the same for all guests, as someone using a wheelchair is surely visible but it tells you nothing obvious of actual relevance to their ridership.

Operators aren't expected to find hidden or undisclosed things - They are expected to react to obvious or visible things. That's the difference.

 

[Disstevefan1]

The very confusing thing here is death was caused by "blunt force trauma".

My untrained mind thinks of this as getting hit in the head with a bat, falling back and hitting my head on a rock, etc.

Not riding a coaster.

If my untrained mind were to rationalize how this happened, I think it was NOT by a piece of the coaster falling off, or someone's personal belongings becoming a deadly projectile.

I can rationalize -

A bird strike - very possible and it has happened.
OR
Possibly passing out at the very beginning and getting knocked around for all of the ride.

 

[danlb_2000]

Could the back brace be seen?
Maybe one of Universal's rules is "No one with back braces are allowed to ride" ?
Maybe If this person was wearing a back brace maybe he would have not been allowed to ride?

Yes, it was a last minute thing so she had it over her clothing. This type of brace is nothing more then a piece of fabric wrapped around your body do it's no different then a piece of clothing. I think it was a case of them not wanting a liability issue if they let a person with a visible back problem ride the ride.

 

[danlb_2000]

The very confusing thing here is death was caused by "blunt force trauma".

My untrained mind thinks of this as getting hit in the head with a bat, falling back and hitting my head on a rock, etc.

Not riding a coaster.

If my untrained mind were to rationalize how this happened, I think it was NOT by a piece of the coaster falling off, or someone's personal belongings becoming a deadly projectile.

I can rationalize -

A bird strike - very possible and it has happened.
OR
Possibly passing out at the very beginning and getting knocked around for all of the ride.

Blunt Force Trauma is not limited to the head.

It seems unlikely he would be hit by multiple birds, but no one else on the ride did.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Blunt Force Trauma is not limited to the head.

It seems unlikely he would be hit by multiple birds, but no one else on the ride did.

Yes I know the term is not limited to the head.

Yes the report said, cause of death was multiple blunt impact injuries, how could multiple birds only hit him and nobody else - forget about the bird strike.

Since it was multiple blunt impact injuries, to me it rules out multiple parts falling off the coaster only hitting him.

Also to me, rules out multiple personal belongings striking only him.

I am going back to him passing out right at the beginning (for whatever reason) and getting knocked around for the entire ride.

I don't know the ride but how knocked around would one get even if they are totally passed out and limp?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I am going back to him passing out right at the beginning (for whatever reason) and getting knocked around for the entire ride.

the initial launch is certainly a time when someone could pass out.

But of course that begs the question - if someone passes out on a coaster are they still safe? Should they be? That’s way beyond my knowledge.

 

[JT3000]

No one ever said they would only question someone in wheelchairs - it was an example of the type of interaction. You're being disingenuous even after the correction. So no point in going further.

I'm not being disingenuous, you are. The mkt post that started this whole side-discussion explicitly proposed questioning wheelchair users. EXPLICITLY. Go back and read it again if you have to, but I'm not going to sit here and let you completely reinterpret the basis of the discussion. If for whatever reason you're still unable to interpret it correctly, you needn't participate. And if mkt misspoke and meant something else, he should have said so. He has not.

Operators aren't expected to find hidden or undisclosed things - They are expected to react to obvious or visible things. That's the difference.

Once again you're completely ignoring what was previously stated, so I'll just reiterate by quoting myself, with added emphasis this time.

it tells you nothing obvious of actual relevance to their ridership.

 

[flynnibus]

so I'll just reiterate by quoting myself, with added emphasis this time.

Same
"react to obvious or visible things"

The word "Or" -- it's there for a reason

 

[flynnibus]

But of course that begs the question - if someone passes out on a coaster are they still safe? Should they be? That’s way beyond my knowledge.

This is the part that is perplexing to me. There is no way coaster designers don't take this into account. I'm not saying you should have a pleasant experience or not experience some injury flopping like a rag doll - but they certainly can't be expecting death or dismemberment if someone goes limp nor can I imagine they ever not considered this.

But look at all coaster designs, even back to the classic carriage+lap bar scenario. If you are limp - you're in a bad bad place.

 

[JT3000]

Same
"react to obvious or visible things"

The word "Or" -- it's there for a reason

Now you're being pedantic. Singling out wheelchair users still requires making an assumption -- yes, based on something visible -- which tells you nothing obvious. You could make the same assumption based on any of the other senses and the result would be the same.

 

[flynnibus]

Singling out

 

[Chi84]

That’s treading dangerously close to Hippa regulations and likely illegal, an employee has no right to ask anyone about their disability beyond asking very general question like if they can transfer and if they feel they meet the rides health requirements. Anything beyond that is likely illegal.

Asking for any specifics, like why are you in a wheelchair, do you have neck problems, etc is 100% illegal.

This doesn’t involve the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

 

[Disstevefan1]

the initial launch is certainly a time when someone could pass out.

But of course that begs the question - if someone passes out on a coaster are they still safe? Should they be? That’s way beyond my knowledge.

Since passing out is not an unreasonable possibility due to G forces, my expectations it (should) be safe even if passed out??

Please nobody say, "If you think you are going to pass out, you should not ride"

No one plans on passing out, it may just happen due to low BP due to dehydration in the central Florida heat.

 

[JT3000]

View attachment 884398

 

[lazyboy97o]

This is the part that is perplexing to me. There is no way coaster designers don't take this into account. I'm not saying you should have a pleasant experience or not experience some injury flopping like a rag doll - but they certainly can't be expecting death or dismemberment if someone goes limp nor can I imagine they ever not considered this.

But look at all coaster designs, even back to the classic carriage+lap bar scenario. If you are limp - you're in a bad bad place.

There are train designs you can order new that would definitely be a problem, like Big Thunder Mountain Railroad. We can also look at the incidents reports and see that someone completely passing out isn’t a common occurrence.

But these seats are padded clamshells. The lap bar support arms end up down and to the side. The lab bar restricts your core a bit. And unless you’re already in a bad position the forces should generally push you back towards the seat. It seems like you’d have to be a fairly tall, lanky and flexible person to be able to hit something unpadded. But, even padded surfaces can cause harm.

 

[SplashJacket]

Please expand.

Even under the situation where Universal is 100% liable for this death, the value of the coaster far exceeds any reason to get rid of it, not to mention the cost of replacement.

In an absolute worst case scenario, Universal would just fix whatever was the issue (if the issue was with them).

Suggesting they’ll demo the coaster and start over isn’t even in the universe of reality.

 

[Disstevefan1]

I’m not trying to disparage you. I’m pointing out that all we know right now is that someone died while riding stardust of multiple blunt force injuries. Until we actually find out that this wasn’t due to some design flaw, or ride malfunction, I’m glad I never rode it, because I would find dying inconvenient.

But how many thousands and thousands of folks have already rode it with no issues?

I would really want to know.

Calling Dr. @lentesta

 

[mkt]

But how many thousands and thousands of folks have already rode it with no issues?

I would really want to know.

Calling Dr. @lentesta

Between mock service in February, TM and AP previews, and paid guests - and factoring in downtime - I’d put a conservative estimate at around 250k riders.

 

[mkt]

Even under the situation where Universal is 100% liable for this death, the value of the coaster far exceeds any reason to get rid of it, not to mention the cost of replacement.

In an absolute worst case scenario, Universal would just fix whatever was the issue (if the issue was with them).

Suggesting they’ll demo the coaster and start over isn’t even in the universe of reality.

The coaster wasn’t cheap, but compared to other headliners it’s still on the lower end. Coasters are some of the cheapest per-guest investments a park can make, which also means tearing one down wouldn’t be the same kind of financial hit as scrapping a $300M+ dark ride.

And the real estate Stardust Racers sits on could easily be repurposed - as an expansion to Wizarding World, Berk, or even a brand-new land. That flexibility makes a demo/rebuild option even more plausible.

I’m not saying this will happen, just that it’s a real possibility given the circumstances. Normally you’d expect a fix and reopen, but this is a brand-new ride in a brand-new park, a fatality, and a ride name already tied to headlines.