• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers

DisneyHead123

Well-Known Member
I just strongly am advocating that there is not yet clear sufficient evidence of impropriety, on anyone's behalf. I think there was an unfortunate consequence that was intrinsic but unknown to the guest against a very unfortunate perfect accidental storm.

I think a big factor will be if the blunt force trauma suffered would have been fatal to anyone, or only to a small subset of people (If for example, he was living with an aneurysm that was undiagnosed. I was shocked when I saw recently that something like 1 in 50 people walk around with un-ruptured aneurysms that they presumably know nothing about.)

If he suffered a head injury that would have been fatal to most people, it’s very hard for me to imagine what could be that unique about his anatomy that would make this unlikely to happen again. The most likely culprits would seem to be very low muscle tone when unconscious or a greater than average range of motion - not exactly extremely uncommon situations, especially as neurodivergence increases.
 

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
If Stardust Racers is somehow too violent on a normal passed out person, then many, many coasters around the world that are even more aggressive would be in danger / need modifications. For instance, nearly every coaster at Cedar Point. Like, ride Steel Vengeance and then get back to me.

However, this strikes me as very, very unlikely. That's why I predict this will result in increased ride restrictions, and not ride modifications.
 

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
And to preface, any death on a coaster is too many, but it’s too premature to call for stardust to be torn down on what’s very likely a freak incident stemming from a pre-existing condition.

But your annual chance of dying in a car accident is about 1/8000.

Stardust has been open for ~120 days, so call it 1/3 of a year.

So your chance of saying in a car accident within 120 days is 1/24000.

Stardust probably carries about 24,000 Guests per day.

So they’ve had a chance of roughly 1/2,880,000 die adjacent to ridership.

We would expect ~120 people who’ve ridden Stardust in the last 120 days to die in a car accident within 120 days of their stardust ride. This is a high estimate that both ignores rerides, but still.

Again that’s too high, there shouldn’t be any.

It took steel vengeance 4 years to hit 1,000,000 riders. Stardust probably hit that in less than 2 months.

Again, this is likely a very freak occurrence, but the chance something like this happens is higher at Universal (through no fault of their own) because the demographics of Universal guests and a ridership that makes other flagship coasters look like flat rides.
Why are you comparing the chances of being killed in a car crash to a roller coaster? There's no connection between the two and is like comparing the chance of getting stomach ache to the chance of being murdered. There are so many factors involved in a car crash which rely on the skill, the timing and the ability for a human being to safely drive the car compared to a roller coaster which relies on none of those things. In a car you or other drivers choose the path they take, the speed they go, their judgement on braking or their ability to drive safely. The weather, their ability to react to unknown events or even their deliberate intentions to harm others could all be a factor. Comparing the two makes zero sense as they're so different and there's no correlation between the two things.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
It’s been 125 days since official opening.

Let’s say the park is open for 11 hours per day.

And let’s say the ride demand and capacity works out to 1,200 riders per hour.

That’s 1,650,000 riders. I feel like that’s the low end - if you said 2 million I wouldn’t argue.

The track length is just about a mile. So we have 1.65 million miles traveled.

Automobiles average 1 death for each 72.5 million miles driven (obviously ignoring preexisting conditions, the nature of the experience, etc). So we’re not at those numbers.

Bicycles average around 1 death in around 13 million miles traveled, give or take. So we’re within an order of magnitude there, just as a back of napkin estimate.

A micromort is a one-in-a-million chance of death, and that page lists the fatality rates for common leisure activities like scuba diving to paragliding.

1:1.65 million is pretty close to skiing. Again, without considering preexisting conditions, etc.

Did we get a final cause on this incident? I’ve not kept up in the last few days.
Thanks Doc.

So at this moment its equal to the the risk of skiing.

Lets say this person sat it out and did not ride, how many million miles would Stardust have run without a death?

Who knows?

How many miles has the Velocicoaster run so far I wonder?

I would also mention Rockit and Hulk but these are small potatoes
 

Comped

Well-Known Member

Biggest points:
  • Victim was born with a spinal condition
  • However he was under no medical restrictions at the time of his death
  • In fact, he often rode coasters across various parks
  • Eyewitness, according to Crump, said that part of the seat covering in front of the victim was loose
  • There are various eyewitnesses who may come forward, again according to Crump.
  • Family at one point had a non-profit which set up disabled people with jobs at theme parks across Orlando - including 300 across the Universal parks, and 100 each at Disney and Seaworld
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
... and they say he was in the front row...

they also don't claim external objects.. but him 'hitting against the metal of this ride' -
 
Last edited:

JT3000

Well-Known Member
So it was a spinal condition and not an injury. I had a strong suspicion that people were getting those two things confused.

I have no idea how a "seat covering" can be loose and yet both Universal and the state came to the conclusion that the ride was operating properly. Also... the front seat? There's no seat in front of you if you're in the front seat!
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
They are also claiming

Kevin suffered repeated head injuries and was unconcious for the majority of the ride -

Also notable, the family isn't calling for the ride to be removed - only that the ride remain closed until the investigation is concluded and that the necessary changes to prevent such an accident to happen are made
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
The attorney quotes a witness claiming as they exited the ride they saw part of the seat covering in front of the rider was 'detached, hanging off part of the seat'


This language is kinda conflicting.. but in general you're still talking about something being out of place..

And they point out the difference of 'working as intended' doesn't necessarily mean 'safe'.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom