News Guest dies, found unresponsive after riding Stardust Racers

[mkt]

The ride has an excellent safety record. With an hourly capacity of approximately 2,750 riders and operating 130 days this year for 9 hours daily, this attraction has safely accommodated over 3 million guests.

Given this volume, the incident rate is statistically negligible. The one documented serious case involved a guest with a pre-existing spinal condition—a significant factor that likely contributed to the outcome. While some riders do experience temporary light-headedness (as can occur on other intense coasters like Hulk or VelociCoaster), these are common physiological responses to high g-forces and don't constitute safety failures.

The key takeaway: When millions of riders complete the experience without incident, and the single serious case involves a documented pre-existing medical condition, the evidence points to the ride operating within safe parameters. The spinal vulnerability was likely the determining factor, not a systemic safety flaw.

I tend to agree - but the estimate number of riders is a bit optimistic. It's not accounting for 8 hour days or downtime.

 

[Disstevefan1]

I tend to agree - but the estimate number of riders is a bit optimistic. It's not accounting for 8 hour days or downtime.

Still a LOT of riders in its short time it was open.

 

[celluloid]

Unless folks are lying, Kevin died on it first and only ride of Stardust.

Still a reasonable thing not to cause blunt force trauma.

 

[flynnibus]

The key takeaway: When millions of riders complete the experience without incident, and the single serious case involves a documented pre-existing medical condition, the evidence points to the ride operating within safe parameters. The spinal vulnerability was likely the determining factor, not a systemic safety flaw.

While you maybe correct - your post is pretty much the poster child of someone jumping to conclusions and failing to wait for the real work to be done.

Why do you think 1 death in 6 months of riding is 'statistically negligible'? Do you know the lifecycle and safety standards this ride is measured against? Or what the expected incident rate should be?

Do you see rollercoasters around the country having 2 riders die a year and people saying "nah, negligible" ?

 

[celluloid]

Still a LOT of riders in its short time it was open.

Not enough to make the odds look clear of culpability(not that would ever be zero anyway) Forces and design are also not equal in every row/seat.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Still a reasonable thing not to cause blunt force trauma.

Blunt force trauma is not a universal constant. The whole reason you are supposed to keep your head back is because your head can/will be whipped back and hitting even a padded seat rest can cause injury. It’s also why rides are not designed to intentionally push the rider forward and then sudden back.

 

[flynnibus]

This is covered under “back conditions” which is already on the signs.

Arguably - it's not. If it's not easily understood on what is included, then the warning is insufficient.

If the sign already excluded the rider for not having control of his legs - then there would be a case that UNI ops didn't follow their own restrictions. Yet, neither side is making that claim.

 

[celluloid]

Blunt force trauma is not a universal constant. The whole reason you are supposed to keep your head back is because your head can/will be whipped back and hitting even a padded seat rest can cause injury.

The other truth is riders and their muscle or awareness/consciousness are not a universal constant either.

It takes a good blunt force to cause a laceration even on someone with spinal cord weakness. Thus was not likely a head slammed against headrest once situation not just a padded seat.

 

[DisneyHead123]

The ride has an excellent safety record. With an hourly capacity of approximately 2,750 riders and operating 130 days this year for 9 hours daily, this attraction has safely accommodated over 3 million guests.

Given this volume, the incident rate is statistically negligible. The one documented serious case involved a guest with a pre-existing spinal condition—a significant factor that likely contributed to the outcome. While some riders do experience temporary light-headedness (as can occur on other intense coasters like Hulk or VelociCoaster), these are common physiological responses to high g-forces and don't constitute safety failures.

The key takeaway: When millions of riders complete the experience without incident, and the single serious case involves a documented pre-existing medical condition, the evidence points to the ride operating within safe parameters. The spinal vulnerability was likely the determining factor, not a systemic safety flaw.

Two things. One, statistics do not always determine “records”. If a person has encountered millions of people in their life and murders one to wear their skin a la Silence of the Lambs, are they an excellent and safe citizen?

We can’t have coasters operating where “only two people die on this a year” That’s absurd, obviously. For some things, the safety rate has to be 100%, barring circumstances like a rider having a heart attack. We see this anytime there is a product recall for a single injury or death.

Second, how can you confidently say that the rider’s death was caused by a spinal condition? His anatomy may have been a bit atypical, but it’s not like he had superhuman elasticity or something. At most he may have had poor muscle tone and increased flexibility, something potentially present in many people. Atypical, yes, but uncommon in a country of over 300 million, no.

 

[celluloid]

Do you live in reality? Do you leave you home? Life is risk.

My brother took a shower, sat down on his easy chair and died.
cb
DO NOT LECTURE ME ABOUT LOSS!

I am sorry your brother died. Your brother's easy chair is not a 1:1 just like my mom's being shot and killed isn't.

Two things. One, statistics do not always determine “records”. If a person has encountered millions of people in their life and murders one to wear their skin a la Silence of the Lambs, are they an excellent and safe citizen?

We can’t have coasters operating where “only two people die on this a year” That’s absurd, obviously. For some things, the safety rate has to be 100%, barring circumstances like a rider having a heart attack. We see this anytime there is a product recall for a single injury or death.

Second, how can you confidently say that the rider’s death was caused by a spinal condition? His anatomy may have been a bit atypical, but it’s not like he had superhuman elasticity or something. At most he may have had poor muscle tone and increased flexibility, something potentially present in many people. Atypical, yes, but uncommon in a country of over 300 million, no.

This is the most eloquently summed up post of the situation.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The other truth is riders and their muscle or awareness/consciousness are not a universal constant either.

Exactly, which is why you cannot just claim that something was unreasonable.

It takes a good blunt force to cause a laceration even on someone with spinal cord weakness. Thus was not likely a head slammed against headrest once situation not just a padded seat.

Lacerations? Blunt force traumas by definition don’t penetrate the skin.

 

[flynnibus]

Lacerations? Blunt force traumas by definition don’t penetrate the skin.

The family attorneys reported there were lacerations as well

 

[Disstevefan1]

Sorry your brother died. Your brothers easy chair is not a 1:1 just like my mom's being shot and killed isn't.

So so sorry. That is tragic and as much as we love our siblings losing parents hurts more and its much worse in your case, very very sorry.

 

[celluloid]

So so sorry. That is tragic and as much as we love our siblings losing parents hurts more and its much worse in your case, very very sorry.

I truly appreciate that. It was over 30 years ago, and she made bad choices but of course no one deserves that and what struggles it caused my family.

Exactly, which is why you cannot just claim that something was unreasonable.


Lacerations? Blunt force traumas by definition don’t penetrate the skin.

Not only the reported external ones but blunt force death is often due to internal laceration caused in soft tissue and internal bleed, hence what causes the death. It is not just bruising.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

They should have never settled with that lady because now everyone who had an even slightly uncomfortable ride is gonna try and get in on this.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

To me there was A LOT of folks saying how they were hurt on Stardust.

I guess its just what folks get out of these press conferences, but to me, this one painted a picture that Stardust hurt folks before Kevin's death and Universal knew it.

And you surely understand why that is right? It isn’t a mystery why people are suddenly crawling out of the woodwork to talk about this ride “hurting” them only now that it is in the news and someone got an easy payday out of Universal after making a similarly nebulous complaint.

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but these folks are making stuff up for money because someone’s tragic death has given them an opportunity to do so.

 

[mkt]

They should have never settled with that lady because now everyone who had an even slightly uncomfortable ride is gonna try and get in on this.

That's literally what they've done for years. Cheaper to settle and move on.

 

[flynnibus]

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but these folks are making stuff up for money because someone’s tragic death has given them an opportunity to do so.

You must have missed where the people coming forward had already reported their issues to UNI...

These stories aren't opportunist making up new stories. They complained in the past, people like you just didn't know it.

 

[Mr. Sullivan]

You must have missed where the people coming forward had already reported their issues to UNI...

These stories aren't opportunist making up new stories. They complained in the past, people like you just didn't know it.

Oh please, they are ABSOLUTELY opportunists. It’s one thing to report a rough ride to a park (which happens at every theme park on earth every day). It’s another to start jumping in and building a narrative for yourself off the back of a major story.

They did not participate in this PC out of the goodness of their hearts and concern for anyone. They did it because they saw dollar signs.

They saw someone get a pay day from inserting themselves in this tragedy and they’re going to try and do the same. It’s that simple.

 

[flynnibus]

Oh please, they are ABSOLUTELY opportunists. It’s one thing to report a rough ride to a park (which happens at every theme park on earth every day). It’s another to start jumping in and building a narrative for yourself off the back of a major story.

So you said it was them just "making stuff up for money" -- now, it's them not making it up, but jumping on the wagon?

Which is it? You think they are changing their story? Kinda like you?