Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by TopThrill182

  1. Although her identification doesn't make the victim's death any less unfortunate, this news at least seems to provide some insight into what happened: no mechanical malfunction, but rather a rider with a particular body type that allowed her to escape from a supposedly locked and theoretically safe restraint. Perhaps it's time for more sophisticated rider requirements? As others have mentioned, maybe height alone isn't the best matrix to determine rider eligibility. Of course, I have no idea how a park could measure riders' body proportions with any efficiency or political correctness. I'll be interested to see where we go from here (once an official cause is cited, of course). Now that someone has died on the ride, the status quo doesn't seem a viable option (if only for perception's sake). Will seat belts be added? A tighter "rider screening" program put in place? Or, the option which is most likely in my opinion, will the park do both?
  2. I, too, am frustrated by how willing the GP seems to be in swallowing up these ostensibly erroneous news stories. I've already had a few friends / family members, who know I'm an amusement park fan, ask me if I've heard how "the ride operator didn't check the woman's restraint" or that "the ride operator dispatched the train even when the woman said she wasn't secure." If this turns out to be a very careless error on the ride op's part, then fine. But for now, it seems an unwarranted insult to presume the park, park's employees, manufacturer, etc. so incompetent and / or careless. This guest's death is a certain tragedy, but hasty finger pointing seems to do more harm than good.
  3. The NTAG accident is no doubt the more immediately tragic of these two incidents, but I actually think the StR mishap seems the more serious in the long run. We've seen riders ejected from coasters before, and while this doesn't make their deaths any less sad, the cause usually turns out to pertain to the riders' body types, ride operator error, etc., rather than mechanical failure (at least I think that's the case; someone please correct me if I'm wrong). In the case of StR, this seems more a case of mechanical failure of some sort (given that the boat should not be allowed to roll in reverse down the lift hill). Given the woes the ride's boats were having even before this accident, I wouldn't be surprised if CP finally pressures Intamin to provide new, redesigned boats entirely.
  4. Has anyone else see the caption to the current CNN headline: "Thousands hurt yearly on rides?" That statement is so distorted (or misleadingly sensational, rather) I don't know where to begin...
  5. Haha I sensed that. I was referring more to what the "A" was in reference to. Thanks, Erik, for clearing that up for me! That's been bugging me since the ride opened!
  6. (Not to distract from the current discussion, but can someone tell me what the "NTAG" acronym stands for? I've never understood it. haha [Or perhaps this is some sort of inside joke from which I'll forever be shut out?])
  7. Does it have to be a part failure, though? Just because the restraint is in the outermost locked position for a normal body type, couldn't there be one outlying body type out there that is able to come free?
  8. True. WIth today's litigation crazed culture, though, is there really any chance of a modern water ride being built with a seat belt only restraint design? Has one such ride been built recently?
  9. But wouldn't that be like not wanting to wear a seat belt in a car because in would hinder your escape in the event of a crash (I realize seat belts are more easily unlocked, of course, but still)? If water rides didn't have such high grade restraints, couldn't someone be worse off in any sort of accident? If this were to somehow happen on a traditional log flume, for example, wouldn't riders be flung from the boat when it tips over, potentially flying into the surrounding fiberglass / concrete and sustaining worse injuries? (Thanks to you, now I won't be able to board a water ride without having fear of being trapped by the restraints in some sort of incident! haha)
  10. The restraint may have very well remained locked, though. If I'm not mistaken, the larger rider who was ejected from (and subsequently killed by) Perilous Plunge flew out on the drop while the restraint was still locked. In other words, it isn't as though the restraint flew open, she just somehow flew out. Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that, when the restraint is only barely in locked position, it may not be effective at holding in guests with larger body types?
  11. I wouldn't be shocked if this were an issue of the guest being too large to fit within the restraint(s)... Sounds eerily similar to the Perilous Plunge incident years back. Every time I visit a theme park these days, it seems I witness at least a half dozen instances in which the employee(s) work to push down the restraint just far enough to accommodate a larger guest. Sooner or later, there's bound to be a time when the restraint doesn't get pushed down sufficiently.
  12. While this is no doubt a tragedy, I feel it sort of pointless to speculate until an investigation (at least a preliminary one) has occurred and provided some facts for the discussion. At this point, we really know nothing other than the fact that someone has died. Everything else is rumor, and any number of things could have happened! Thoughts are with all those affected.
  13. What a tragic evening! Having said that, have we confirmed that the StR boat actually "flipped?" If it had, I would have expected the injuries to be more severe. Given that only one StR rider was transported to the hospital, it doesn't sound all that horrible... How could the anti-rollback mechanism and chain lift fail at the same time?
  14. Was at the Point today. The park wasn't mobbed (i.e. no one was parking on the grass as they have been in 4th of Julys prior), though considering how crummy the weather was today, there were still a ton of people at the park! A few things about my visit that stand out in my mind: One, Maverick's line moves painfully slowly... Though only two switchbacks in the uncovered portion of the queue were being used, the line was a full hour and a half. I blame FL. Though the sign mentioned FL having a 30 minute wait, I didn't see anyone waiting more than five or so minutes. It seemed like FL was given half the ride's capacity (i.e. 12 FL-ers let in for every 12 standby guests). Two, when I rode GK in the back right, the vibration was BAD--perhaps worse than I've ever experienced on a B&M before. What causes this, exactly? Moreover, the ride's lighting system seems to be having issues (or continuing to have issues, rather). Many of the trains' lights were out (including all but one of the red eyes). The LED flood lights on the two keyholes were also completely out (minus one light that would flicker on and off occasionally). Three, Mean Streak was smooth as glass! I was shocked. Four, the fireworks were awesome! Really enjoyed the show. It was long and had a lot of cool finale-esque sequences in it. Five, many of the rides were running at less than full capacity during / before / after periods of rain (for example, Magnum seemed to be running one train at one point). Is this done to prevent trains from crashing into one another when the tracks and brakes are wet so as to hopefully avoid another Magnum-esque accident? Finally, my cell phone was essentially useless during my visit. Data was totally inaccessible. I'm on Verizon 3G, but LTE friends were having the same issue... What causes this? (Admittedly, I'm not really up on cell phone / Internet technology.) Had a lot of fun despite the bleak weather and large crowds (which were amplified by a couple of all day breakdowns [e.g. Gemini and Wicked Twister] and other rides running few trains [e.g. Magnum]). Thanks, CP!
  15. Bonnie Rabjohn seems cool! Definitely a lot of energy. Has anyone interacted with her at all? To be honest, I'm shocked to see such positive early reviews for FT... Now I'm curious to ride it! The hang time in the loop looks like a blast. I'll also be interested to see whether or not the "high energy," YOLO-themed area is complete yet or not. With the whole certification holdup today, it seems like this opening was really rushed (which I don't get considering the leisurely pace at which this thing was built). Still, though, my excitement for this ride is tempered by the fact that it only has two trains... The inevitable one train operation seems likely to produce agonizing waits...
  16. I'm confused... Haven't a lot of people already ridden this ride? What event was that for? And did the ride never open after that? As for the noise barriers, do we know if the park received any official complaints during the testing process? I thought this issue had been decided when the park received the permit to build the ride, so I'm confused why management is going to such lengths to "silence" the ride. Sorry for all the questions... I've tried skimming this thread, but there are a lot of pages to cover!
  17. Am I the only one who thinks SF is overdoing this whole backwards thing? Won't it lose its specialness if the company does this so widely?
  18. ^^ Haha really? I can't imagine which part of the park you're referring to. (I guess I should amend my earlier statement by saying nothing looked unintentionally old; the old parts looked old in a good, new kind of way.)
  19. At least X's head rest has some plush padding. With defensive riding, I feel like your head doesn't get bashed around too much. Then again, I haven't yet found a way to protect my calves during the last raven turn...
  20. ^ Was this before the four point harnesses? I still regret not being able to ride the ride with just the lap bars. In fact, I never even got to experience the ride with the original boats. I'll never forget how, the first time I visited Knott's (I believe in 2004; the original boats were in use with the four point harnesses), I was turned away from Plunge for being "too thin." While I exceeded the height requirement OK, the harness apparently didn't fit around me tightly enough. Ahh memories.
  21. Goatdan, thank you for taking the time to post that. Very informational. However, I'm still not convinced that high rail tolerance is to blame. If the rotational rails were subject to high tolerances (leading to the cars' extra back and forth shaking), then wouldn't the weight bearing rails be subject to high tolerances as well? If that were the case, then wouldn't we be feeling up and down / side to side roughness coming from the movement of the actual ride carriages? In other words, we'd be feeling roughness coming in from two dimensions. As far as I can tell, there is no such roughness coming from the movement of the actual train. The only roughness I feel is coming from the violent back and forth rotational shaking coming from the seats.
  22. What do you mean by "rail tolerance?" Are you thinking the rails could be crooked?
  23. I'm no engineer, so I apologize for using potentially inaccurate terminology, but could this free rotation issue be compared to how buildings are designed to sway in wind rather than remain rigid? Regardless, it seems like the general consensus is that the ride has gotten rougher in the years since its conversion. Given that it seems unlikely the actual guide rails have deformed over time, I'd argue the trains themselves have worn down in some way. Would scrapping the audio and shaving a few additional pounds help at all? I realize this is a small part of the train's wait, but given the dismantling of Bizarro's audio at SFGAd, I don't think it too far fetched to think that X2's could be on the way out as well.
  24. Looks like a nice park! Do they own any of the adjoining land for future expansion, or will this be the size of the park for the foreseeable future?
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/