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

NEWS: 12 year old girl severely injured in Wisconsin Dells


Recommended Posts

You can see in this video that the rider comes to close to the ground anyway.

Ok, seriously. Please STOP "making up" ways that the ride works. I can see clearly from that video that the rider DOES NOT actually come close to the ground, and, there is the giant landing pad on the ground that you can't see in this video.

 

Clearly you haven't been on one of these rides, I'm guessing probably have never seen one in person either. If that's the case you really shouldn't be responding to this thread because you have no clue as to what you're even talking about.

 

--Robb "Really sick of people living in the land of la-la make believe every time there is an accident." Alvey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 195
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I loved this ride when we were given the chance to experience it on the 2007 TPR MidWest Trip.

 

After being on hundreds of coasters, thrill rides, water parks, and other rides, THIS has to be the absolute scariest thing I have ever done. Ever. Nothing has made my heart drop like a SCAD tower. I think a lot of it had to do with the psychological experience the operators gave (I hope) acting like they were both brand new to the ride; saying things like "Where does this cable go?" and "What does this do?" or "Are you sure about that one?"

 

Now it makes me second guess it.

 

I loved it though and would do it again in a heartbeat!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rode the carnival version at the LA County Fair wayyy back around 2002. It was the kind that the net is attached to the elevator car, so there really was no possibility of it not being raised up enough. They would still bring multiple passengers up in the car, but between jumpers, we would just lower ourselves with the net enough for them to get out. Seems pretty fail-safe to me....at least more-so than a tower with independent net operations. Anyway, I will definitely be riding a SCAD tower again when I see one at a good price

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rode the carnival version at the LA County Fair wayyy back around 2002. It was the kind that the net is attached to the elevator car, so there really was no possibility of it not being raised up enough.

This is not correct. The LA County Fair one is the same one we filmed on. The net can raise and lower independently. It may *look* to someone who is untrained on how the machine works that it's attached and there is "no possibility of it not being raised", but that is incorrect information. The net raises at the same time as the cage, but they can be done totally independent. In fact, I believe this very installation was the first accident where the net wasn't raised properly.

 

Incidentally, has there ever been an accident on one of these OUTSIDE of America?

 

--Robb

Edited by robbalvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw this ride on the Travel Channel not too long ago. It looked extreme but I never thought someone could have gotten hurt. I'm not going to speculate, there are a high number of things that could have happened.

 

I'm not going to let this stop me from riding one if I ever come into contact with one (which I hope I do) because it just looks amazing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rode the carnival version at the LA County Fair wayyy back around 2002.

 

I remember seeing that one at the Orange County Fair in 2001 or 2002. It was promoted as being the first of its type in the world (if I remember correctly). Whatever year it was, that was the only year they had it. At the time, my brother wanted to ride it but didn't meet one of the requirements. All I remember was watching a couple people drop and saying I would never do that because it looked incredibly unsafe. Sure enough, shortly after someone died due to the net being improperly raised.

 

Edit: As the news story below says, the person was actually only injured, not killed. I should have double-checked first. Sorry for any confusion. Either way, accidents are never a good thing even when they don't result in injury.

Edited by rcdude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^^ Yep, the park is being foreclosed...

 

http://wcco.com/wireapnewswi/Wis.park.where.2.1835939.html

 

Hmm... if the Park's owner was already in serious debt perhaps he was cutting some corners, like fewer hours and less staff operating each ride. I could see this happening if the ride wasn't staffed according to the manufacturer's guidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rode the carnival version at the LA County Fair wayyy back around 2002. It was the kind that the net is attached to the elevator car, so there really was no possibility of it not being raised up enough.

In fact here is the story from when this same installation failed in 2003:

http://www.rideaccidents.com/2003.html#jul13a

 

You can see here that there in fact IS total possibility that the net can raised independently of the cage.

 

Sure enough, shortly after someone died due to the net being improperly raised.

Please get your facts straight before you post. No one died on it. See the link I just posted.

 

--Robb "Seriously, everyone, PLEASE STOP POSTING CRAP ABOUT THE ACCIDENT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A FREAKING CLUE WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT!!!!" Alvey

Edited by robbalvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody in this thread seems to have pointed out that they say the girl only fell 40 feet. It is my understanding that these towers take you up 150ft, and drop you 100 of those feet into the net which sits 50 feet off the ground. This leaves me a bit confused as to where the platform and net were set when she dropped. The net would not even be off the ground if the platform was only up 40 feet. They also say she landed in gravel. With the landing pad below how did she hit gravel?

 

I did the permanent tower in Dallas about a month ago and I only know how that one operates, but there they have a controller on the ground who raises and lowers the cage, and the operator in the cage is the one dealing with all the rigging for the people on board. Is that not how it always works? If this is also the case in the Dells, then how would a person on the ground not realize he/she parked it so low? If they were only up for her for fall 40 feet, how did the person in the cage release her so prematurely? Not very much is adding up here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I think a lot of people are kind of ignoring that 40' 'stat' since there just aren't enough details released yet to figure it out. There are a lot of possibilities of what could have happened and gone wrong, it just seems like it's the same thing as always, net not up.

 

You're totally correct though that one of the possibilities is that they released her prematurely before everything was up at full altitude.

 

Again, I'm just hoping we hear that she's okay soon. Terrible accident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody in this thread seems to have pointed out that they say the girl only fell 40 feet. It is my understanding that these towers take you up 150ft, and drop you 100 of those feet into the net which sits 50 feet off the ground. This leaves me a bit confused as to where the platform and net were set when she dropped. The net would not even be off the ground if the platform was only up 40 feet. They also say she landed in gravel. With the landing pad below how did she hit gravel?

 

I did the permanent tower in Dallas about a month ago and I only know how that one operates, but there they have a controller on the ground who raises and lowers the cage, and the operator in the cage is the one dealing with all the rigging for the people on board. Is that not how it always works? If this is also the case in the Dells, then how would a person on the ground not realize he/she parked it so low? If they were only up for her for fall 40 feet, how did the person in the cage release her so prematurely? Not very much is adding up here.

 

 

Pointed out on Page 3 But I just chalked up the "40 foot" comment as a fact error (much more common in today's reporting) since I don't care to speculate. If 40 feet was the true drop of her fall that implies that the net initially stopped her, then she fell the final 40 feet after coming to a stop in the net.

 

The reporting just doesn't make sense unless she bounced or rolled off the netting (after her ride ended) before it was lowered or she fell through the net (after her ride ended). And if those were the facts, they should have been reported as such.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been meaning to go on this ride for awhile now but keep putting it off. I was actually in the dells yesterday watching people do this ride... I'm not sure how this happened though.. The cage lifts off the ground with the net at the same time. Wouldn't they have to know at which height to release the girl? I think the net either had to have broke or like other people have said she fell off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't watch the Bert clip that was posted (because I think that show is ridiculous and all that is wrong with coaster shows!)

 

THANK YOU!!!

 

Back onto topic - SCAD just keeps making it's way into the news with these - you WOULD think that this genre of attraction would have a fail safe - but I did a bit o' research...

 

Bungee jump:

Failsafe - Guy in crane with you determines when he's at the top or correct distance. (All faith on operator)

 

Skycoaster:

Failsafe - Platform is lowered before riders are hoisted up - only after other operator acknowledges "All Clear." Cable is constant length to ensure correct trajectory.

 

Slingshot:

Failsafe - Some models are electronic panel controlled. Older models are controlled by simple lever pulled to launch.

 

SCAD Tower:

Failsafe - similar to bungee operator...all faith in operator at the top.

 

Now, these are my own observations - feel free to add on or correct where your knowledge adds to mine.

 

So in reality - though statistically safe - many of these let's call them "Upcharge Style" attractions HAVE NO TRUE "FAIL SAFE." In a twisted way it adds to the thrills, I suppose. (Not that I condone any attraction injuring a patron)

 

EDIT: I just realized that most of the things in our lives don't have fail safes either...

 

Kris "A in-sink drain disposer can't tell if it's food or fingers!" Rowberry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in reality - though statistically safe - many of these let's call them "Upcharge Style" attractions HAVE NO TRUE "FAIL SAFE." In a twisted way it adds to the thrills, I suppose. (Not that I condone any attraction injuring a patron)

 

While it may be true for some, Skycoasters are as absolutely failsafe as they come. They are, unequivocally, the safest rides in the entire industry. The set of circumstances that would have to happen for a serious injury and/or fatality would have to be so ludicrously absurdly off the wall. You have a better chance of being struck by lightning while simultaneously being attacked by a shark and being sat on by a whale with legs.

 

I could list the reasons why it's so safe, but that would take too long, and you should just take my word for it.

 

Now back on topic, I hope the girl makes a speedy recovery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Oh, I totally believe you. In fact when trying to explain this accident to a non-enthusiast today I used the Sky Coasters as an example. I'm pretty sure there has only been ONE accident on ANY Sky Coaster and it was an employee goofing off.

 

When you think how much longer Sky Coasters have been around and their sheer numbers over SCAD Towers , I feel much safer riding one of those than most of my daily activities!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SCAD tower in Dallas makes you sign a waiver as do most of these types extreme upcharge rides. There are reasons for that. Obvious reasons being that these attractions require a lot of faith in the human element i.e. the operators MUST secure everything properly, and set up equipment correctly and the riders must adhere to guidelines, and behave in a safe manner. You don't have as many control factors and backups in place as with traditional amusement devices. This is what adds to the thrill, and unfortunately, due to that, when things go wrong the attractions themselves seem to get a bad wrap, when in fact, I think it's the human element that makes things go wrong far more often. I'll be shocked if we learn that this incident was the result of equipment failure and not operator error, or guest misconduct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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