Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He overrode the system by loosening the restraint to allow it to appear to the sensor that he was locked in properly.
Again... He WAS "locked in properly" in that the restraint was locked. The boy tried it himself and couldn't move it. And again... If it hadn't been locked, he'd have tumbled out the second the seat pitched forward at the top and didn't. It's just that the restraint, once locked, didn't cover sufficient mass to contain his bulk against the force of gravity once that was applied.
Sure, if you knew it would dangerous, of course you wouldn't-- but if you thought it was safe (which was the part of my post you didn't bold)? I mean, I wouldn't think *I* could slip through a six-inch gap, let alone someone his size. Someone who'd seen the override done before without mishap or concern, and who, again, may have been told it was safe and okay to do, is probably going to think all will be well.
Exactly. I maintain that NO ONE, except maybe some engineer somewhere who just happened to be an expert at physics, could have predicted this. For all ANYONE knew, whatever small adjustment "whomever it was" made was not going to endanger anyone. However, whoever - along the line - conceived of the idea of or authorized the practice of or personally made it possible for the overriding of the built-in safety mechanism in order to accommodate larger riders comes closest to bearing the responsibility, and that - at least as I understand it - wasn't the teenage attendant.
Again... He WAS "locked in properly" in that the restraint was locked. The boy tried it himself and couldn't move it. And again... If it hadn't been locked, he'd have tumbled out the second the seat pitched forward at the top and didn't. It's just that the restraint, once locked, didn't cover sufficient mass to contain his bulk against the force of gravity once that was applied.
It was only able to lock because he loosened it too much to actually restrain him. They tested this with 2 large people during the investigation and both were able to slip out from under it when loosened to this degree. The investigators said the gap was twice as wide at the bottom as it would normally have been.
No one could have imagined G-forces would cause an entire body to slide out what was still a tiny opening, even if it was "twice the normal size," because it had never happened.
No one could have imagined G-forces would cause an entire body to slide out what was still a tiny opening, even if it was "twice the normal size," because it had never happened.
Until it did.
(I feel we're repeating ourselves...)
You are repeating yourself…
And the engineers clearly knew of the risks of oversized riders getting on, hence the instructions in the manual.
I don’t think the employee should be charged, even though they were partially at fault. There was no criminal intent. If it’s a design flaw, the engineer doesn’t get charged with a crime.
IMO they should be charged with something, even if it amounts to a slap on the wrist.
The employees working the ride were hired to work that ride, they were also trained by the manufacturer for a few months.
They are hired to put people on the ride and to make sure they have a safe experience, the owner is counting on them to do that job.
In this case it was not the owner or manager training them, it was the manufacturer, so it's my opinion that they explained the ride, weight, larger or even smaller people to them because the manufacturer is not going to be there holding their hand once training is over.
I hope this is a wake up call and lesson to owners and employees, especially on these dangerous rides that they hold customers lives in their hands and that them having an off day can result in one or more deaths and that they could be held responsible like we are when we get into a car driving drunk or even causing a fatal accident, we could go to jail for life even though it was an accident.
The manufacturer will walk away with only having to be sued. They don't even live in our country.
I'll be surprised if the manufacturers employee who did the training is not also disposed to explain training to investigators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
Yes and the attendants on the other two rides had no problem doing that. But it shouldn’t have gotten to the stage where he was seated already. The height and weight restrictions should have been posted at the entrance.
Agree 100% that it should have been posted but Florida does not mandate it, most likely because it counts on people coming to the theme parks there. It's always about money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by otterhere
Examined by whom? What is "fitting properly"? Most people would assume that, if the brace (harness) locked, it was secure. If the warning wasn't triggered, then for all the teenage attendant knew, he "fit properly."
I think the employee learned a hard lesson, he or she will have to live knowing that their lack of action caused his death.
Let's hope this is the last drop ride death and that both owners and employees will do whatever they can to make sure something like this doesn't happen again.
Employers can make sure they train employees to stress how dangerous it can be for a person to not be strapped in right and for the employees to know that peoples lives are in their hands. Not doing their job correctly can cause a death or deaths.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcenal813
Typically, the only way to override such features is through a key or code. The owner/operator of the ride has this.
No doubt the employees have had to use the over ride before, just like the employees in Colorado who also used the over ride when the 6 year old girl did not have her seat belt on for that drop ride.
Quote:
Originally Posted by K12144
Sure, if you knew it would dangerous, of course you wouldn't-- but if you thought it was safe (which was the part of my post you didn't bold)? I mean, I wouldn't think *I* could slip through a six-inch gap, let alone someone his size. Someone who'd seen the override done before without mishap or concern, and who, again, may have been told it was safe and okay to do, is probably going to think all will be well.
I've said it multiple times, I'm surprised his body came out of that fairly small opening, small compared to his size. It was only about 7 inches, his upper body was way bigger than that. It's like squeezing toothpaste out of the tube. I'm sure it had to have hurt. It may have even broken his spine.
No one could have imagined G-forces would cause an entire body to slide out what was still a tiny opening, even if it was "twice the normal size," because it had never happened.
Until it did.
(I feel we're repeating ourselves...)
But they did imagine it, because it specifically says in the operators manual that if the person doesn’t fit properly in the seat without any adjustments, the person must not be allowed to ride. There’s nothing in there that says you can adjust the harness so that it will lock. It says to tell the person they cannot ride.
"Ken Martin, an amusement park ride safety analyst and consultant, told Fox News Digital he believes the Orlando FreeFall incident is "criminal," and says "somebody killed Mr. Tyre Sampson."
The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services released its commissioned engineering report performed by Quest Engineering last week, which states that a "proximity sensor" for the harness being used by Sampson was "manually loosened," meaning Sampson wasn't properly secured in his seat.
Nikki Fried, Florida commissioner of agriculture and consumer services, said during a press conference last week that "maladjustments" were made to the seat's proximity sensor that allowed a safety light to illuminate, allowing Sampson to ride even though he was not "properly secured in the seat."
"Samson's harness had a proximity sensor that "was manually loosened, adjusted and tightened to allow a restraint opening of near seven inches," according to the report. Normally, the range is around three inches, according to the report."
The state has hired a forensic engineer to investigate now as well. I do think the state bears some responsibility too for not requiring that ride operators post signs for rides that have a maximum weight limit or other restrictions. I'd be adding them to my lawsuit if I were Tyre's parents.
How did we go from 'they didn't check his harness, it's on the video' to 'they physically adjusted the seat's safety features specifically to allow Trye to ride', but it's NOT on the video?
Last edited by DubbleT; 04-25-2022 at 01:54 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
