Originally Posted By mrichmondj Wow! This is an interesting topic! My only question is what constitutes a company like Disney being negligent in terms of safety? I think it goes without saying that they have expended a huge amount of resources in engineering and testing to determine that a new ride is safe for millions of visitors to ride each year. Does the average visitor take the same precautions in their daily life to ensure personal safety? Do you wear hearing protection, eye protection, and steel toe shoes when you cut your lawn? If you don't, you risk a debilitating injury. Have you ever left items cooking unattended on a stove, plugged too many electrical appliances into a single outlet, or overfused a fuse box to prevent a circuit from blowing? Do you inspect your vehichle every time you get inside to ensure proper tire inflation, fluid levels, and working condition? Have you ever worked on a ladder or other elevated position without using a safety harness or other restraint? A fall from as little as 6 ft can result in serious injury. There are countless safety concerns that are regularly implemented by organizations like Disney as a matter of daily practice. Yet, few private citizens ever make an effort to do the same in their own routine. I think I feel much safer on Expedition Everest than I do as a passenger in some of my acquaintances vehicles on the highway, or even visiting some of their homes.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 <My only question is what constitutes a company like Disney being negligent in terms of safety?< I think Disney answered that in their opinion that the lap bar is not a safety device, but more of a convenience and reminder not to get up in the car ( much like all old time wooden coasters ) -- that the ride is designed to keep the passengers in by forces from the ride, not the bar-- From the looks of the ride unless you were in the front seat why not hold onto the headrest in front of you ? Let's face it GTMRR can throw you around also if not holding on to anything. I an very tall and therefore most lap bars hit me so low and leave my arms so far above the, they would hardly be safety devices -- I look for other places to hold on for 'balance' if needed. I don't doubt at this point that this happened, but to the level of extremity ? Curious forum to bring this up, as all written here is easily retrievable, and now have a media source aware of all that went on in details ( have to be consistent ) -- not sure what reaction was meant to be garnered. And of course Disney ( or any other park ) would have to say that the possibility a person could come out of the car is there, they cannot control things like idiots standing up during the ride, trying to exit ( as has happened in one of their previous rides in DL) during the ride. etc. One COULD fall out of the Doombuggies or on Smalll World also. They can't make a false claim that it is impossible.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<I think it goes without saying that they have expended a huge amount of resources in engineering and testing to determine that a new ride is safe for millions of visitors to ride each year.>> Are Disney's attractions inherently unsafe? This seems to be the stance of the OP. Do they not take appropriate actions to insure the safety of their guests? This also seems to be the position the OP holds. While a lap bar may have failed, does that prove the above two statements as true? No. Accidents happen, no matter how well something is made, or what precautions are put in place. Disney has a 50+ year history of designing and operating theme park attractions, and billions and billions have enjoyed them without incident. Still, there is no 100% guarantee that something might go wrong. In a few of cases, Disney has been judged at fault for those accidents. I can empathise how frightened a person might be to be on the receiving end of mechanical failure, and I don't blame anyone for questioning how it may have occured. But I do not believe for one moment that Disney is cavalier about safety.
Originally Posted By retlawfan >> What the Disney consumer should be DEMANDING is that Disney prove it didn't happen. << How do they do this? Should they provide video of every inch of the track, and every seat in every train to PROVE that no lap bar came up prematurely? To prove something happened, you prove it happened, not demand someone come up with proof it didn't happened. Duh! I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm still skeptical...
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL A couple things have been bothering me throughout this entire thread. First off, How large is your husband girth wise? And how far down did the lap bar click? The higher up the lap bar stays the higher the incidence of failure. I know for a fact that on the Collossus at MM in CA, if the bar doesn't go past the 3rd click/ratchet, the guest can not ride. If the bar can not go past a certain point, the weight and force of a person can "pop" the bar. The Collossus had a thrown from vehicle fatality in its 2nd year of opertaion. Second, What kind of injuries could one sustain by just holding themselves in their seat? Even if holding onto the daughter, I can't see how one would be "seriously" injured. Thirdly, any ride vehicle at a Disney park that comes into the station with a defective ANYTHING is pulled from operation and inspected. I admit, this may have changed since I worked there, but I highly doubt it after the BTMRR fatality.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL And after re-reading OrlandoSentinel Scotts post #113 and OP guineapigs # 134 even more is sceptical. Scott points out that the train in question was pulled from service and inspected. Guinea states they just ran it once with the car in question empty and then kept using it. Curiouser and curiouser
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Whether or not Scott the Orlando Sentinel reporter is talking about gineapigs specific incident is not, to me, the issue. A lapbar did allegedly pop up on Expedition Everest ride on Jan 26th. Whether it's the exact same incident that gineapig is describing? That's the big question.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL And if it is, then guinepig is making an Everest sized mountain out of a mole hill.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< The lapbars are mostly to keep the rider from standing up when they are not supposed to. They're not there to hold you down. >>> I can totally believe that. I've always assumed that the difference between coasters with lapbars and those with over-the-shoulder "heavy duty" restraints are that the lap bar ones will hold you in the seat though G-forces, and the ones with over-the-shoulder restraints actaully need them for you to stay in the seat. <<< As a stockholder, every year I vote against the board in order to implement improved ride safety checks and procedures. >>> This is the most curious thing you've said so far. So, even before this incident, and as "Disney fans for generations," you've been casting your shareholder votes for years against the board on the basis of insufficient ride checks and procedures? I've never heard of anyone here or anywhere else claiming to have done so before. It's quite remarkable that someone that has apparently been fixated with this issue even before this incident would happen to be the one to have their lapbar pop open. Then, to choose a new user name called "guineapig" of all things, adds even further to the mystery.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Was any other stockholder besides me wondering how and when the issue of ride safety was up for a vote ? I have only attended one stockholder meeting in person ( felt pretty cool - but mostly boring ) - and the proxy votes I have gotten never had a safety issue involved. I have been a stockholder ( as are both of my kids ) for over 20 years.
Originally Posted By typhoonCM Vbdad I too have been a stock holder for a considerable amount of time and never have I seen a vote on safety... would execs here really vote AGAINST safety measures. I still smell a rat... I'm officially done reading posts in this one. Someone just has too much free time on their hands...
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<As a stockholder, every year I vote against the board in order to implement improved ride safety checks and procedures>> I am not a stockholder, but I responded to the OP's comment way back in post #180, to which you will find nothing more than a LOL. I interpret it as not a vote against a specific issue, but a total vote of no confidence, as if to signal, "You guys don't have my vote until you you clean up your act." It's utterly preposterous... just as most of the OP story seems to be.
Originally Posted By Labuda "your kitchen utensils don't really sing and dance." Maybe YOURS don't... And, I'm quite curious to see if somewhere in post #141+ you reveal your identity, proving to us that you ARE a longterm member of the LP. "I've got to tell you though; if something like that happened to TDLFAN you can be sure the report would be under the name TDLFAN. I may not always agree with him, but his integrity is beyond question." Indeed.
Originally Posted By Labuda "Well, two things for me. I just figured out what OP meant; someone, after 160 posts said "original poster" and I went "Oh"." Well, you know, LP also stands for Learning Place.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> and the ones with over-the-shoulder restraints actually need them for you to stay in the seat. << Almost true. Even rides that go through inversions and have shoulder restraints are designed to keep you in the seat through centrifigal force. The real purpose of over-the-shoulder restraints is to keep you in your seat just incase the ride should stop in one of those inverted locations. Or proceed through it too slowly. Another reason for over-the-shoulder is for handling real live airtime. (Not just perceived airtime)
Originally Posted By paulyahoo << the ones with over-the-shoulder restraints actaully need them for you to stay in the seat >> I believe it's only true for suspended coasters. If I remember correctly, in Travel Channel documentaries about DLP Indy imagineers told that over the shoulder restraints are used mostly for psychological safety, because the force of gravity must hold you inside a coaster car at all times.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< I believe it's only true for suspended coasters. If I remember correctly, in Travel Channel documentaries about DLP Indy imagineers told that over the shoulder restraints are used mostly for psychological safety, because the force of gravity must hold you inside a coaster car at all times. >>> I wonder about that. I recently rode the DLP Indy clone called Raging Spirits at TDS, and they were very concerned about the over-the-shoulder restraint. In fact, they had this little tool with which they measured the minimum amount that the restraint had to be lowered, which was several notches beyond the first locking position. Larger guests, whether because of their girth or height, may not be able to ride if they cannot get the restraint to go several notches past the first notch. It may be due to some quirk of Japanese safety law that they did this, but I've not seen this on any other TDR ride.
Originally Posted By paulyahoo Indy/Raging Spirits coaster is way too simple and you feel centrifugal force pushing you in during the ride. But it seems the situation is different with RNRC: it is the only coaster I've ever ridden when my backpack fell out (from between my ankles) in one of the inversions.
