KS - Caleb Schwab, 10, dies on 17-story Schlitterbahn waterpark slide, Aug 2016

[Jax49]

Agree. Those seat belts look like bull crap for a 17 story drop like that.

The patrons need to be strapped in with the over the shouders bars thats used on the upside down roller coasters and not some simple seat belt. Jmo.

I simply think that the worker didn't make surr that caleb was strapped in tight enough. Idk.

I noticed the riders in the videos had their hands locked, like they were holding on for dear life. Bad design all around--and I hope someone pays dearly.

 

[KaaBoom]

We won't have to concern ourselves with measuring the height of the ride or trying out those velcro straps, cause this park is toast.

Actually the park is back open, and the lines are as long as ever according to reports. It is definitely not toast.

http://fox4kc.com/2016/08/10/despit...tterbahn-as-park-reopens-in-limited-capacity/

 

[AmyPond]

I noticed the riders in the videos had their hands locked, like they were holding on for dear life. Bad design all around--and I hope someone pays dearly.

Isn't there even a sign that says you have to hang onto the handles the entire ride? That just screams unsafe to me!

 

[ninij9]

Agree. Those seat belts look like bull crap for a 17 story drop like that.

The patrons need to be strapped in with the over the shouders bars thats used on the upside down roller coasters and not some simple seat belt. Jmo.

I simply think that the worker didn't make surr that caleb was strapped in tight enough. Idk.

I hate these kinds of rides, I really do. I'd hate to put the blame of this tragedy on the worker that strapped them in, that perhaps the child wasn't secured properly. I just don't feel comfortable with that. The trouble points more to the rides design flaws, the use of Velcro straps and parks lax regulations. Jmo. I'll bet everyone that was there at the time will be traumatized for life.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[ninij9]

Actually the park is back open, and the lines are as long as ever according to reports. It is definitely not toast.

http://fox4kc.com/2016/08/10/despit...tterbahn-as-park-reopens-in-limited-capacity/

That's just bad mojo. I couldn't bring my family there at this time. I'm sure plenty of people are there for morbid interest too. Too bad park reopened.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

Agree. Those seat belts look like bull crap for a 17 story drop like that.

The patrons need to be strapped in with the over the shouders bars thats used on the upside down roller coasters and not some simple seat belt. Jmo.

I simply think that the worker didn't make surr that caleb was strapped in tight enough. Idk.

There should never be a single source of failure on a ride like this. The "designers" should have designed it such that if one safety feature failed, other safety measures would still prevent an accident.

They didn't know what they were doing.

I wonder if they could be sued for practicing engineering without a license?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[JohnPaul]

There should never be a single source of failure on a ride like this. The "designers" should have designed it such that if one safety feature failed, other safety measures would still prevent an accident.

meh....not really,

thats like saying if the brakes in my car failed, something else should stop my car before i hit something

 

[AmyPond]

meh....not really,

thats like saying if the brakes in my car failed, something else should stop my car before i hit something

At least if you crash into something, your car has other safety features. And something other than velco seat belts.

 

[DatelineFan]

I hate these kinds of rides, I really do. I'd hate to put the blame of this tragedy on the worker that strapped them in, that perhaps the child wasn't secured properly. I just don't feel comfortable with that. The trouble points more to the rides design flaws, the use of Velcro straps and parks lax regulations. Jmo. I'll bet everyone that was there at the time will be traumatized for life.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Yes, the person who strapped him in was one of the first people I thought of in this incident. That individual will likely be tormented forever.

 

[Wyle_E_Coyote]

meh....not really,

thats like saying if the brakes in my car failed, something else should stop my car before i hit something

Actually, the parking brake can often still be used even when the main brakes aren't working (not to mention downshifting will slow the car tremendously, and yes, it is possible to manually shift in an automatic). Plus there are seatbelts and airbags.

So yes, cars have multiple means of protecting the occupants.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

 

[JohnPaul]

Actually, the parking brake can often still be used even when the main brakes aren't working (not to mention downshifting will slow the car tremendously, and yes, it is possible to manually shift in an automatic)

<modsnip>

people still die, and are injured in cars with all the safety items you list, and that will always continue, so a secondary form of protection will not necessarily help anything

the point is simple, accidents have happened in the past, accidents are happening today, and accidents will always happen in the future,

it doesn't matter how well you design something, or the safety precautions you take, accidents, injuries, and deaths will still always occur,

i don't care if a car has 50 airbags, 3 seat belts for each person, and can steer itself, people will still eventually die in that car,

amusement ride, car, plane, bus, tank...i don't care, you can never prevent injuries 100%, it's impossible

 

[Yvettea]

2 Women in Same Waterslide Raft as Caleb Schwab Speak Out


http://abcnews.go.com/US/women-raft-10-year-boy-killed-kansas-waterslide/story?id=41480735

It must be too early to speak about what they remember.

 

[Rocco]

<modsnip>

people still die, and are injured in cars with all the safety items you list, and that will always continue, so a secondary form of protection will not necessarily help anything

the point is simple, accidents have happened in the past, accidents are happening today, and accidents will always happen in the future,

it doesn't matter how well you design something, or the safety precautions you take, accidents, injuries, and deaths will still always occur,

i don't care if a car has 50 airbags, 3 seat belts for each person, and can steer itself, people will still eventually die in that car,

amusement ride, car, plane, bus, tank...i don't care, you can never prevent injuries 100%, it's impossible

Yes, but...................when you have warnings that there are problems with the ride and do nothing about it, that's a problem and a liability. There were previous complaints about the straps not holding and also about the rafts lifting up. What measures, if any, were taken to rectify those issues?

 

[Rocco]

There should never be a single source of failure on a ride like this. The "designers" should have designed it such that if one safety feature failed, other safety measures would still prevent an accident.

They didn't know what they were doing.

I wonder if they could be sued for practicing engineering without a license?

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Perhaps their secondary safety feature, if the restraints failed, was the netting and metal loops. I wonder if they sent test dummies down the slide to see what would happen if a rider came out of the restraints and hit the net and metal loops. I guessing the answer to that is 'no'.

 

[Doghairrules]

<modsnip>

people still die, and are injured in cars with all the safety items you list, and that will always continue, so a secondary form of protection will not necessarily help anything

the point is simple, accidents have happened in the past, accidents are happening today, and accidents will always happen in the future,

it doesn't matter how well you design something, or the safety precautions you take, accidents, injuries, and deaths will still always occur,

i don't care if a car has 50 airbags, 3 seat belts for each person, and can steer itself, people will still eventually die in that car,

amusement ride, car, plane, bus, tank...i don't care, you can never prevent injuries 100%, it's impossible

And yet it doesn't appear they even tried.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Trox]

I have been following this and I have finally finished this thread. I cannot believe how awful this whole thing is
I have a question though, I read earlier on there is a break in the netting? Why would there be a break in the netting if that's the point it is most likely to go airborne?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[neesaki]

<modsnip>

people still die, and are injured in cars with all the safety items you list, and that will always continue, so a secondary form of protection will not necessarily help anything

the point is simple, accidents have happened in the past, accidents are happening today, and accidents will always happen in the future,

it doesn't matter how well you design something, or the safety precautions you take, accidents, injuries, and deaths will still always occur,

i don't care if a car has 50 airbags, 3 seat belts for each person, and can steer itself, people will still eventually die in that car,

amusement ride, car, plane, bus, tank...i don't care, you can never prevent injuries 100%, it's impossible

I think there's a major difference when comparing this to a car accident. The person driving an automobile in most cases is basically 100% in control over that vehicle, as in reality it's very rare for brakes to fail or accelerator's to stick, etc. In this or any ride, the rider has more or less 0 % control over the ride once they decide to ride it. They are at the mercy of the safety factors of the ride itself and its operators. I just don't think they can be compared, it's apples to oranges, IMO.

 

[ninij9]

I have been following this and I have finally finished this thread. I cannot believe how awful this whole thing is
I have a question though, I read earlier on there is a break in the netting? Why would there be a break in the netting if that's the point it is most likely to go airborne?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know workers removed a section of netting after the accident. I don't recall netting missing pre-accident.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Madeleine74]

The break in the netting is so if a raft gets stuck they could get it out. I read that in something MSM, but I cannot remember where I read it.

 

[JohnPaul]

I think there's a major difference when comparing this to a car accident. The person driving an automobile in most cases is basically 100% in control over that vehicle.

really?

over 50% of car accidents happen because of mechanical failure where the driver is left with absolutely no control over the vehicle....

a tire puncture in your front wheel, a bad wheel bearing that lets go, a broken lower ball joint, a broken steering tie rod end.....etc etc.....

these are just a few examples that would leave you with basically no steering ability/control of your vehicle, and it happens a lot more often then you think,

i am still not buying into the "design flaw" theory on this one,

think about how many thousands, or probably hundreds of thousands of people who rode this ride injury free in the past, sorry but that does not scream "design flaw" to me,

if the "boat" they were riding in was propelled into the air, hitting the mesh on top, then the two women riding in the boat would have serious head injuries equivalent to the child....and they do not....the two women did not hit the mesh/netting,

going by that i think its safe to assume this child was ejected from the boat, for whatever reason we do not know right now, but in my opinion this is not a "design flaw".....something went wrong with the straps,

were the straps secured properly to begin with?
were the straps in good working condition?

we don't know the answer to these questions,

<modsnip>