Anonymous wrote:I've read a few articles on this and none of them and none of the witnesses mentioned that. It's possible that it's just not being reported at this point but all of them said he was laying on they ground and they saw him laying there when the paramedics pulle a white sheet over him. Seems like if he were decapitated they wouldn't have necessarily known it was a boy and the witness statements might have been different. But in definitely not an expert on any of this.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
That was my thought, too. It's hard to believe none of the engineers could foresee what would happen if someone hit the net.
I hate to write this, but since you've chosen to read this far into the thread. . . Some have said that he was decapitated by the netting or the metal framing for the netting. There was blood pooled in the water at the the bottom of the track.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Any reports on who the other two riders on his tube were?
On the AMA thread from someone who has ridden that water slide before, that OP says it was 2 women and he likely didn't even know them.
If it were two women and a ten year old boy (he was skinny from his pictures) how would they have hit the minimum weight?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Any reports on who the other two riders on his tube were?
On the AMA thread from someone who has ridden that water slide before, that OP says it was 2 women and he likely didn't even know them.
Anonymous wrote:Any reports on who the other two riders on his tube were?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
That was my thought, too. It's hard to believe none of the engineers could foresee what would happen if someone hit the net.
I hate to write this, but since you've chosen to read this far into the thread. . . Some have said that he was decapitated by the netting or the metal framing for the netting. There was blood pooled in the water at the the bottom of the track.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
Netting under roller coasters is pretty standard to keep things like cell phones that fall out of people's hands from hitting people below. I wonder if that was the thinking. I can't imagine they thought the netting was a solution to people coming out of their seats. Seems like the harness/seatbelt is the solution to that.
I think the key word is under. There are videos of people riding it and the netting and framing is pretty darn close to people's heads. In hindsight, it seems extremely dangerous.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:There were some delays in opening the slide back in 2014, but that was just with the system getting the rafts up to the top.
No there were also issues with the "test dummies" flying off. The principles were based on roller coasters which didn't work exactly the same for water. It sounds as though this ride wasn't safe to start with.
My heart aches for the family.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
Netting under roller coasters is pretty standard to keep things like cell phones that fall out of people's hands from hitting people below. I wonder if that was the thinking. I can't imagine they thought the netting was a solution to people coming out of their seats. Seems like the harness/seatbelt is the solution to that.
Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
True. And it looks like netting needs tone held in place by something like a pole. So probably the harness did not work (several news reports are saying this is an issue) or he was under the height requirement. So he flew up and hit the pole.
We love waterparks, but I have found that kids working there are often lax with rules. They probably have no idea of the consequences. And it is scary to hear that instead of designing this right they did trial and error. No sandbag is going mimic how a person may move on the ride.
I've read a few articles on this and none of them and none of the witnesses mentioned that. It's possible that it's just not being reported at this point but all of them said he was laying on they ground and they saw him laying there when the paramedics pulle a white sheet over him. Seems like if he were decapitated they wouldn't have necessarily known it was a boy and the witness statements might have been different. But in definitely not an expert on any of this.Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.
That was my thought, too. It's hard to believe none of the engineers could foresee what would happen if someone hit the net.
I hate to write this, but since you've chosen to read this far into the thread. . . Some have said that he was decapitated by the netting or the metal framing for the netting. There was blood pooled in the water at the the bottom of the track.
Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand how netting (at 65+ mph) would be a "safety" item. Anything at that speed is dangerous.