• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Drayton Manor Park - Splash Canyon Incident

RoyJess said:
From today's inquest, it appears that this was more than simply kids changing seats or standing up to avoid a wave. These kids were apparently hanging over the edge with their hands in the water, it appears that they wanted to see who could get the wettest.

I wonder who will be at fault here? Who was responsible for the safety of the kids? The school teachers or the park? I hope it's the former
Click to expand...

Ultimately the park will get the blame for not having enough barriers/seatbelts in place to prevent this kind of behaviour. All they have to do is to point to the rapids rides that do operate with seatbelts and there will be little to no comeback for DMP.

I have thought for years though that they should all have had a seatbelts anyway. People can't behave. Simple as that.
 
Benjsh said:
I have thought for years though that they should all have had a seatbelts anyway.
Click to expand...

Seat belts on the rapids are a terrible idea, not safe if a boat was to unlikely to capsize. If sat down properly, even if standing up t avoid a wave or to swap seats, falling out of those boats should be very difficult unless you are hanging over the edge like the kids were doing.
 
Lurker said:
What is the deep pool that she fell into?

Is it the resovoir for the ride, where water is pumped from?
Click to expand...

I can only imagine the bit near the end just before the lift hill back into the station.

Those who remember the ride, it was very jolty in places, and if it was in that final section, if the boat hit one of the sides in the right way just after the previous corner it was a pretty big jolt.

As for stopping the ride, there's still water in it now (admittedly full of duckweed) in that bit, I don't think the water ever disappears from that bit or at least not easily.
 
CoasterMadMatt said:
I can only imagine the bit near the end just before the lift hill back into the station.

Those who remember the ride, it was very jolty in places, and if it was in that final section, if the boat hit one of the sides in the right way just after the previous corner it was a pretty big jolt.

As for stopping the ride, there's still water in it now (admittedly full of duckweed) in that bit, I don't think the water ever disappears from that bit or at least not easily.
Click to expand...
Worse than not draining away, it would most likely rise if the pumps were stopped. It's the low point of the ride so if you stop the water being pumped out the level there will go up.

The water at the bottom of Tower's lift rises and that's even with the full Katanga lake to flow into, Drayton's lake was far far smaller so presumably the level would raise even more.

Add on that stopping the pumps drops any water currently in them (more than you would think) and would create a wave travelling backwards through the lift base area. And also most if not all boats will still make it down to the end after an estop.

Cut short; going by the info that it was drowning and not a mechanical injury then an e-stop would not really help much.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
RoyJess said:
I wonder who will be at fault here? Who was responsible for the safety of the kids? The school teachers or the park? I hope it's the former
Click to expand...

So, you would rather it was the Teachers fault? An individual who will have to live with that guilt forever rather than a business? A business whose rules allowed her to ride unaccompanied (she met the minimum height requirements to ride without an adult). The school simply can not be blamed as they followed the Park's rules.

She shouldn't have moved, everyone agrees with that. But this inquest will be more about the actions which followed and safety processes
 
Themepark-newbie said:
So, you would rather it was the Teachers fault? An individual who will have to live with that guilt forever rather than a business? A business whose rules allowed her to ride unaccompanied (she met the minimum height requirements to ride without an adult). The school simply can not be blamed as they followed the Park's rules.

She shouldn't have moved, everyone agrees with that. But this inquest will be more about the actions which followed and safety processes
Click to expand...

Like everyone else, I would have rather the accident never happened.

They may call it an accident as no one intended for it to happen, but accidents usually happens as a result of someone not following the correct procedures.

These were children under the care and responsibility of the school. It's down to the teachers to access whether the kids were mature enough to be allowed to ride without a grown up or not. The theme park can't make that assessment as they don't personally know the kids.

Considering the enquiry is going to last for up to two weeks, this could be an indication that there is a lot more to be revealed about the indecent and there may be some blame yet to be pointed at the themepark.


Themepark-newbie said:
The school simply can not be blamed as they followed the Park's rules.
Click to expand...

But the kids didn't follow the rules and the kids were in the care of the school not the themepark, the school has a duty of care.
 
Yes, that I agree with. However, at what point does the duty of care pass to the Theme Park who operate the rides. If a ride stopped at height, it wouldn't be the teachers responsible for the evacuation but the Park. When did the Park stop the girls from standing? When did the Park know she was in the water? Did the Park get to her in time and stop her drowning? If 11 minutes is correct then that is not the responsibility of the school.

I would say that 11 year old are responsible to go on a ride themselves. I am sure most are trusted to walk to school or cycle on roads themselves... Surely that is inherently dangerous as well?
 
The issue is here that whilst the rules are there for people not to, we all know that people do not abide them. Like when you are in hurry, how many people jump a red light?

Obviously we'll find out more as it goes on. But the rules for the ride did say Do Not Stand Up, Remain Seated etc, on the info boards and on the ride. But you can then say that about any T&Cs, how many of us have actually read the whole thing?

Yes there is video evidence to prove that they were not abiding by the rules and the ride was running normally, nothing broke down on it, as far as the ride goes, systems were fine.

The teachers did a risk assessment to say that the kids were well behaved on the first go but was this because the teacher was there? By removing that authority figure was it now a case of "kids will be kids"? It did seem a little odd to me when it said in the article that it was normal practice for the teacher to remain with any students that didn't want to ride, again they've used a risk assessment to say that was the greater threat.

With it being a free flow water ride instead of tracked ride makes the ride very different. If the ride had have broken down, stuck, stranded etc then its the parks responsibility but unlike the Smiler incident, the ride wasn't giving off warning signs to say it was broken/or an issue.

However on the flipside, their needs to be this contingency, no matter how unlikely, if this was to happen.

If the kids were sitting on the ride normal and followed the rules, it would never have happened but when riders don't follow the rules, who is to blame.

The park for the response time on a ride that cannot be easily stopped? Or the riders themselves for putting themselves in danger and ignoring the rules? Or the school for simply assuming it was someone else's responsibility?
 
Themepark-newbie said:
Yes, that I agree with. However, at what point does the duty of care pass to the Theme Park who operate the rides. If a ride stopped at height, it wouldn't be the teachers responsible for the evacuation but the Park. When did the Park stop the girls from standing? When did the Park know she was in the water? Did the Park get to her in time and stop her drowning? If 11 minutes is correct then that is not the responsibility of the school.

I would say that 11 year old are responsible to go on a ride themselves. I am sure most are trusted to walk to school or cycle on roads themselves... Surely that is inherently dangerous as well?
Click to expand...

CoasterMadMatt said:
The teachers did a risk assessment to say that the kids were well behaved on the first go but was this because the teacher was there?
Click to expand...

As mentioned on tonight's ITV news, the school did a risk assessment and they concluded that the younger children was to be accompanied by a teacher at all times. The school went against this when they allowed the children to go on the ride without a teacher.

Also as mentioned on the news, the inquest is to establish if there were anything else that could have been done.

Remember this is an inquest not a trial, the park are not being held responsible. I should imagine that the outcome of this inquest will pave the way for, if any, more H&S regulation on this type of ride.
 
Interesting to know where and how it happened now.

I imagine the issue will come down to Drayton not doing anything during the ride (towers constantly play that do not stand message and the operators even come over the PA at times) and then being slow to respond after she did fall in. Wherever that’s the operators fault, station staff or general training they receive.

Would also explain why towers and Thorpe now have that staff member looking rather bored stood at the end of the ride where the lift hill is. I guess they had been told where the accident had happened, and this is why they now position a member of staff there.
 
Blame blame blame!

A child can be found to have died by misadventure, they can be held to be responsible for their own actions.

The teacher has already said they had ridden the ride with the children without incident and decided they were safe to do so again alone. That is clearly with full knowledge of the nature of the ride, the restraints, and the obvious risks.

The person best placed to make a judgement on the girls ability to ride safely decided they were capable. That she went on to act so irresponsibily could therefore not have been foreseen by the park.

I'm just hoping the park don't get spanked financially. They don't deserve it.
 
If there is cctv showing then acting badly then why was this not flagged to the ride op that they may need to keep an extra watch h on them.
Or is it the cctv is just there for show.
 
bluesonichd said:
If there is cctv showing then acting badly then why was this not flagged to the ride op that they may need to keep an extra watch h on them.
Or is it the cctv is just there for show.
Click to expand...

It does beg the question as to what the CCTV was for if the staff didn’t notice the girl falling out of the ride and into the water, climbing onto the lift and then falling off it back into the water.

They only seem to become aware once the other kids in the raft had alerted them.
 
bluesonichd said:
If there is cctv showing then acting badly then why was this not flagged to the ride op that they may need to keep an extra watch h on them.
Or is it the cctv is just there for show.
Click to expand...

Question is is the CCTV she was seen standing the whole time on the rides CCTV system or other cameras with overview of the splash area? If they were the rides system it's fairly damming for the park and will expect to see a large fine as although the standing situation couldn't have been prevented it could have been stopped before the accident happened (tannoy announcement then ESTOP if refusing to sit)
 
Benjsh said:
Ultimately the park will get the blame for not having enough barriers/seatbelts in place to prevent this kind of behaviour. All they have to do is to point to the rapids rides that do operate with seatbelts and there will be little to no comeback for DMP.
Click to expand...
I think that oversimplifies things a bit. The ride has a long history operating in the same state as when the accident occurred. Other rides under the HSEs jurisdiction operate in exactly the same way and two have had their boats replaced with new ones during SCs operation with new boats that don't feature seatbelts or barriers.

Also, the ride was signed off as safe to operate by external parties.
 
Doublethink said:
Question is is the CCTV she was seen standing the whole time on the rides CCTV system or other cameras with overview of the splash area? If they were the rides system it's fairly damming for the park and will expect to see a large fine as although the standing situation couldn't have been prevented it could have been stopped before the accident happened (tannoy announcement then ESTOP if refusing to sit)
Click to expand...
E-stop would have most likely just created a more dangerous situation so is unlikely to be the correct course of action.

PA yes, but I have no idea how good the PA system on that ride is.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk
 
bluesonichd said:
If there is cctv showing then acting badly then why was this not flagged to the ride op that they may need to keep an extra watch h on them.
Or is it the cctv is just there for show.
Click to expand...

And this is probably where the inquiry will go. We are all theme park enthusiasts on here but there has to be an acceptance that it can't simply be pinned on the girl or school.

In life, the only thing I can liken it to was being a lifeguard at 18. Despite all the signs, people still ran, bombed, dived in the shallow end. We were given whistles to alert them to their behaviour and to not do it again.

However, we also had the training and equipment if an accident occurred e.g a spine board if somebody landed on their head when diving. There were procedures for 'worst case'.

Whilst the accident should never have happened if she followed the rules, it did. So... Where were the reminders to stop the behaviour? Why did it take so long to get her out? Where were the evac places?

The school did a risk assessment which looks at levels of risk and how to minimise it. The Park would also have a risk assessment for each ride... Did they follow their own procedures? They absolutely would have a 'what if...?' plan for if somebody stood up or went in. Was it actioned?

The other thing we don't know is how many other people have been for a swim on Splasy Canyon. The HSE would definitely want to see a record of related incidents. If a few people have been for a swim then what have the Park done to try and stop this?

I want the Park to escape a fine like everyone else, but the reality is that they are culpible as are maybe the ride manufacturers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top