• 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.

Incident on The Smiler 02/06/2015

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
It's highly possible more than one person lost their job but chances are we will never find out. The person in the Mirror article may well have been seasonal anyway and was let go with the rest of the seasonal staff at the end of the season.

We'll probably never know the true outcome anyway. It's simple enough for the mirror to assume someone was sacked, guess a rough age and a gender and then put it all down to an unnamed source.
 
Apprentice4 said:
I wonder if the theme will change at all?

Surely with all the cuts they won't want to pay for new work from merlin studios.
Click to expand...
Considering that they have been testing the marmaliser, I'm going to say that a retheme is very unlikely.

I doubt that this ride open has anything to do with the crash. She probably did work on the smiler at some point, but she probably won't be the one responsible for it.
 
Not even going to click on the article and give the Mirror the visitor numbers. I'd say Merlin are skating on very thin ice sacking someone for the event, particularly where the ride systems have been upgraded, which is pretty much an admission of an inadequate Human-Machine Interface. This is why I call BS on the Mirror article (or most Mirror articles for that matter).
 
micksalt said:
Not even going to click on the article and give the Mirror the visitor numbers. I'd say Merlin are skating on very thin ice sacking someone for the event, particularly where the ride systems have been upgraded, which is pretty much an admission of an inadequate Human-Machine Interface. This is why I call BS on the Mirror article (or most Mirror articles for that matter).
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be a surprise if someone was sacked (or if they were seasonal just not re-hired next season) as Rob posted (below) AT have said that the disciplinary procedure was used. But I don't expect them ever to confirm who was disciplined or whether anyone was sacked.

Rob said:
An Alton Towers spokesperson has told the BBC that they have followed "standard HR procedures and taken the appropriate action" in regards to the staff involved and that "the outcome of this however remains a private matter between us and any individual concerned."

:)
Click to expand...
 
micksalt said:
Not even going to click on the article and give the Mirror the visitor numbers. I'd say Merlin are skating on very thin ice sacking someone for the event, particularly where the ride systems have been upgraded, which is pretty much an admission of an inadequate Human-Machine Interface. This is why I call BS on the Mirror article (or most Mirror articles for that matter).
Click to expand...

Systems and protocols can always be improved and made better. That doesn't mean that they were not adequate beforehand. You're taking what is known as the Kay Burley approach. In this incident it is clear that protocol was simply not followed, basic errors were made. If all five trains had been accounted for then this surely would never have happened.

I'm sure others on here who have worked at the park know better than me regarding this, but I have heard then when guests are on board a ride it is park operations (and not technical services) who have control of the ride and are to operate it. I don't know how true this is and if it is the case how strictly it is followed.

Our only real hope of finding out more is an FOI request to the HSE once their investigation and report is completed.

:)
 
Following on from what Rob said according to HSG175 (the UKs guide for safe and legal attraction operstion) it is the responsibility of the rides operator for anything that happens while a ride is operating. If their are guests onboard ultimately the operator must be in control because even if an incident is not directly their fault they will still be held responsible for not stopping it.

It sucks if you are that operator but by giving 1 person that responsibility it normally stops incidences like this happening.

However I've never met an operator that wouldn't follow any instruction given by someone from maintenance. They know more about the ride than any operator and therefore it's assumed they know what they are doing.
 
Tim said:
therefore it's assumed they know what they are doing.
Click to expand...
Some of the most dangerous words in the language! Viewers of Aircrash Investigation will be aware how often a first officer could have spoken up and saved the day, but didn't because they assumed the pilot knew what they were doing. When it comes to safety, never assume anything.
 
DiogoJ42 said:
Some of the most dangerous words in the language! Viewers of Aircrash Investigation will be aware how often a first officer could have spoken up and saved the day, but didn't because they assumed the pilot knew what they were doing. When it comes to safety, never assume anything.
Click to expand...

Very true, I was watching an episode the other day in which a crash was caused by this exact thing! Assumption and cross-checking are two very different things :p
 
Tim said:
Following on from what Rob said according to HSG175 (the UKs guide for safe and legal attraction operstion) it is the responsibility of the rides operator for anything that happens while a ride is operating. If their are guests onboard ultimately the operator must be in control because even if an incident is not directly their fault they will still be held responsible for not stopping it.

It sucks if you are that operator but by giving 1 person that responsibility it normally stops incidences like this happening.

However I've never met an operator that wouldn't follow any instruction given by someone from maintenance. They know more about the ride than any operator and therefore it's assumed they know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

The 'operator' relates to the company or individual using the ride, i.e. the owner/user. Not the staff member pushing buttons.
 
Tom said:
The 'operator' relates to the company or individual using the ride, i.e. the owner/user. Not the staff member pushing buttons.
Click to expand...
no, the way that Tim said, i think he means the person actually pushing the buttons
 
Tom said:
The 'operator' relates to the company or individual using the ride, i.e. the owner/user. Not the staff member pushing buttons.
Click to expand...
Who is the user if not the person pushing buttons?

What I quoted above all relates to the person who is at the rides control panel. In legal terms they are referred to as the operator as they are operating heavy duty machinery. The HSG175 form is also the first thing any company would make an employee read and sign before they are allowed near a control panel, so its definitely aimed at them.
 
The issue here is that Alton Towers (namely Merlin) will almost certainly be prosecuted as the owner/user, not the individual.
 
Unless things have changed, the Op is in control whenever guests are on the ride and the ride is transferred over to Tech Services during a breakdown, this only changes when a tech fault stops the ride with guest onboard that cannot be removed when an Op may be asked to help with manual control with Tech Services present - it is against the COSWP for an Op to operate the ride when in manual mode. They used to use a physical sign on the Operator panel to show who was responsible for that ride at that time - Green side for Op, Red side for Tech Services.

Also, a failure to understand the error message is no excuse for not following the COSWP - you don't need to understand the message as an Op....TS on the other hand.....
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top