I’ve heard Liseberg trying to explain the reasons for the seatbelts and I have to say their explanation was rather poor. They’re clearly there for a reason, but even in their own explanation it wasn’t clear whether they were required due to customer demand or a new school of thought on whether the current safety systems were adequate.
From what I know, I have to say, whilst safety is of course critical, I don’t follow either explanation.
If it is a result of customer demand, it is likely catering to a vocal minority. Liseberg should be leading and educating their customers, not cow-towing to those vocal few who will always complain they don’t feel secure enough, no matter how many restraining devices you use. I’m sure we’ve all sat next to at least one of these “types”, who ask the ride attendant to double check everything and then tell them how to do their job despite being entirely ignorant to the functioning of the ride. By installing the belts, Liseberg have tacitly accepted this kind of concern as merited, which is weak.
If it is because of his new school of thought on the adequacy of failsafes, I have to ask, how far do you take it? If a double failsafe isn’t enough, then who’s to say a triple failsafe is? Why not have two seatbelts as a quadruple failsafe? And let’s face it, if the main restraints fail, is that seatbelt really going to hold everyone in their seat? No. If you want to remove all risk, don’t ride.
Liseberg need to be more pragmatic with this and lead their customers and the industry. They appear to de doing neither. Poor show I say.