Rapids ride safety equipment feasibility

[jibbsie]

Another topic got carried away with discussing the fesability of using restraints for saftey in rapids rides, the problem is that if the boat flips a restrain could trap you from being able to escape and may cause you to drown (see the cedar point shoot the rapids ride incident)

here are the messages previously:

They need to bring in restraints with tech to resolve the "flip issue". It's not rocket science. When seat belts were introduced they were static restraints (like on an airplane). Then we had the inertia reel, then pre-tensioners and airbags. Can't be that difficult to do the same for water rides - mercury switch combined with tech?? Of course it can "not work" and drown people, in the same way an asteroid can hit Earth and kill us all.

there are many problems with this here are 2 of the key problems:

1. how do you know you're upside down:
you suggest using a mercury switch, the other options are gyroscopes (they drift) or accelerometers. none of these are perfect because it is a ride, it will have negetive G forces, the nature of restrains is that you would want to prevent these negetive G-forces from opening the restraints mid ride (if you were holding on then you would want it not to just open if it has negetive G-forces) you could add some sort of timer, like if upsidedown for more than 1 sec reliease restraints, but every second can count when a multi tonn vehicle is landing on your head.

2. where dose the power come from:
the nature of rapids is that the vehicle may come in at random positions or oreintations, making it difficult to add locations that contactors can allow power to flow through, also if you are using batteries where will these go, there is now a risk of electrocution, water damage to the restraints, etc. this mechanism needs to work every time and can't stop working if something such as the batteries die


you have to remember the restraints are saftey devices, you don't want them to fail dangerouse but this leaves no choice, if power is lost then do you fail open or closed? if closed and it flipps people may get hurt, if open and it dosn't but there is a big bump people who may have been relying on the restraint to hold on may fall out.

Well I have several patents to my name, and some software on satellites (specifically related to power) - so not unaccustomed to solving problems. (My wife says I talk about this waaaay to much )

The bottom of a raft is always in contact with the water, so there's one thing. A mercury switch (first thing I thought of) is perfectly implementable. And any system that creates false positives is fine - human behaviour would suggest people re-insert their seat belts rather than use it as an opportunity to do dangerous things.

As for the power, a Li-Ion battery will last for weeks in monitoring these things between charges. In terms of engineering marvels, this isn't one of them.

My oppinion: Water switches aren't a good Idea as if it flips the water may run over the top of the boat anyway meaning they may stay on, and if it gets some air (as they can sometimes) it may reliease the restraints.

one problem is rapids rides are an unknown when it comes to forces, and are random due to the unpredictability of turbulent water and if you were holding onto your seatbelt, or trying not to hold on relying on your seatbelt, your seatbelt detaching could be really bad as you aren't expecting it.

also about the bateries: I wasn't saying that bateries couldn't power it, the problem is the batteries have to be charged, it is very difficult to do that at the station, and having to have someone move round with a cable charging the batteries in a wet enviroment is asking for problems (also it can take a while for batteries to charge, so the time in the station may not be enough)

 

[That Guy]

I wonder how much power would be required, could you get away with something like a Ryobi battery that could be removed and charged overnight.

That said, I'm not sure you could create a system that people would trust. Even if it was totally failsafe lots of people would probably not want to ride.

 

[rob666]

My opinion.
Simply not needed, never have been.
Stick to the rules and live.
Darwinism at its finest.

 

[Jb85]

Could people just wear a nice jacket?
Would hit capacity mind you.

Or just be sensible ?

 

[rob666]

...Or just be sensible ?

Now you are just being silly.

Back in the good old days, I remember all the woodies with no restraints.
Only the idiots fell off.

 

[Jb85]

Now you are just being silly.

Back in the good old days, I remember all the woodies with no restraints.
Only the idiots fell off.

We need more rides like that. Idiotkillers

To many of them around

 

[Fuct]

We need more rides like that. Idiotkillers

To many of them around

Unfortunately deaths at a park are still deaths at a park, even if the people dying are Darwin Award candidates. I don't think any insurer would be happy with "only the idiots will die".

 

[John]

To me seatbelts/restraints are unnecessary. The modified boat designs brought in recently mean it's now pretty much impossible to fall out of the boat. Combined with signage/instructions to remain seated, this all but eliminates the risk. The only way to fall out now would be to climb on the seats, anyone who does that has such poor judgement that they shouldn't be left unsupervised.

 

[Jb85]

Unfortunately deaths at a park are still deaths at a park, even if the people dying are Darwin Award candidates. I don't think any insurer would be happy with "only the idiots will die".

I get that - but isn’t this more of a sign of the state we are in as a global society, rather than the theme park operators / ride manufacturers getting something wrong?

 

[Bowser]

We had a similar discussion last year and I mentioned that Jurassic Park rapids in Singapore has seatbelts (car style) which seems the simplest solution.

Has a Rapids ride ever flipped over? This was cited as an issue with seatbelts but the only reference was an incident at Cedar Point which was a log flume not a rapids.

Realistically the benefit of preventing people from climbing out surely outweighs the virtual impossibility of a rapids vehicle both flipping over and a passenger being severely impeded by a seat belt. You could argue OTSR prevent people escaping rollercoasters in an earthquake or fire but similarly the probability of it preventing someone falling out far outweighs that risk.

 

[rob666]

Yes, australia, 4 dead 2016.
Ramp flip I think...
Caused by water level drop.

 

[Skyscraper]

Yes, australia, 4 dead 2016.
Ramp flip I think...
Caused by water level drop.

Correct. Coaster College did a good video on it recently.


From: https://youtu.be/fK71BkmlOT0?si=VNWGTgkE5bxEIrOf

 

[AT86]

Has a Rapids ride ever flipped over?

There have been various incidents of rapids boats flipping over, including one at Thorpe Park in the 80s.

More info on these cases here:

River rafting rides at amusement parks have a 37-year record of accidents — some are fatal

Many of the most serious accidents, like the one at Altoona's Adventureland Park in July, have involved rafts capsizing or overturning.

eu.desmoinesregister.com

Perhaps the key one for this discussion is:

A woman died and 10 people were injured after their 12-person raft capsized on the Roaring Rapids ride at Six Flags over Texas in Arlington, Texas. Riders, who were all wearing seat belts, became trapped upside down underneath the raft in 4-foot-deep water.

 

[NuttySquirrel]

We had a similar discussion last year and I mentioned that Jurassic Park rapids in Singapore has seatbelts (car style) which seems the simplest solution.

Has a Rapids ride ever flipped over? This was cited as an issue with seatbelts but the only reference was an incident at Cedar Point which was a log flume not a rapids.

Realistically the benefit of preventing people from climbing out surely outweighs the virtual impossibility of a rapids vehicle both flipping over and a passenger being severely impeded by a seat belt. You could argue OTSR prevent people escaping rollercoasters in an earthquake or fire but similarly the probability of it preventing someone falling out far outweighs that risk.

Unfortunately it has happened several times. The following incidents involved rapids rafts with seatbelts flipping over and trapping people underneath:

• Adventureland Iowa, 2021: a raft on Raging River overturned. Four people were taken to hospital and one of them, an 11-year old, died.
• Dreamworld, 2016: a raft on Thunder River Rapids overturned after two rafts collided. Four adults died.
• Hersheypark, 1987: a raft overturned and four people were injured on Canyon River Ride.

I have never understood why it was thought that seatbelts were safer - if you're on any sort of water-based vessel and it capsizes, you need to be able to jump clear and swim away. I've never been on such a ride with seatbelts and I honestly would refuse to wear one if it did.

 

[Skyscraper]

There have been various incidents of rapids boats flipping over, including one at Thorpe Park in the 80s.

More info on these cases here:

River rafting rides at amusement parks have a 37-year record of accidents — some are fatal

Many of the most serious accidents, like the one at Altoona's Adventureland Park in July, have involved rafts capsizing or overturning.

eu.desmoinesregister.com

Perhaps the key one for this discussion is:

Arrest my case.

A Missouri boy broke his leg on the "Fury of the Nile" ride at Worlds of Fun in Kansas City. According to media reports, he was trapped in his seat belt after his raft struck another and overturned.

 

[Bowser]

Wow, quite a lot of incidents it turns out! I'll never look at rapids the same again.

 

[NuttySquirrel]

Wow, quite a lot of incidents it turns out! I'll never look at rapids the same again.

I think they're generally pretty safe, BUT because they run on a flume of water as opposed to a defined metal track there is some element of randomness and they're more dynamic than, say, a rollercoaster which can be more precisely controlled. I think the issue is that people forget that they're essentially in a boat and to be vaguely aware of their own effect on the position of the raft in the water. Really I think it should be treated by guests as any other type of watersport, if that means being on some level responsible for one's own actions and following safety advice. I might also think twice about taking small children on such a ride if they couldn't swim.

Part of the fun of a rapids ride is randomness - you MAY get soaked but you might not - and it's this unpredictability that also makes these awful types of incidents more likely to occur. (I say this with the exception of the Dreamworld incident which was more about the park making unsafe modifications to the more controlled areas of the ride.) I guess there is an argument that they shouldn't be in amusement parks, because generally the guest's expectation is that the park has their safety covered and providing the park is safely operated nothing can go wrong. That's not really the case with any type of water ride. As such, safety protocols for these have (in the UK at least) become so stringent as to remove a lot of the enjoyment of the ride - and maybe it's just not worth running them anymore.

 

[Bowser]

I think they're generally pretty safe, BUT because they run on a flume of water as opposed to a defined metal track there is some element of randomness and they're more dynamic than, say, a rollercoaster which can be more precisely controlled. I think the issue is that people forget that they're essentially in a boat and to be vaguely aware of their own effect on the position of the raft in the water. Really I think it should be treated by guests as any other type of watersport, if that means being on some level responsible for one's own actions and following safety advice. I might also think twice about taking small children on such a ride if they couldn't swim.

Part of the fun of a rapids ride is randomness - you MAY get soaked but you might not - and it's this unpredictability that also makes these awful types of incidents more likely to occur. (I say this with the exception of the Dreamworld incident which was more about the park making unsafe modifications to the more controlled areas of the ride.) I guess there is an argument that they shouldn't be in amusement parks, because generally the guest's expectation is that the park has their safety covered and providing the park is safely operated nothing can go wrong. That's not really the case with any type of water ride. As such, safety protocols for these have (in the UK at least) become so stringent as to remove a lot of the enjoyment of the ride - and maybe it's just not worth running them anymore.

They're not a ride i particularly enjoy tbh (especially in the UK considering our weather), nor does my son. We did the AT one once and he was thoroughly unimpressed. He enjoys The Gruffalo and Grampys Sailing Club but that's for the immersive theming and i wouldn't say either of them qualify as a rapids ride.

That being said i did enjoy the aforementioned Jurassic Park ride in Singapore, predominantly because of the excellent theming and dark ride aspects plus the fact getting splashed with water when it's 30C is a lot more pleasant. So on the one hand it's a shame if the UK is somewhere that could never be replicated but as i say, the climate makes it unviable anyway. I appreciate other people generally enjoy the rides so it's sad if they are to become extinct here but arguably there are much better water rides that could replace them now anyway.

 

[jibbsie]

I wonder how much power would be required, could you get away with something like a Ryobi battery that could be removed and charged overnight.

That said, I'm not sure you could create a system that people would trust. Even if it was totally failsafe lots of people would probably not want to ride.

probably a lot, you would have to actuate the reliease every time it enters the station and deactivate it when it leaves.

Wow, quite a lot of incidents it turns out! I'll never look at rapids the same again.

yeah, they are probably the most dangerouse ride at a theme park (pretty unpredictable), also most dangerous is not that dangerous more in context of rollercoasters where engineers know how much force the riders will experience at every poin on the track and it won't do anything unpredictable

another reason is that you can't just stop the ride, you have to wait for the water to stop moving and it can take 3 mins before it is safe to jump in and try to rescue someone.

Could people just wear a nice jacket?
Would hit capacity mind you.

I think you could get away with adding life jackets without a capacity hit (for instance just hand them out before the bridge to the turn table as people go past)

I think there are benifits: if someone falls in it could masivly increase their chance of survival, the rapids are litterally rapids, they may seem tame on a multi tonn boat, but even olympic swimmers would struggle to swim there, and there are masive pumps, a life jacket may aid the chance of survival

there are also negetives: it may trap guests, similar to airplanes you souldn't inflate them before you leave as you can easily get trapped, you may not be able to swim down under the wall of the boat if it capsizes

 

[DistortAMG]

As far as I am aware, Intamin have already solved the specific problem of people falling out of boats, by making the backs of the newer generation ones significantly taller. Making it practically impossible to climb out unless you climbed your way up.