KMG Afterburner accident - Ohio State Fair "Fire Ball" ride

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

9 minutes ago, djrappa said:

One of your stupidest remarks ever here. 1) Coaster tracks do not have components... two all welds are certified to begin with...three the connections ARE regularly inspected...four the lattice welds of the track are not considered high stress areas. 

The trains on the other hand do in fact receive this.

Dude, seriously, calm down and re-read my post - I would have thought my insistence for this to be done every 42 days would have been a dead giveaway I wasn't serious.

 

[HussRainbow87]

16 minutes ago, djrappa said:

As for considering parks and traveling rides differently... why? Just because the major maintenance parks go through is too expensive and inconvenient for carnival operators?

The ride mechanics and components are pretty well identical so why should one be subject to less scrutiny?

 

I guess different components go into how the machines maintained. Travelling operators must adhere to WorkSafe requirements, which includes paperwork and having things signed off. There is always an engineer present at the major shows to assist with any technical or mechanical issues. I wouldn't say its too expensive, it's more so just adhering to what is required for the ride to operate within rules. I don't think im lacking perspective, im just here to discuss a terrible situation. Im not against parks, its just annoying that Melbourne doesn't have anything big like the GC. At the end of the day, ill continue to ride travelling rides, park rides, and support both great industries. 

[webslave]

26 minutes ago, djrappa said:

As for considering parks and traveling rides differently... why? Just because the major maintenance parks go through is too expensive and inconvenient for carnival operators?

The ride mechanics and components are pretty well identical so why should one be subject to less scrutiny?

 

Also the analogy to public transport, elevators etc is also a poor one. Those items for one are used for necessity not fun so it's not a matter of just choosing to avoid them. 

Also these items aren't engineered on the boarder line, they have massive safety factor to reduce the requirement for inspections. 

People who are carnival fans are lacking perspective in this topic. 

Okay, so are we talking about an issue with the engineering from the manufacturer now, or are we talking about maintenance?  I don't see how using an item for necessity rather than fun has any bearing on whether it's safe to use or not.  It might be your own distinction, but it isn't a widely held one.

Are the parks doing more/different maintenance to what the manufacturers recommend?  If so, why?

[rappa]

The bearing is not on whether it's safe, but on acceptable risk. If there is an equal risk in doing something because I need to in order to get to my apartment, to something that will give me 2mins of amusement. I'm more likely to accept the risk in using an elevator than riding a roller coaster aren't I?

Thats why it's silly when people say "well perhaps we should stop crossing the road then" as an argument. 

 

Youll also notice I'm mostly seeking answers in my posts to educate my opinions. But instead of getting "yes manufacturers do insist on XYZ and all operators follow that and it's enforced" I'm more getting "the Jones family do a darn good job of ensuring all the light bulbs work but I can't speak for the Smith family, they can be dodgy at times" kind of responses. 

 

Park ride manufactures stipulate strict maintenance regimes which or parks follow. And in some cases parks go beyond those because manufacturer recommendations should be considered the minimum. 

Do the traveling ride manufactures do the same and do the operators do the same? This I don't know and nobody seems able or willing to answer. 

 

 

Oh and @AlexB one would hope that was sarcasm but in the context of this discussion I felt the need to point out how stupid and wrong that idea/comparison was in explicit detail. 

[HussRainbow87]

The only reason I don't know is because it's mainly none of my business, but the people I have worked for in the past go above and beyond to ensure their rides are maintained to the highest standard.

Just like some theme parks will maintain an attraction better than another park that has the same ride.

Seems to me you have something really against the travelling amusement industry. Whereas most people on her have a love for the industry as a whole, travelling, park etc.

Go and visit some of the travelling fairs in Germany, they are in a league of their own, its incredible to see how much devotion and care are poured into their machines, its really something to admire.

[Tim Dasco]

I would say yes. Traveling rides can come from the same manufactures as theme park rides. IE Mondial, Zamperla, Gersluar even KMG have theme park rides. So there would be set protocols for mantanience that is set by the manufactures that apply to both permeant and traveling versions with some differences due to design differences in the versions.

[rappa]

I have nothing against the industry... IF... things like seats flying off rides stop happening, sadly they don't. Do the point it's almost now just accepted by the general public, no one is boycotting carnivals like they are DW now are they?

 

I appreciate and applaud your passion for the industry @HussRainbow87 however devotion, and admiration don't equal safety and science. The lengths parks go to for ride safety is quite incredible (and hugely expensive), until any evidence of the same thing happening with in the travelling rides circuit is presented, I just can't get on board.

I'm sure the manufactures do have recommendations, but are they being enforced? Certainly not in many countries, Australia I am waiting to be shown this is the case.

 

Specifically back to this recent incident. They was clearly a major flaw there, hence the redesign, why in the hell was this thing ever allowed to operate? 

 

 

Maybe someone can answer this general question for me then: How long and how many people does the DAILY inspection for one of these rides take, undertaken each and every day prior to opening? Likewise how long/many for the WEEKLY inspection?

We can then compare that to a park flat ride such as say, The Claw, and work out if best practice really is occurring here...

[HussRainbow87]

Each to their own I guess. I respect people's opinions. There is always negativity around travelling amusement rides, and it's something I don't care to listen to. I enjoy myself, I enjoy the rides, and I've made some fantastic friends working on the travelling circuit. Simple as that.

Somehow I think the industry will be fine without you getting on board. All is fine.

[rappa]

4 minutes ago, HussRainbow87 said:

Somehow I think the industry will be fine without you getting on board. All is fine.

It also seems fine with old mate getting on board in Ohio and then being flung off to his death so...

[webslave]

Were we still not awaiting the findings of the Dreamworld incident I wouldn't find such a line of argument to be so hard to swallow.

[rappa]

Don't worry, I'm in no way about to defend DW on that accident, and I have my own fairly educated opinions on it also. I would in no way ride that ride if it opened tomorrow in the same state it was in the day prior to that accident either. 

And if I felt that accident was caused by maintenance standards then I wouldn't ride anything at DW either.

 

[webslave]

I guess that's kind-of the point I'm making; it can't be as cut-and-dry as travelling rides having poor maintenance.  What if this one was chalked up to metal fatigue that was previously unidentified?  After all, planes have been brought down by the same thing despite the regimen of the system.  I just don't think we say draw a line down the middle.

[rappa]

As I keep saying, I'm asking the question of what maintenance they do have. So far no one can answer that question.

[webslave]

What sort of answer are you looking for, and from whom?  I see paperwork for an inspection posted earlier, as well as a maintenance briefing by the manufacturer asking for checks and work to be carried out.  That would at least suggest to me that *something* is being done.  I've seen commentary earlier that the major shows have an engineer on-site.  Worksafe paperwork I've seen other times also makes reference to maintenance procedures.

By the same token where's the evidence of what the parks are doing?

(I should point out, by the way, that I had always assumed travelling rides were less safe than rides in the parks but have had to admit that I had nothing to back up that assumption)

[rappa]

That paperwork was proof of a general mostly visual inspection at best.
There is no manufacturer paperwork detailing major preventative maintenance regimes.
There is ZERO change a show appointed on site engineer is carrying out major ride rebuilds.
I'd be interested to see this WorkSafe paperwork.

I work in the industry so am intimately aware of what the parks do, plug is pretty well publicised and common knowledge amongst the enthusiast community.

[webslave]

Okay, sure, but I haven't seen any proof of even a general mostly visual inspection from the parks in this thread - but I wouldn't claim it therefore doesn't exist.  That you work in the parks helps you see it on one side of the fence, but you can't therefore conclude that because you can't see the same on the other that it therefore doesn't exist.

Re: Worksafe paperwork you'll note incident reports generally make reference to the manufacturer's recommended maintenance procedures, particularly if they haven't been followed.

[rappa]

Ok I'm using every formatting tool that's provided to enhance my text. My opinion through this ENTIRE THREAD has been, IF they are carrying out these practices then I am happy with that, IF NOT then I have major issue. So far there is nothing to say that they ARE following these practices, EXCEPT the operator of this KMG ride who clearly wasn't doing inspections on that point of failure. So I'm not saying because I can't see it then it doesn't exist, I'm saying my view is based on whether it does or doesn't exist. As a Theme Park Fan I know can say it does happen. So far a Carnival Fan has not been able to do the same...

[webslave]

Formatting isn't really a substitute for communicating better.  If I'm failing to get your point here then I will take responsibility for my part in that.  To pick you up on an item in your latest - you say as a theme park fan you can say that you know it happens; but is that really as a fan, or as an employee?

After all, I could just as easily be both and not be able to say for sure on either.  I think you're looking for an employee, rather than a fan.

I don't think we can yet say the operator of this ride clearly was not doing inspections - after all; they could have been but the inspections were performed incorrectly, or the issue could have been one that would not have been apparent at the time of inspection.  There's a lot of supposition going on here, and I would imagine as someone in the industry you'd probably already know better than to make this type of commentary off the back of a couple of social media images and videos.

[rappa]

No what I'm saying is as an enthusiast (I was this before an employee, and to be fair I don't work in ride maintenance so I really would still think of myself as an enthusiast in that regard) I know the procedures and processes and parks have in place. It's pretty well out there as I say in the enthusiast community.

I would think that equal fans of the carnival industry would also have the same knowledge so could at least comment. At this point (this is as you say speculation) I would happily take the word of someone that says they do this or don't do that, I'm not seeking documented proof.

I'll give you the point that yes there may be the possibility that: the ride operator did engage the services of a reputable NDT inspection provider, have said inspections regularly carried out, was provided with the certifications of such. But in fact this reputable company was falsifying or was negligent in their inspections, OR that the ride passed all inspections which WERE don't correctly and this failure managed to manifest from non existent to catastrophic in the space of a maximum of 12 months (of course assuming the inspection was carried out at most 364 days prior to this tragic day). IF all of these things occurred then yes I will happily stand here and say, freak accident, they are in no way negligent.
Not trying to be a smart ass here at all, I do enjoy the discussion, but I think you'd have to concede that what I've written above is very highly unlikely.

[webslave]

I'd go with somewhat unlikely, but probably stop short of highly unlikely.

In reading your latest I did think it interesting that on one hand earlier you called attention to how many pieces one of the SE trains is in right now for maintenance as something that most people wouldn't know, but then went on to say that it's pretty well out there.  I know I'm cherry-picking here and not trying to give you a hard time on that point, merely just illustrating that I don't think it's as 'out-there' as you might think.  I know I've seen videos from the parks saying they do this stuff, but I don't put a great deal of stock in that in all honesty.

What about, on the other hand, if the metal fatigue was brought on in a very short time period because of a different modification (approved or otherwise) on the ride transferring more load than expected to this area?  Or what if the last time the ride had been racked for transportation it was done incorrectly which weakened the area?  Just two possibilities I've literally plucked out of nowhere - they may not fit the cause you have in-mind, but I have to at least assume they might be plausible.

[New display name]

Some news agencies now reporting the problem that caused it could have been festering for years.

 

A closeup photograph of the severed metal spoke that failed, killing one man and injuring seven, appears to show that a critical weld holding the seats onto the ride’s arm may have cracked over time due to metal fatigue, and then suddenly and catastrophically failed, said Gerald Frankel, a professor of materials science and engineering at Ohio State University.

“What is on the left side (of the break) looks very different than what’s on the right side,” Frankel said. “That first part on the left took some time to grow. That part on the right, that didn’t take any time.”

The photograph, which shows a closeup of the severed metal arm apparently taken shortly after the accident.

Frankel said that he’s only hypothesizing based on the photo, and that a conclusive answer on the nature of the break will be made by scientific testing being done by colleagues of his at forensic engineering firm SEA, which has a Columbus office. A manager at SEA said Friday that the firm is prohibited from commenting on the Fire Ball investigation, including whether it’s participating in it.

But the photo is telling. The straight-line break on the left indicates a “weld had a defect and that defect grew over time, likely because of fatigue, which is repeated stresses below the limit that the metal would normally break,” Frankel said.

The jagged right side is where it finally failed, suddenly and catastrophically breaking off, a “ductile failure,” meaning it simply ripped off from being unable to hold up to the load of the gondola, Frankel said.

“My interpretation is the crack initiated and grew, and then there was a ductile failure, and then the thing just broke off.”

And the noise that’s heard on the cellphone video of the accident posted online? That could be the sound of the metal snapping, Frankel said. When a piece that size snaps, “it makes a lot of noise,” Frankel said.

“Just because it made a noise, that doesn’t mean it hit anything.”

 

[HussRainbow87]

1 hour ago, djrappa said:

No what I'm saying is as an enthusiast (I was this before an employee, and to be fair I don't work in ride maintenance so I really would still think of myself as an enthusiast in that regard) I know the procedures and processes and parks have in place. It's pretty well out there as I say in the enthusiast community.

I would think that equal fans of the carnival industry would also have the same knowledge so could at least comment. At this point (this is as you say speculation) I would happily take the word of someone that says they do this or don't do that, I'm not seeking documented proof.

I'll give you the point that yes there may be the possibility that: the ride operator did engage the services of a reputable NDT inspection provider, have said inspections regularly carried out, was provided with the certifications of such. But in fact this reputable company was falsifying or was negligent in their inspections, OR that the ride passed all inspections which WERE don't correctly and this failure managed to manifest from non existent to catastrophic in the space of a maximum of 12 months (of course assuming the inspection was carried out at most 364 days prior to this tragic day). IF all of these things occurred then yes I will happily stand here and say, freak accident, they are in no way negligent.
Not trying to be a smart ass here at all, I do enjoy the discussion, but I think you'd have to concede that what I've written above is very highly unlikely.

Ok, so the company I work for, they rebuild their rides yearly, replacing parts, not because of any defects, but because they keep things in perfect working order. They upgrade safety features when they become available from the manufacturer, and ensure that all maintenance procedures are undertaken regularly. Checklists are done daily, greasing of moving parts, and inspections of motors, gearing and other moving parts are all reviewed before anyone boards the ride for the day. Checks are also done at night after close. Once the ride has been packed and returned to the yard, usually towards the end of the year, parts undergo screening and rebuilds take place if necessary, Manufacturers keep owners up to date, and I know that KMG are extremely prompt in offering service. Mondial also offer 24 hour service, and some of their newer machines feature a connection that shows the ride is currently running, and if any problems are found, they can assist immediately.

I'm honestly not trying to fight you on this. Everyone knows the love I have for travelling rides here. Just like the Rainbow, that model in sweden was involved in an accident, HUSS made sufficient changes to ensure the safety of the public, and they move on. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by HussRainbow87

[rappa]

THIS! ^^^

This is exactly what I was asking, this company's procedures seem quite good then and what I would want/expect.

Now here's another question... is this mandated practice or is this just what your company chooses to do? And others (in Australia) don't all do that?

 

As for the United States, it seems things are very unregulated and this is probably not all being followed. Thank for a thorough answer.

[Wil_i_am_not]

Have a look at these @djrappa 

http://www.safework.nsw.gov.au/health-and-safety/safety-topics-a-z/amusement-devices (NSW)

https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/collection/workplace-amusement-devices-guidance-material (This one seems to be Australia-Wide)

[HussRainbow87]

1 hour ago, djrappa said:

THIS! ^^^

This is exactly what I was asking, this company's procedures seem quite good then and what I would want/expect.

Now here's another question... is this mandated practice or is this just what your company chooses to do? And others (in Australia) don't all do that?

 

As for the United States, it seems things are very unregulated and this is probably not all being followed. Thank for a thorough answer.

As far as i'm aware its mandated practice, but then there are rides that don't go near the capital shows, and large events, so who knows if they adhere to these rules.

I read something that in the USA some states only require a ride to be inspected once a year, which i find to be truly ridiculous.... Hopefully those laws change.