Thunder River Rapids Incident Coronial Inquest

[StingRay]

This looks bad but it is not. From a company standpoint, it helps. That staff member could be utilised within another area of the park. Plus that would not be a fun position to be in. It is not like the old days of going through the old surf shop.

Sure you gotta walk back out the front (you'll be doing that anyway) and through into the water park entry but this ain't a deal-breaker.

[New display name]

11 minutes ago, Gold Coast Amusement Force said:

I don’t see in anyway how management in general are cost cutting? 
 

 

52 minutes ago, Jordan M. said:

 

@Gold Coast Amusement Force this is cost cutting.  It's done to cut cost.

6 minutes ago, StingRay said:

This looks bad but it is not. From a company standpoint, it helps. 

Drugs are bad.    I'm a guest not a company so if it looks bad it's bad.  

[StingRay]

 

 

0

 Advanced issue found

▲

 

 

1 minute ago, Skeeta said:

 

Drugs are bad.

Maybe don't take them then. 

[New display name]

@StingRay I'm sorry but if I didn't take them I wouldn't of understood what you said.

 

 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

its a bad look. it is cost cutting.

But so long as they are separately ticketed parks, with separate gates, and not an 'all in one' such as the experiment they tried previously, the need for tickets to be checked on entry is required. The mere fact that the parks share a fenceline (and have a gate) makes it convenient to park hop, but` not required.

Wonderland used to have an 'in park' gate between the park and the wildlife park, both in HBL and at Lakeside next to the dodgems. Both of these were subsequently closed, with all entrances into the 'second gate' made by going out the main park gates, and then going back into the 'other' park by scanning your entry ticket. (the gates were a little closer to each other though)... So this isn't a new concept.

Park Hopping from Disneyland to California adventure, requiring the scanning of your park ticket is a requirement, and nobody is whinging about that...

 

TL:DR - Yes, they share a border. But two separately ticketed gates aren't REQUIRED to have a go-between gate, and if it costs them more money to have staff sitting there all day (especially in off peak, and on cold, rainy days), than it does in guest goodwill and complaints, and they're prepared to weather those complaints - then who cares?

(And if the answer to that rhetorical question is that "you care" - then complain, next time you're at Guest Services - if enough of you do, then i'm sure a receptive management who actually care what their customers think about them will be only too happy to consider changing this policy.)

[Jdude95]

We bitch when the park doesn't listen to us on here but also refuse to actually approach the park services and raise the issue.
Welcome to 2020

[New display name]

20 minutes ago, Jdude95 said:

We bitch when the park doesn't listen to us on here but also refuse to actually approach the park services and raise the issue.
Welcome to 2020

For me to raise the issue with guest services would require me to go to DW in the first place.  

[Jdude95]

7 minutes ago, Skeeta said:

For me to raise the issue with guest services would require me to go to DW in the first place.  

You don't have to go there to pass on feedback by email

[New display name]

25 minutes ago, Jdude95 said:

You don't have to go there to pass on feedback by email

Nobody emails in 2020.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

38 minutes ago, Skeeta said:

For me to raise the issue with guest services would require me to go to DW in the first place.  

This is just it though - if you aren't going to the park, this isn't bothering you.

[Jdude95]

14 minutes ago, Skeeta said:

Nobody emails in 2020.

Ah, so that's why they have social media channels you can contact now

[New display name]

18 minutes ago, AlexB said:

This is just it though - if you aren't going to the park, this isn't bothering you.

I'll be back when the new coaster is up and I want the place prefect for my arrival.   

[Jamberoo Fan]

Quote

The findings from an investigation into the deaths of four people at Australia's biggest theme park will be released on February 24.

Here are some more official details that were revealed back on the 3rd of February:

Quote

Findings scheduled for 24 Feb 2020 at 10:00am in Court 17 at BRISBANE

[TomiJ]

Thanks @Jamberoo Fan for those who can't be bothered to click the link, below are the details:

• The findings required by s.45 (2) of the Coroners Act 2003; namely the identity of the deceased person, when, where and how they died and what caused the death.

• The circumstances and cause of the fatal incident on the Thunder River Rapids Ride at the Dreamworld Theme Park, which occurred on 25th October 2016.

• Examination of the Thunder River Rapids Ride at the Dreamworld Theme Park, including but not limited to, the construction, maintenance, safety measures, staffing, history and modifications.

• Examination of the sufficiency of the training provided to staff in operating the Thunder River Rapids Ride. • Consideration of the regulatory environment and applicable standards by which Amusement Park rides operate in Queensland and Australia, and whether changes need to be made to ensure a similar incident does not happen in the future.

• What further actions and safety measures could be introduced to prevent a similar future incident from occurring?

[coasterdude44]

Just to think that the conveyor belt was made of a sheet of leather instead of wooden slats the whole tragedy would have been avoided

[Gazza]

They'd use rubber, not leather.

This isn't the turn of the century.

[coasterdude44]

Well have they actually found the root cause yet?

[Alex Berriman]

14 minutes ago, coasterdude44 said:

Well have they actually found the root cause yet?

This can be answered on February 24th once the findings have been released.

 

“• The findings required by s.45 (2) of the Coroners Act 2003; namely the identity of the deceased person, when, where and how they died and what caused the death.

• The circumstances and cause of the fatal incident on the Thunder River Rapids Ride at the Dreamworld Theme Park, which occurred on 25th October 2016.“

 

Edited February 21, 2020 by Alex Berriman

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

3 hours ago, coasterdude44 said:

Well have they actually found the root cause yet?

Yes. It was Dreamworld.

[Levithian]

Im not even sure if a belt style conveyor would have stopped the issue happening. Part of the problem looks like theres a decent gap between the end of the conveyor and the steel supports in the trough which is normally submerged. 

Being at mismatched heights, if it happened that the raft lifted after bumping into the one stalled on the supports already, a belt style conveyor might still have grabbed the rubber tube part of the raft and pulled it into the gap at the end of the conveyor. They are pretty grippy to be able to pull a water soaked boat or raft out of the water. 

The water level dropping so everything was exposed might be the biggest contributing factor.

[crowd]

I think the belt will be a major cause to the accident with removal of 2 out of 3 timber planks creating enough room for the raft to get caught in the belt when it floated back.

[Cryptic Hatter]

On 21/02/2020 at 2:48 PM, AlexB said:

Yes. It was Dreamworld.

More like Ardent Leisure 

[Jdude95]

I'll be at the findings as with the actual inquest. I'll be keeping track of things and live(ish) posting on here.

[Jamberoo Fan]

@Jdude95, earlier today (Sunday), I created a topic separate for the findings itself here. Appreciate if your live blog would be in that topic as I'm sure the findings will generate plenty of discussion.

[Tim Pearson]

I've skimmed though this forum and read some good points, Joel on page 6 mentioned that the motor's modern PLC should be capable of fault logging, and Jamberoo Fan noticed the widened slat interval on the conveyor belt.

This should be a child friendly theme park. That conveyor belt should be driven by a motor exerting the minimum force necessary to move 2 groups of adults up that slope, nothing more.

You never see an electric window on a car slicing some kids arm off. This is because the motor lacks the power to do something like this and also that newer / modern cars have pressure sensors on power windows. It might break their bones in a worst case scenario.

The basic protection system that is essential here starts with the motor contactor that controls the otherwise powerful 3 phase motor. There is also an adjustable overload breaker relay that is fine tuned to cut out when the motor is slightly overloaded. Any motor up to 900hp can be controlled with this. A Schneider Electric 3 Pole Contactor - 115 A TeSys F, 3NO, 55 kW would cost about $1402. There is no reason why such a low RPM device couldn't cut out immediately.

It's not going to stop the motor if a person gets their arm trapped inside the conveyor belt, but it would  cut out if the raft was being broken apart. The system would require a cut out switch available to the staff supervisor as well as an extra onboard remote control fitted to the raft.

On the other hand, this onboard remote switch could be used to activate the conveyor belt instead of emergency dis activation, making the system safer and less reliant on staff supervision.

Then there are the actual mechanics of the conveyor belt. The drive mechanism should be utilizing some kind of cam cut out clutch or friction disc torque limiting clutch. When they get used on tractors they cost only AU$300 and are rated up to 40 HP, I can't see it needing much more power than this.

Then there are all the water level cutout switches that are discussed. The news articles were correct in stating that kind of thing would cost $3000 to get installed.

This is the only way to make something dangerous safe again.

But also this is a fun park, I have no concern about rubber tube rafts being used. But they are no  different to Kid's inflatable rubber ring tubes, they are just toys.

If you were to send your kid down that conveyor belt death trap, you would use something like this:

NASA’s Orion Deep Space Capsule

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-s-orion-deep-space-capsule-in-pictures-top-10-images-of-2019

The Orion Deep Space Capsule features an epoxy  resin with carbon fiber hull with a phenolic impregnated carbon ablator heat shield.

It can survive space. It could also technically survive the thunder river rapids ride, however forces in  excess of 350kpa of compression stress would  cause hairline fractures, without collapsing the  entire capsule though.

Fracture in Phenolic Impregnated Carbon Ablator
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Parul_Agrawal/publication/260671234_Fracture_in_Phenolic_Impregnated_Carbon_Ablator/links/555b86a008ae6aea0816c677.pdf

Generally the issue here is the formidable conveyor belt and people often downplay the danger of this secondary environment.

People say just place a water level sensor at the end of the ride and know where the emergency button is. But really the conveyor belt is only conditionally safe when there is an adequate water level.

Kids fall from boats all the time. Infact it's compulsory for them to wear jackets on small boats in Australia.

But it's not the drowning risk I'm concerned about here, it's the crush risk that exists between the wooden planks of this dodgy conveyor belt.

It's only conditionally safe when there is an adequate water level and it's assumed that kids will never fall off this raft into the water.

Because it's a theme park used by kids it should be completely safe to children. A continuous rubber conveyor belt before it even start's to resemble an environment that it safe this way.

The last method of protection by the system is the friction disc torque limiting clutch. Beyond that point of protection, that's when human intervention is required and a manual cut out switch must be used.

But inevitably for safety reasons, it's a system that requires 100% constant staff supervision and control at all times, unless you're doing something more innovative such as allowing the people on the raft to control their own conveyor belt, because by default it shouldn't be moving, it's because it's moving that it's dangerous.

 

Edited October 17, 2020 by Tim Pearson