Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
ramboacdc

Drayton Manor incident

Recommended Posts

 

I will mention, there is a potential weakness in the boats design in that the steps in and out are an area of the craft that does not actively prevent someone from falling out.

 

This is mainly due to aid quick transition on and off the ride, but perhaps a simple bar gate design that reinforced the upper perimitter level could be considered.

 

Lap belts could also be an option, but given the incident in Australia (2016) I'm not,sure how readily this will be considered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DJ Barry Hammond said:

 

I will mention, there is a potential weakness in the boats design in that the steps in and out are an area of the craft that does not actively prevent someone from falling out.

 

This is mainly due to aid quick transition on and off the ride, but perhaps a simple bar gate design that reinforced the upper perimitter level could be considered.

 

Lap belts could also be an option, but given the incident in Australia (2016) I'm not,sure how readily this will be considered.

Sure and a good suggestion - the Australia incident happened due to a raft tipping over on a conveyer belt though not actually in the water right? Its likely people would have been crushed no matter what but yeah.

 

I'm an advocate of making such rides safer but not necessarily of lap belts - lap belts are the current security of choice I would imagine because of the lack of expense and outlay comparative to other more advanced technological solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Swan Lesta said:

So as a paramedic you know that competency to consent to treatment falls for U16s from Gillick to Fraser guidelines.... and the wording relates to a full cognitive understanding of the potential outcomes inclusive of risks and harm. I don't believe an eleven year old in the throws of the adventure ride has the capacity to make those decisions nor do I believe that adults should allow her to be able to make those decisions.

 

 

Oh FFS. I don't think many adults know the competency to consent falls under whatever guidelines.

Besides, there's a difference between legal competency to consent to treatment and having mental capacity to understand the consequences of one's actions.

I believe children of 11 will have the capacity to understand the reason why warning signs and restrictions are in place and the potential consequences of failing to observe those rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Parafox said:

Oh FFS. I don't think many adults know the competency to consent falls under whatever guidelines.

Besides, there's a difference between legal competency to consent to treatment and having mental capacity to understand the consequences of one's actions.

I believe children of 11 will have the capacity to understand the reason why warning signs and restrictions are in place and the potential consequences of failing to observe those rules.

 

Adults are granted that competency over a certain age - under that we are duty bound to protect children as they are not deemed competent enough to understand the severity of the impact of their actions especially on an adventure ride.

 

Which is why when a lad fell off in to the rapids in Thorpe park and lost an ear in 86 they had to slow the ride down and its why other rapids rides where there is a risk to small kids being bounced out into the water have safety features that are arguably lacking at DM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Wymeswold fox said:

Might be right in thinking the seats on the ride had no adjustable seatbelts, and just 'black chairs' facing each other?

With a ride that is bumpy and has twists and turns, particularly in windy weather etc, this should be a requirement clearly.

Thing is though, the seatbelts can still be undone and the accident could still have happened, all they really do is help satisfy health and safety issues as regards to the park getting sued or blamed. Put a flight of stairs in a workplace and as long as there's a risk assessment in place, the firm can't get sued if someone falls down them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, yorkie1999 said:

Thing is though, the seatbelts can still be undone and the accident could still have happened, all they really do is help satisfy health and safety issues as regards to the park getting sued or blamed. Put a flight of stairs in a workplace and as long as there's a risk assessment in place, the firm can't get sued if someone falls down them. 

 

Absolutely.

 

And I don't think they are the best solution - just possibly the cheapest but if there was video evidence of the rides attendant checking everybody had belts on (and of course that they had provided them) as they set off then if somebody undid their belt then I'm guessing they would have made reasonable provision for their safety and the park would not be at fault - still not certain though that the people on the ride should have that decision though and differing security would be more appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said:

 

Adults are granted that competency over a certain age - under that we are duty bound to protect children as they are not deemed competent enough to understand the severity of the impact of their actions especially on an adventure ride.

 

Which is why when a lad fell off in to the rapids in Thorpe park and lost an ear in 86 they had to slow the ride down and its why other rapids rides where there is a risk to small kids being bounced out into the water have safety features that are arguably lacking at DM.

So lets age-restrict every ride then? 11 year old's are only allowed in Thomasland...

 

An 11 year old can read and has comprehension and an understanding of risk. With risk comes excitement at that age. Excitement may be an overwhelming sensation, hence the existence of thrill rides in the first place. 

 

You wouldn't put a lap belt in a rowing boat in Abbey Park, would you? Kid might still stand up and rock the boat for a thrill, fall in unnoticed and drown. Never happened... yet. But hey, it could. So how do you mitigate that risk?

 

I stand by what I said.

 

Let's wait and see what the inquest brings, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Parafox said:

So lets age-restrict every ride then? 11 year old's are only allowed in Thomasland...

 

An 11 year old can read and has comprehension and an understanding of risk. With risk comes excitement at that age. Excitement may be an overwhelming sensation, hence the existence of thrill rides in the first place. 

 

You wouldn't put a lap belt in a rowing boat in Abbey Park, would you? Kid might still stand up and rock the boat for a thrill, fall in unnoticed and drown. Never happened... yet. But hey, it could. So how do you mitigate that risk?

 

I stand by what I said.

 

Let's wait and see what the inquest brings, eh?

Not all 11 year olds can read or have the same understanding or comprehension of risk.

 

11 year olds are not allowed to hire boats unsupervised at Abbey Park - the water is also B2 classification flat and not moving.

 

Kids drown in rivers all the time and it's sad but they didn't pay money to a private company to go on a ride and then die - there is absolutely no comparison in any of your points.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Parafox said:

So lets age-restrict every ride then? 11 year old's are only allowed in Thomasland...

 

An 11 year old can read and has comprehension and an understanding of risk. With risk comes excitement at that age. Excitement may be an overwhelming sensation, hence the existence of thrill rides in the first place. 

 

You wouldn't put a lap belt in a rowing boat in Abbey Park, would you? Kid might still stand up and rock the boat for a thrill, fall in unnoticed and drown. Never happened... yet. But hey, it could. So how do you mitigate that risk?

 

I stand by what I said.

 

Let's wait and see what the inquest brings, eh?

 

And age restrictions on rides - perhaps, or how about making reasonable adjustment to ensure no other kids die?

 

Crazy proposal I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to say...

 

RIP to the girl involved.

 

My thoughts are with her family and friends; and the school community, many of whom are no doubt deeply traumatised by this tragedy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AoWW said:

Just to say...

 

RIP to the girl involved.

 

My thoughts are with her family and friends; and the school community, many of whom are no doubt deeply traumatised by this tragedy. 

And I wholeheartedly agree.

 

Doesn't mean we shouldn't express views, points or opinions.

 

Just in case you thought we were being disrespectful, we're not. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it appears that whilst swapping seats her clothing got caught and took her out of the vessel.

 

something that could be remedied with a bar or seatbelt like other rides if it's kind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...