Slashdot Mirror


Coasters to Face G-Force Limits?

jonerik writes "NBC News is reporting that today New Jersey will begin examining the possibility of placing limits on roller coaster G-forces. Pointing out that the G-forces on coasters are considerably greater than even those experienced by astronauts and race car drivers, legislators on both the state and national levels want to start reining in coaster G-forces which have been blamed for a number of injuries and deaths over the past few years. Pansies. Why do they think people ride roller coasters to begin with?"

568 comments

  1. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  2. Backyards? by BrianGa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What about the backyard roller coasters? What kind of regulations will be needed?

    1. Re:Backyards? by a3d0a3m · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      maybe this post was +1 interesting but considering slashdot has done a story on backyard rollercoasters [with this exact link] before, you have to wonder how it is interesting at all.

    2. Re:Backyards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mod this flamer down

    3. Re:Backyards? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not likely. If that toy ever pulled as many G's as the "bigger" "faster" roller coasters the proposed legislation limits, then the guy who built it would be freakin' rich by now.

  3. G-forces. by garcia · · Score: 2, Informative

    I have ridden a few roller coasters in my life. Mostly in parks in OH and PA. Nothing to make a sweeping generalization, but I will anyway.

    I went to Cedar Point in OH a few times and I have been to various other parks in the past 10 or so years. Last summer I went to Kings Island in Southern OH and I had the strangest experience on a roller coaster ever.

    I rode Face-Off w/my gf. After the ride both my gf and I felt dizzy and disoriented. I wasn't as bad as she was, she had to sit for about 20 mins to regain her composure. I was definitly not stable on my feet and seemed confused mentally, very strange.

    Was this a result of the G-Forces or something else?

    I don't suffer from motion sickness on any other ride, and I have never been physically ill by any amusement ride.

    Anyone have a similar experience riding Face-Off?

    1. Re:G-forces. by Lokni · · Score: 2, Informative

      I had a similar experience riding Goliath at Six Flags Magic Mountain in Valencia, CA. I was completely dissoriented and needed help getting out of the ride. In addittion to that my vision greyed out around the fringes on one of the high G parts, the rising corkscrew part of the ride. I enjoy roller coasters but will not get on that ride ever again. Just to make a point that these things happen to everybody, I am a perfectly healthy 20 year old male.

    2. Re:G-forces. by Skyfire · · Score: 1, Informative

      G-forces, in themselves, will almost never make you sick. Its rapid changes that will make you sick. About the only thing that G's higher than one will do to you (steady, no rapid) will make you blackout. Of course, if sustained for too long, death can result, but for that you need a momentary force of around 90-100 G's or a sustained force of around 10 G's. What's worse, in my opinion, about some rollercoasters, is the vibrations (usually older rollercoasters). Some of those are really painfull.

      Of course, some people can get sick by anything. Motion sickness is something that is very hard to generalize about. The only thing that really gets me sick is rapid, repitative changes in altitude on a hot day.

      --
      Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
    3. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in cincinnati, and have been to Kings Island quite a few times. Face off always gives me slightly more of that 'disoriented' feeling than the other coasters there, but I didnt think anything of it.

      For those who dont know the ride, it is of the hanging variety. You sit in a seat hanging from the rails, while somone sits in another seat facing you. Hence the name face-off. You go through the track twice, once you travel forward, once backward. Perhaps it is the backward sensation that causes the disorientation?

    4. Re:G-forces. by tiwason · · Score: 1

      After a day at Cedar Point a fews years back, my girlfriend and I didn't feel right for well over a week...

      Never again will I ride 10+ different coasters in a single day... That place is deadly... (we were traveling X-Country and decided to stop on a whim.. had no idea what we were getting ourselves into)

    5. Re:G-forces. by Restil · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure what causes it, but the same thing happens to me the first time I ride a roller coaster in a while. After that the effect is diminished and eventually I don't even notice it at all. I think its a natural response by the body, probably the adreneline rush, since after riding 10+ rollercoasters in a day, that rush doesnt' exist anymore. Your body has adapted to the hostile conditions you're putting it through and doesn't bother responding negatively.

      As far as the other issues go, if someone dies on a rollercoaster and it's not the result of a mechanical failure, they probably had a health problem to begin with, even if they weren't aware of it. Occasionally (one out of thousands and thousands) someone gets injured as a result of excessive G-forces.

      Here's a few other things that people get seriously injured, ill, or die from. Food poisoning. Allergies. Car accidents. Stress. Alcohol abuse. Drug abuse. Electrical shock. Cigarettes. Just to name a few. Humans are mortal. We are not invincible. It's quite possible that statistically speaking, you might DIE today for a completely unexpected reason. While nobody likes it, its a fact of life that most people seem to accept. We take a risk everytime we get out of bed in the morning. But sometimes that's a risk worth taking.

      -Restil

      --
      Play with my webcams and lights here
    6. Re:G-forces. by Spaceman+Spiff+II · · Score: 1

      Yeah, when I went to six flags there in Valencia with a bunch of my friends, something along those lines happened to each of us, too.

      --
      I understand that life's not fair, just why is it never unfair in my favor?
    7. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      G-forces, in themselves, will almost never make you sick. Its rapid changes that will make you sick.

      That doesn't make much sense. Acceleration doesn't need to be continuous. The derivative of acceleration can be "infinite" in everyday situations, so bounding the norm of the 3rd derivative of position is a no-no.

    8. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about Face-Off, but I rode my gf, and during the ride both my gf and I had increased heartbeats, spasms and involuntary convultions. Must be the G-Forces.

    9. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      when i get spam in my email box, i get this sick feeling in my stomache. is this usual??

    10. Re:G-forces. by garcia · · Score: 2

      In this instance I hadn't ridden any rollercoasters in a least a year prior but I had ridden several other roller coasters that day. I believe that they included other looping roller coasters.

      I went to Cedar Point the day before Labor Day back in 1998. The park was empty (take heed /.'ers) and we rode ride after ride several times. That feeling that I experienced was not felt on any of those rides (even ones that I am not particularly fond of (the one where you are either dropped or rocketed) in a seat 30000 stories.

      G-Force really fucked w/me. I am not a big fan of King's Island as it is (I am less interested in great scenery and poor rides than terrible scenery and great rides (Cedar Point)).

      Other than a single individual no one has answered "Has G-Force created a similar experience for anyone else?"

    11. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you were suffering heat stroke from waiting 3 hours in the sun to get on the ride.

    12. Re:G-forces. by garcia · · Score: 0, Troll

      Overcast, cold, and the line was less than 20 mins.

      BTW -- Taco, if you are reading this, the speed at which I type is TOO fast for your little website to handle, fix that. Also, I like to post, I paid, I should get priority over those that don't.

    13. Re:G-forces. by Moonshadow · · Score: 2
      I've ridden Goliath multiple times, and have never has said events happen to me. I'm also over 230 lbs (albeit in good shape), so the g-forces on me would not have been trivial. Guess it depends on who you are.

      Last time I was at Six Flags, however, Goliath was shut down because some old lady had an anuerism burst on the ride a few weeks prior. G-forces, or bad health? I dunno.

      Let's regulate everything, including people's choices to make decisions based on their own physical condition, why don't we?

    14. Re:G-forces. by checkyoulater · · Score: 1

      I wasn't as bad as she was, she had to sit for about 20 mins to regain her composure. I was definitly not stable on my feet and seemed confused mentally, very strange.

      This happened to me last time I was at the local amusement park. I realized that it was due to the joint I had smoked in the parking lot!

      --
      Is that a real poncho? I mean, is that a Mexican poncho or is that a Sears poncho?
    15. Re:G-forces. by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

      Also, I like to post, I paid, I should get priority over those that don't.

      Isn't this the exact argument that the MPAA is using in blocking the spread of DeCSS? That if you want to use the decryption algorithm that you'll have to license it like all the law-abiding companies who make DVD players do?

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    16. Re:G-forces. by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      There are many factors which contribute to one's ability to sustain G-forces. While it is tempting to think that a very fit person could sustain more head-to-toe Gs, that is not necessarily true. If it is easy for the blood to flow out of the head (for instance, in an athlete whose exercise has promoted high levels of capilary and/or blood vessel growth -- note, I'm definitely not a doctor), then one can't sustain as many Gs. If the distance between the head and the neck is short, it makes it easier for the heart to achieve the pressure necessary to provide blood to the brain. I'm sure there are many other bizarre contributing factors.

      As I mentioned, I'm talking out my rear-end to some degree. My source of information comes from some show I saw several years ago about the selection and training of fighter pilots in Israel. IIRC, they measured the heart/brain distance (or at least neck length) of candidates, and limited their pilots' cardiovascular exercise. Who would have guessed?

      -Paul Komarek

    17. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I no longer ride coasters because they make me feel nauseous afterwards. One overlooked possible cause for the negative effects on people is infrasound. All buildings and large devices (cars, coaster, etc.) will produce high levels of very low frequency sound. The effects of this are well documented and include nausea, even death. The military applications were researched years ago by a french scientist by the name of Gavreau. The effects are both scary and deadly. When designing buildings or mechanical devices that humans will use the engineers should take infrasound effects into consideration. I'm not sure they do.

    18. Re:G-forces. by KernelHappy · · Score: 3, Informative

      The Viper (a relatively new steel coaster) at Six Flags Great Adventure is horrible in terms of comfort. The ride isn't that exciting and thanks to the design of the shoulder restraints most of the ride experience is liken to being repeatedly punched in the ear.

      Your comment kind of simplifies the human bodies ability to withstand G forces. I just finished watching a whole program on the Discover Channel about crash testing and the effects of certain forces on the human body, so obviously I'm now a certified expert. Moving right along the program just reinforced what common sense would tell anyone who has been in any kind of accident: it's not just how hard you hit, it's how you hit, what position you're in when you hit, how many times you hit and the angle that you hit at.

      The numbers you mentioned sound a bit off from what the program was stating in terms of what the human body could safely endure. They showed a man traveling at some thing like 630mph decelerate to zero in about a tenth of second, which worked out to roughly 45Gs horizontally. His lung(s?) collapsed and his retinas temporarily detached. He eventually recovered and managed to live another 45 years but its still not what I would consider a fun day at an amusement park.

      The program also went on to state that the human body can only survive 15Gs of momentary force vertically before the spinal damage occurs. I wonder what 6Gs of sudden momentary lateral force would do to someone's neck.

      It would also seem that human anatomy would play a big role in what forces and change in forces the human body could survive without damage. A person sitting perfectly upright may be able to survive a 6G load in one direction, but what happens when they are subjected to the same force with their body and head are shifted to one side from the previous 4G turn or loop? I sure as hell don't know, I doubt New Jersey state legislators know either.

      Rider operators do not want to kill customers, just momentarily make customers think they are going to die. There are so many variables in play that any legislation that tries to "make these rides safer" is going to fail hopelessly. I'm all for making ride operators/builders prove that their machines are minimally dangerous but to put blanket limitations on them just doesn't seem to do anyone much good.

      --
      -- Button up, your ignorance is showing
    19. Re:G-forces. by ROBOKATZ · · Score: 1
      Of course, if sustained for too long, death can result, but for that you need a momentary force of around 90-100 G's

      Bwahaha! 90-100 G's would smash you into oblivion. A momentary force of about 15 vertical G's is enough to snap your spine. It takes about 45 horizontal G's to injure someone.

    20. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense, but in the world of large amusement parks, 12 years old isn't "relatively new."

    21. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my God. That's crazy!

    22. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow! The same thing happened when I rode your girlfriend too!

    23. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think so dude.
      Check the definition of "priority".

    24. Re:G-forces. by SerpentMage · · Score: 2

      It is not a question of regulating. Here is the issue. There are good rollar coasters and bad roller coasters.

      For example bodies can handle a high vertical G, but cannot handle a high horizontal G. Some rollercoasters have high horizontal G's and hence are actually hazardous to your health in a major way.

      The other problem with roller coasters is that we are approaching human limits on what the body can tolerate without damaging itself. Sure some can handle more than others, but the point is that we are approaching the limits. And to attract more people roller coasters are just making them faster, harder, etc.

      I do not call it limit I call it reality. Case in point German Autobahn. There is no limit on a large amount of the Autobahn. And yes I drive fast. But my car is limited to 250 KPH (155 MPH). Why? Because above that speed things move REAL fast. Any accident or anything that happens becomes not just dangerous to the person but to everyone around them. Accidents below that speed are actually not that bad and in the large majority of cases people come out alive without any major problems. Exceptions are if you run into a tree (Tree does not move even when you are going 250) or a car going against you. Hence why in German stats most deaths are on country roads and NOT highways. Sure you can buy non-regulated cars, but the insurance premiums are incredibly high and the percentage of cars that are actually un-regulated are VERY VERY VERY small. On the German Autobahn maybe three times a year I will run into someone who can outrun me.

      My point is that even though we can go faster it is not really beneficial to everyone's health...

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    25. Re:G-forces. by ImaLamer · · Score: 2

      I also live in Cincinnati but I am a pansie...

      ...do they rush you off the ride? At plenty of their rides you get rushed off and that can make you feel this way if you were riding something higher than the "Beastie".

    26. Re:G-forces. by cdrudge · · Score: 2

      I went to Cedar Point the day before Labor Day back in 1998. The park was empty (take heed /.'ers)

      Great. Thanks alot. I was going to go then anyways, but now the park will be /.'ed. Actually, apparently holiday weekends are a very good time to go. I think in their literature they say that Memorial Day and Labor Day are actaully slower then the typical day. Not sure of the 4th due to fireworks.

    27. Re:G-forces. by JWhitlock · · Score: 2, Funny
      The Viper (a relatively new steel coaster) at Six Flags Great Adventure is horrible in terms of comfort. The ride isn't that exciting and thanks to the design of the shoulder restraints most of the ride experience is liken to being repeatedly punched in the ear.

      Yeah, when it came to naming it, it was a dead heat between "The Viper" and "Punches to the Ear!" I think Six Flags chose wisely.

    28. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cry us a river, whiner.

    29. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Huh-huh.. Good one, Beavis.

    30. Re:G-forces. by Mr.Intel · · Score: 2
      and limited their pilots' cardiovascular exercise.

      Being a former Air Force pilot, I can tell you for sure that this is FUD. Every six months they have you run 2.5 miles and if you don't come across the line under 8:30, you get put on probation. Don't do it again in 6 months, you are out.

      Cardiovascular fitness is essential to being able to withstand high gees. Training to be a pilot, they instruct you to 'grunt' like you are on the pot. You are also supposed to take deep breaths in between grunting. This keeps blood in the brain through interstitial pressure and rapid oxygenation of the blood. Let me tell you, this can be quite exhausting after only five minutes. If you aren't in shape, you are SOL.

      --
      ASCII tastes bad dude.
      Binary it is then.
    31. Re:G-forces. by PW2 · · Score: 1

      I believe Iron Wolf in Illinois bites too -- everyone has red ears when the ride is done (atleast as of a few years ago) -- it probably makes everyone a few decimal points stupider, so I feel sorry for the Season Pass holders!

    32. Re:G-forces. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pussy.

    33. Re:G-forces. by PW2 · · Score: 1

      The Discovery Channel show where they discuss pilot training in high Gs can also apply to civilians on rollercoasters -- when a high G turn is coming -- tighten as many leg muscles as you can find to get the blood up to your head -- leads to no more 1/2 second blind spells

    34. Re:G-forces. by TomServo · · Score: 1

      Just as a side note, the newest coaster at Magic Mountain out in Valencia, CA (mentioned earlier as being the home of Goliath), called X, is probably the easiest one on the human body that I've seen there. They've got some videos here, in Real Player and Windows Media. They're all computer generated simulations, but you still get a good idea.

      The ride looks horribly disorienting, but oddly enough, it's not at all. Maybe being flung around at those G forces makes your body's orientation matter less, but I got off that ride feeling fine.

      I can, however, attest to that slightly disoriented feeling getting off Goliath, but that's half the fun of the ride...you feel a little goofed up after flying around at that ridiculous speed. The drop on it is so fast, they had to put a braking strip in the middle of the ride so you'll slow down enough for the end of the trip. I think the initial drop puts you at about 85mph on a 61 degree drop...good times!

    35. Re:G-forces. by TomServo · · Score: 1

      You are so absolutely right about Viper's shoulder restraints. Now, I love Viper, it's great fun, but it's so incredibly painful. I'm 6'2", and the bars come down on a hinge that sits just below my shoulder level. So I have two choices when it swings down...have it be sorta comfortable but sticking out about a foot and a half in front of me, basically not hanging onto me at all, or pull it down further so I have to sit in the car like Igor in Young Frankenstein. That's usually what happens (those fine attendants really smash the thing down on me), and while the ride then is fine, once it's stopped and I'm waiting to go into the terminal, I sit there in intense and searing pain, starting to get claustrophobic from the damn thing.

      Rest assured, if you haven't ridden it, X has *FAR* better shoulder restraints...they seem to be able to fit almost any body size that sits in them.

    36. Re:G-forces. by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      From what I remember, the Israeli pilots were prohibited from excessive running -- which definitely seems to disagree with what you are saying. If you are part of the Israeli Air Defense Force (I think that is what they call it), then I'm clearly in the wrong (and either my memory is screwed up, or the program was). I don't claim to be an expert; I just wanted to share some piece of (possibly wrong) trivia I ran into.

      I've practiced the "grunting" thing before, just for fun. It makes your face turn red in a hurry!

      -Paul Komarek

    37. Re:G-forces. by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      I have heard a similar thing (maybe the same source? not sure) but it mentioned specifically those who typically took slower, deeper breaths were at a disadvantage to those who took quicker, shallower breaths.

    38. Re:G-forces. by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      "That place is deadly"

      Can't tell if you're serious, but think of how many people ride 10+ coasters there in one day each year. At least one million. Deaths directly related to the ride: 0. Excludes people with pre-existing conditions - they should read the warning signs and obey their doctors.

    39. Re:G-forces. by pondlight · · Score: 1

      There's a reason they rush you off the ride when you look sick. If you throw up inside the boundaries of the ride -- the ride workers have to clean it up. If you throw up outside the boundaries -- the grounds crew has to clean it up. Now that's a strong incentive. (move it along folks)

    40. Re:G-forces. by tiwason · · Score: 1

      no.... i was not serious....

      I had bean dip once that was deadly....

  4. That's okay, just accelerate to negative Gs by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

    Can't complain then!

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    1. Re:That's okay, just accelerate to negative Gs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And watch the punters empty their guts on every bend. nice

  5. OK, so we're reining in roller coasters... by gonerill · · Score: 2
    ... and expanding sub-orbital space tourism. Hmm.
    On the other hand, seeing as the G-Forces on Coasters are

    > considerably greater than even those experienced by astronauts

    Who needs $20M in cash when you can head to Six Flags for a better rush?

    1. Re:OK, so we're reining in roller coasters... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but your forgetting the rush of flying in a tin can!

    2. Re:OK, so we're reining in roller coasters... by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 1

      Are you nuts? $20M in cash is the discount price for admission.

  6. Roller Coasters in Jersey by lkaos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are an aweful lot of roller coasters in New Jersey, and most aren't in big theme parks (like Six Flags and stuff).

    Most are on the board walk on small piers, and there have been a number of deaths (actually, usually at least one every summer) from poorly design and/or maintained coasters. Regulating coasters is not necessarily a bad idea.

    It makes sense to not allow high speed coasters on little piers that don't have enough staff to maintain it properly. I think that is the basis of a law like this.

    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
    1. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      there have been a number of deaths (actually, usually at least one every summer)

      I don't know.. according to the report on the congressman's page, there has only been one death ever in NJ, and the victim was medically predisposed. Now I think that's only brain injuries, but this page doesn't list much in NJ either, and most of it is due to people not using the safety bar.

      Check your facts before you pass on anecdotes as truth.

    2. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by ZenCrawler · · Score: 3, Informative

      i'm not so sure how complete that site is for accidents. I remember I was back at Great Adventure back in the late 1980's.. hrm I was in middle school so it had to be like 87-88. A girl let the ride 'lightning loops' restraints close behind her, and was ejected from the ride mid loop. She died from that and its not listed anywhere on that site. Also stories are on the news a lot about the Boardwalk rides like one 'wild mouse' roller coaster that had a 60 degree climb or so and the climbing mechanism broke and people went down and hit a car behind them causing some horrible G forces i'd assume, but I ride roller coasters a LOT myself and I say leave the G's alone..

    3. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by TurboThy · · Score: 3, Informative
      She died from that and its not listed anywhere on that site.


      <quote> Wednesday, June 17, 1987 - A 19-year-old girl was killed after falling from the Lightnin' Loops shuttle loop roller coaster ride at Six Flags Great Adventure theme park in Jackson Township, New Jersey. An investigation by the State Labor Department concluded that the ride itself was operating properly, but that the ride operator started the ride without having made sure that all of the passengers were secured by the safety harnesses. The Department's Office of Safety Compliance further concluded that the accident would not have occurred had proper procedures been followed. The park was found to be in violation of the Carnival/Amusement Ride Safety Act and was subsequently charged with the maximum state fines of $1,000. The ride was reopened on Saturday, October 10, 1987, with the permission of the Labor Department, but was eventually dismantled and no longer operates at Great Adventure.</quote>
      --
      78% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
    4. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by statusbar · · Score: 2

      Wow! $1,000 !!! that will teach them! it probably took them AGES to page the fine!

      --jeff++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
    5. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by ROBOKATZ · · Score: 1

      ...for sufficiently large values of $1.

    6. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by jeffy124 · · Score: 1

      well, I grew up in NJ and there have been a number of accidents, let alone deaths from those accidents. They probably consider a death being the result of improperly seated (like the Six Flags Lighting Loops incident, or a similar incident on the Falling Star at Clementon Park, where a girl laid down in the seat, legs not under the lap bar) or malfunction (like Ocean City a few summers ago). There was a death in Wildwood (a shore town w/ boardwalk) about 5-7 years ago where a maintenance worker was killed when he was kicked in the head by a passing coaster. The coaster was one of those inverted tracks where the feet dangle. (btw - I grew up in Clementon, and worked two summers at the park, there are about 1-3 accidents/year, but few are ever newsworthy)

      --
      The One Rule Of Chess You'll Ever Need: Don't play someone who carries a kit in their bookbag.
    7. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by elh102 · · Score: 1

      I can testify to the poor maintenance and operation of the coasters on New Jersey piers. I spent a weekend in Wildwood, NJ, about 10 years ago. My brother and I spent a lot of time on the amusement piers. On one roller coaster, a wooden one with only lap bars to restrain the passengers, the guy running the ride started the train rolling before the lap bars were locked down. All the passengers started screaming, and the operator stopped the train. On another coaster, the ride vibrated and rattled excessively, much worse than any old rickety wooden coaster I've ever ridden, even though this ride was a steel looping coaster. My head was bouncing back and forth pretty hard against the head restraints. My guess is that the amusement pier was not entirely stable, and that the pilings had sunk or shifted since the coaster was built.

      I'm not sure how I feel about the proposed G-limiting law in the article, but I am all for tighter inspections and safety regulations for rides like these.

    8. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by RideMan · · Score: 1

      New Jersey has a pretty comprehensive ride safety program to begin with, mostly concerned with the building code. Historically, New Jersey has been mostly over-reactive with their ride code. They had a poorly-engineered and poorly-built bungee tower fall over onto a bumper car pavilion, so now all rides are subject to structural review. They had an incident where a fabrication error on a roller coaster allowed a routine malfunction to turn into a fatal accident, so now they want to review ride designs. I suspect that their desire to establish a force standard is a desire to be proactive for a change. The new regulations are a bit more sweeping than just force limits; if anything, I think the force limits are probably the most benign part of the whole package!

      --Dave Althoff, Jr.

    9. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by RideMan · · Score: 1

      The "one death in New Jersey" referred to in this discussion is a single death that might possibly be related to ride forces, rather than to some accident (be that accident a mechanical failure or a problem of rider behavior).

      Off the top of my head I can think of several ride fatalities in New Jersey in recent years, most recently in ...er, I think it was in August of 1999...when two riders were killed in the same incident.

      --Dave Althoff, Jr.

    10. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by vena · · Score: 1

      anyone who's lived in wildwood, nj for any length of time will eventually realize why nobody who lives there rides the rollercoasters. they hire homeless drug addicts to assemble them, and since the city DESPERATELY needs the money they draw, it's all overlooked.

    11. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      Most roller coasters are designed by large, professional companies employing well-educated college graduates. I could find only 2 coasters in New Jersey, out of 17 parks, not designed by a well-known (in the enthusiast community) company or with no designer listed. So almost certainly poor design is not at fault here. Maintenance can be a problem, however. You say that regulation is a good idea because of this, however, regulation of speed is not the solution. A low speed coaster can still cause injury and death if poorly maintained. A better solution to the problem you bring up here would be to have government officials inspect roller coaster maintenance to ensure they are being maintained safely.

    12. Re:Roller Coasters in Jersey by lkaos · · Score: 2

      Exactly... Atlantic City is pretty bad too...

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
  7. NASA gets in on it. by Jarvo · · Score: 1

    I can't wait until NASA will accept time on roller coasters as astronaut training time.

    High G-force Roller Coaster Theme Park World here I come!

  8. blacked out by stmpynode · · Score: 1

    i've blacked out for a few seconds before on one of the rides at magic mountain. it wasn't even the fastest or best one there. but i absolutely love it anyways :)

    --

    Blah.

    1. Re:blacked out by packeteer · · Score: 1

      i would sudjest that if anyone ever has an incident like this they go see a doctor... this could point to serious brain trouble... you dont black out for nothing...

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  9. Why? Well... by JanusFury · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People ride them to have fun, get a thrill.

    Not to have their bodies exposed to more forces and danger than most astronauts ever experience - if you think about it, the astronauts are safer. The astronauts have teams of medics, special suits, and a large, strong spacecraft around them. Compare this to the average coaster-rider who is sitting in a flimsy piece of metal, or even wood - nothing protecting them from the G-forces, let alone the wind. And most people are going to ride the same coaster multiple times in a row if possible - I know I do. :)

    --
    using namespace slashdot;
    troll::post();
    1. Re:Why? Well... by Malc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      On top of that, most astronauts are very fit and healthy. Considering that over 50% of American adults are now obese, it's little wonder the regulations need to be tightened up a bit.

    2. Re:Why? Well... by JanusFury · · Score: 1

      Excellent point, I never even thought of that. At least the exposures are short, though.

      --
      using namespace slashdot;
      troll::post();
    3. Re:Why? Well... by popular · · Score: 1

      You may pull close to 5G's on a particularly good coaster, but the duration of that force is nowhere near the length of exposure experienced by astronauts. Similarly, in car accidents, force alone never gets blamed for injuries and deaths -- if you come across some counterforce, that's another thing altogether.

    4. Re:Why? Well... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2
      You may pull close to 5G's on a particularly good coaster, but the duration of that force is nowhere near the length of exposure experienced by astronauts.

      Maybe a roller coaster's G force rivals that of wimpy modern rockets, but it's nothing compared to old school space travel. Here's an example. (I'm sure there's better examples, but I happened accross this one a few days ago so I still remembered where to find it.) This is from the astronautix.com page about the cancelled 1970's Chinese moon program:

      There is just enough space for a single astronaut within the FSW capsule (despite statements by some Western experts to the contrary). Drawings and photographs released show that the ablative impregnated-oak nose cap covered electrical equipment. The spherical aft dome contained the recovery parachute. The space for an astronaut in the intermediate bay would be quite limited. The ride would also be rough, worse than that of any other first generation manned spacecraft - 6 to 11 G's and 150 dB during launch, 8 to 20 G's on re-entry, and a landing speed of 4 to 14 m/s. In the absence of a soft-landing system, recovery at sea may have been necessary. Alternatively, the astronaut may have been provided with an ejection seat in order to bail out of the capsule before landing or in the case of launch vehicle failures (as in the Soviet Vostok spacecraft).

      Maybe that should be an idea for a next-generation 20 G roller coaster. They could name it something like "Chairman Mao's Moon Blaster".

    5. Re:Why? Well... by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      Oops, my post had a mental slip. The Chinese didn't have a moon program in the 70's. It was just an earth orbit project. Rename the coaster "Charman Mao's Human ICBM Payload".

    6. Re:Why? Well... by JungleBoy · · Score: 2, Funny
      ...if you think about it, the astronauts are safer.

      Except that astronauts are sitting on top of a Big Controled Bomb[tm]. The shuttle SRBs are one of the largest controlled explosions ever engineered.

      But I'd still Ride 'em if they offered me a seat. :)

      Have Fun
      The JungleBoy
      --
      "You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
      -Calvin
    7. Re:Why? Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big deal, I've been in an United Airlines 767.

    8. Re:Why? Well... by allanj · · Score: 2

      That's a really good argument for regulating *obesity*, since that is the root cause (by your argument).

      --
      Black holes are where God divided by zero
    9. Re:Why? Well... by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      The forces that they are talking about are basically insignificant.

      "The Gravitron" that you can ride on at a carnival maxes out at about 3 gees, and a ride on that is sustained at 2-3 gees for about 5 minutes.

      Using a similar device, I've personally experianced sustained force on the order of 4-5 gees for 10 minute blocks.

      A couple of seconds at 4 gees just isn't going to cause damage.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    10. Re:Why? Well... by DamnYouIAmALion · · Score: 1

      if you think about it, the astronauts are safer

      Err, I don't think so. According to what I've read here today the chances of having one of these accidents on a coaster is around 1 in a million. That's probably wrong, but its a very unlikely event.

      The chance that a shuttle fails is 1 in 250 according to NASA, although they used to spout a ridiculous impossible / 1 in 100,000 (although the engineers maintained 1 in 250/300).

      I'd feel a lot safer on a coaster! But I'd choose to ride the shuttle any day of the week! :-)

      - Damn You I Am A Lion!

    11. Re:Why? Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd feel a lot safer on a coaster! But I'd choose to ride the shuttle any day of the week! :-)

      Except Thursday I never did like Thursdays.

    12. Re:Why? Well... by popular · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's quite funny -- I went to bed after posting that comment, and fell asleep to a show on The History Channel, apparently about auto safety and/or the test dummy. The part of the show I caught was about a U.S. military researcher who believed that forces in excess of 15G's (then considered lethal) were survivable if experienced only briefly, and when the vehicle's occupant was well restrained. Wouldn't you know, he managed to survive 35G's, collapsed lung and detached retinas and all (he recovered), and in the process got to set the land speed record :)

      I disrecall the man's name, or the name of the show -- it was on The History Channel at midnight CDT.

    13. Re:Why? Well... by Malc · · Score: 1

      Personally I think something should be done about it because it pushes up the healthcare bill for the rest of us normal people. Why should I pay for some fat lazy slob?

  10. Idiots by Whardie+Jones · · Score: 0

    If you can't take a roller coaster ride then dont go on it. No one is forcing you to do anything. A few G's are nothing, if you're in shape anyway.

  11. A benevolent company? by TwitchCHNO · · Score: 1

    [Quote] Gary Story is the president of the Six Flags amusement park chain."G-forces on roller coasters last for nano-seconds," says Story.

    But Story says the industry won't oppose G-force standards. o one cares any more than we do about the safety of our guests in the park and we are all about safety, we are all about science and studying these issues," says Story [/Quote]

    I am amazed that a CEO of a conglomerate didn't whip out his lawyers.

    Of coures this could merely be a PR boost... "Six Flags the first amusment park to comply to Government standards." or "Check out the new UberCoaster... expirience the legal limit in G's"

    --
    ___________________________
    I'm not a geek, but I play one on TV.
    1. Re:A benevolent company? by tunah · · Score: 2
      The whole idea is to propell your body through time and space as quickly as possible.

      Benevolent and bullshit both start with B...

      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
    2. Re:A benevolent company? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 2

      The relationship between the market and the Right Thing is a complex one. Sometimes, the private sector would prefer a regulation that mandates that they and their competitors all do the Right Thing, when the Right Thing done unilaterally would mean a competitive disadvantage. This is why the initial laws against child labor were promoted in England by factory owners - they wanted to end the practice, but couldn't do so unilaterally (because their costs, vis-a-vis their competitors, would go up too much.)

    3. Re:A benevolent company? by jonerik · · Score: 2

      I am amazed that a CEO of a conglomerate didn't whip out his lawyers.

      I was amazed the first time I read the article, too; for the same reason. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized what's probably going on here. You'll note that no one's trying to whip up the public here. No "coasters are killing working families," "what about the children?," or other hot-topic buttons that pols usually press in order to catch the attention of the press like a red flag in front of a bull.

      When I originally posted the piece, I went looking for stories in New Jersey newspapers about the regulation push there and couldn't find anything from the past week or two. Maybe there's something out there that I missed, but I certainly couldn't find anything. I never would have heard about it had it not been for the NBC article.

      So, given the lack of press and Gary Story's acquiesence, my guess is that Story and local politicians are working together on legislation that will address safety concerns while also not wrecking the amusement park industry there. In other words, the industry is being allowed to collaborate on legislation that they can live with in return for not calling on coaster fans to flood their reps and senators with irate letters. That's just a guess on my part, admittedly, but given the evidence it's the most likely scenario.

  12. Another reason not to trust the media by jdun · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Bunch of morons. The liberal media are a bunch of idiots. They need to do their background research better. I can't believe that they think that a Roller Coasters ride has more Gforce then getting shoot up into space at an ungodly speed. Another reason not to trust the media.

    1. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like you are the idiot. Astronauts on the shuttle only get 3Gs at maximum acceleration. In the article, they stated that roller coasters easily will do 6. Now, the astronauts back in the Mercury/Gemini days had to deal with it, but they were also highly trained military pilots who knew how to deal with it.

    2. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Artifex · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I can't believe that they think that a Roller Coasters ride has more Gforce then getting shoot up into space at an ungodly speed.

      It's not the speed, it's the huge change of speed in a short time that makes the difference. Relatively gradual accleration to significant speeds is not nearly as traumatic as a quick acceleration and then an abrupt deceleration.

      Don't forget, also, that the people piloting military planes and shuttles have gone through significant physical training and monitoring to make sure they're in good shape. The same cannot be true of the vast majority of couch-potatoes visiting the fair. And if the stress on the adult body isn't enough, imagine what the stress might be like on a teen or preteen's body, especially to the brain stem, when suddenly given a 3 or 4 G shock. Maybe nothing, maybe a lot more... especially as the stress gets repeated.

      Go ask a pediatric neurologist about the effect repeated stresses like this could have, or go ask any trauma surgeon what repeated low-grade whiplash, which is a potential risk at these levels, can do to anyone.

      Think about it - the whole point of roller coasters is to give you a "rush" by stressing your body extremely. It makes sense to at least examine the need for regulation, to make sure roller coasters don't get too extreme.

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    3. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Semi-Psychic+Nathan · · Score: 1
      And how much background research have you done? Compare this with the Highest G Forces listed on this page under the Steel Coaster category.

      So, do some research before you call someone a moron for not doing any research.

      --
      I have nothing to allude to, and I am alluding to it.
    4. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by jheinen · · Score: 2

      FWIW, a space shuttle launch generates about 3 Gs of acceleration. Not bad at all. Fighter pilots, on the other hand, experience loads as high as nine Gs in tight turns, and they are also experiencing rapid acceleration changes during maneuvers.

      Personally, I can't think of anything more fun.

      --
      -Vercingetorix
      "Necessitas non habet legem." -St. Augustine
    5. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2

      Bunch of morons. The liberal media are a bunch of idiots.

      As the media falls under the control of fewer and fewer corporate owners, this screaming about this "liberal" media has been getting more and more shrill. Liberals seem to be like witches, communists, pedophiles, and Satanists. The fewer there are of them, the more you hear about how they're everywhere.
      As to what a story about rollercoasters has to do with a "liberal media" in the first place, you'll have to explain that one to me. This is a story about health regulators in New Jersey deciding whether to introduce regulations in response to several injuries and deaths from amusement park rides. You can get into an ideological argument about whether government should regulate amusement park rides or about how you deserve what you get when you get on one, but please quit complaining about this "liberal media". They're all corporate drones as far as I can tell.

      They need to do their background research better.

      Agreed.

      I can't believe that they think that a Roller Coasters ride has more Gforce then getting shoot up into space at an ungodly speed. Another reason not to trust the media.

      You're comparing speed to acceleration, which is completely apples to oranges. A moon rocket has a steady, solid acceleration that remains pointed in the same direction to accumulate a great speed. A roller coaster is subject to a wild and inconsistent acceleration in all kinds of directions so the cumulative changes in velocity cancel out and you never go faster than 100 mph. Plus the jerk (time derivative of acceleration) during a rocket launch is light and smooth, except right when the engine turns on and off. On a roller coaster the jerk is as crazy and variable as the acceleration. A moon rocket gives a much smoother ride.

    6. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Artifex · · Score: 2

      Fighter pilots, on the other hand, experience loads as high as nine Gs in tight turns, and they are also experiencing rapid acceleration changes during maneuvers.

      I believe you... I tried to find out what Gs might be associated with a car crash at 30 MPH, with/without airbags, but couldn't. I'd also heard something about blackouts happening to pilots somewhere between 6 and 8 Gs... is that true? And 12 Gs was a magic number... like a fighter plane would shear itself apart at that horrendous level, or something. Any more notes?

      --
      Get off my launchpad!
    7. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Woek · · Score: 1

      Shocks in rollercoasters can be far greater than 4 G. The construction itself endures hundreds of G's but this is, through dampening in the seats and the human body, reduced to something in the order of 10 or 20 G. But these shocks are not so much the problem, it's the sustained acceleration that might cause brain damage. In rollercoasters however, this is usually not greater than 2 G, and in rare occasions maybe 3. Though this might be too much for an old person with plugged vains, for a healthy individual this should be no problem. The human body should be able to sustain 6 G for a reasonably long period, which is what fighter- or stunt pilots often experience.
      In this article, they picked two favorable examples: astronauts and race car drivers, which both don't get a lot of G's (about 3), but seem like they do!
      Though regulations are fine, I don't think they should be too strict. And place a warning sign at the entrance!

      And besides, rollercoaster are for whimps :) Try acrobatic flying!!

    8. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by Weh · · Score: 1

      fighter pilots (and other people) black out when their bodies take too many g's for too long (measured in seconds). They've got special suits and in some case special training to retard the blackout. The blackout is caused by blood flowing away (or sometimes to) the brain because of centrifugal acceleration (mainly directed along the main axis of the body). I don't know what the effect of a sustained exposure to high acceleration after blackout has set in is but it doesn't seem so healthy to have no blood in your brains for a while.

      A Fighter planes can tear off it's wings if it makes certain moves that stress it's construction beyond it's limits. The limits depend on the construction of the plane. There are different moves which can tear off wings but the general principle is that the pressure on the wings is so great that it creates a massive shear force and bending moment where the wing joins the fuselage.

    9. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by TomServo · · Score: 1

      That is definitely some old information on the ibiblio.org page. As far as the wooden coaster information goes, I'm not sure about that, but the steel ones don't take into account at least one coaster that's a good 2 years old.

      Taken from the Goliath homepage:

      Height - 255 feet (higher than the top listed on those records)
      Drop angle - 61 degrees (higher than #2, and X, the newest one, is something like 86 or 87 degrees)
      Drop Length - at least 255 feet (it goes underground, once again, higher than top listed on those records)
      Speed - 85 mph (ties record)

      So those are at least a few years old, and I know that Goliath has been surpassed for those records since that time.

    10. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      But at least the G-forces listing on that page is 100% accurate and up to date. I guarantee it.

    11. Re:Another reason not to trust the media by jheinen · · Score: 2

      Blackout occurs in a normal individual at around 6-8 Gs. Fighter pilots wear special suits around their lower body which inflate during high G maneuvers. The suit constricts the lower extremities, forcing blood back to the head. They also learn how to tense the muscles in their legs and lower body to help keep the blood up in their head (similar to when you hold your breath really hard and/or scream - you get red in the face because the blood is being forced up into your head). 9 Gs is about the limit for fighter pilots. 12 Gs would probably cause rapid blackout in anyone.

      As for the plane, a modern fighter jet is far more durable than the humans who fly them. A pilot would blackout long before he could pull enough Gs to tear the wings off. That's one of the reasons the military is so interested in unmanned aerial vehicles. They can maneuver far more violently than a manned plane, giving them a substantial edge over a manned enemy airplane.

      --
      -Vercingetorix
      "Necessitas non habet legem." -St. Augustine
  13. Just a guess.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Why do they think people ride roller coasters to begin with?"

    Well, I'll take a wild guess that people ride to have fun and not to get injured and die. Frankly, this sounds like a good idea to me. After all, if deaths have been blamed on roller coasters, then why not regulate something to prevent completely preventable deaths and injuries?

    1. Re:Just a guess.... by qqtortqq · · Score: 1

      Risk of injury just makes something all that more fun... If saw someone getting off a roller coaster, half conscious and puking their guts out, id head to that roller coaster next.

    2. Re:Just a guess.... by Weh · · Score: 1

      It may be fun at the moment, but if you are injured so that you won't be able to function normally for the rest of your life (brain damage, (partial)-paralysis, etc. etc.), it will suck severly, you might even start a campaign to legislate coaster safety.

  14. welcome to new jersey by mosch · · Score: 2
    On Monday, New Jersey will propose caps of 2.5 to six Gs vertically -- depending on how long the Gs last -- and one to 2.5 Gs side to side.
    Just when you thought that New Jersey couldn't be more lame, they find a way to prove you wrong. These are legislators solving a problem that doesn't exist... or more likely, threatening to solve the problem unless their election fund gets a nice little boost from six flags.
    1. Re:welcome to new jersey by garcia · · Score: 1

      NJ is plagued by deaths at amusement parks. Six Flags has had several years of good luck recently, but I remember on many different occasions a good number of deaths did occur due to accidents at their park.

      The G's were not the problem obviously it was stupidity, malfunctions, etc.

      I don't see the point of all this. Who the fuck are these people to tell me that I cannot pay my own money to ride an AMUSEMENT ride for fun. It is in NO way the responsibility of a small group of individuals to decide what I want to do w/myself. If I want to take the risk to ride these rides, I will.

      Fix the other fucking problems out there (airports, large cities, etc) before bothering me w/what I am interested in.

      Who voted for these fucking morons?

    2. Re:welcome to new jersey by istartedi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      These are legislators solving a problem that doesn't exist

      I'd say they are taking a very small problem that has already been reported and nipping it in the bud. This reminds me--the very same people who are now saying that Bush knew about 911 are the very same people that would probably have sluffed off a hijack warning before then. So, what we have here are some politicians who are actually demonstrating forsight, and getting blasted by comments like yours. Would you prefer to see a statisticly significant uptick in brain damage incidents at New Jersey hospitals before action is taken?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    3. Re:welcome to new jersey by qqtortqq · · Score: 1

      I seriously think I hit 2.5 vertical Gs and 1 horiz G occasionally during daily activities. How stupid.

    4. Re:welcome to new jersey by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      This reminds me--the very same people who are now saying that Bush knew about 911 are the very same people that would probably have sluffed off a hijack warning before then.

      This is complete conjecture- you can't just blandly assert what someone else would have done in the same situation. The Clinton administration did issue a warning to air travelers before New Year's Eve 2000 that never amounted to anything.

    5. Re:welcome to new jersey by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      Did you actually pay attnetion to what they wrote. Notice the ifs, mights, maybes, etc... I know I always want sweeping govt regulation on stuff that has been around along time because one person might maybe have been injured by a roller coaster if it exceded a certain G force. Not too mention the doctor could not really think of anything else the guy told him about that could have caused it. Good thing we cought it now, it might have one day have possibly been the cause of injuries of 2-4 people per million if we use rollar coasters the may have enough G force to maybe hurt someone. Good use of our tax dollars, I wish the govt was always this usefull.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    6. Re:welcome to new jersey by ccmay · · Score: 1
      Who the fuck are these people to tell me that I cannot pay my own money to ride an AMUSEMENT ride for fun.

      I can tell you who the fuck they are:

      1. Dirty politicians
      2. meddlesome bureaucrats
      3. priggish killjoy public-interest groups
      4. scum sucking trial lawyers -- ESPECIALLY the trial lawyers.
      We have let these busybodies and pirates push us around for too long. They are destroying America.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    7. Re:welcome to new jersey by Peyna · · Score: 2

      Isn't that how it always works? Back home for me more of the railroad crossing are lucky enough to have stop signs if anything at all. As soon as someone is killed at a crossing, they put up a gate, maybe. Even though many of them are obviously very dangerous, it takes loss of life for action. It's sad, but it is probably a lot easier to get something done after a terrible event than before.

      --
      What?
    8. Re:welcome to new jersey by Windcatcher · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      Okay, warning to those over-sensitive hyperventilating types: this is going to look like a flame. Take your medication before freaking out; this is just what I perceive after living three miles from NJ for the last 25 years...


      I used to work in Camden a few years ago. Since then, ALL of the coworkers I hung around with that lived in NJ have left for DE. I can think of several reasons why I wouldn't move to NJ (I live in PA):


      - HIGH property taxes. And I don't mean a little high. My aunt and uncle in South Orange pay $12k a year. Not twelve hundred, twelve thousand. That's a new car every two years, folks. BTW, my friend in DE pays $1,200 a year by comparison. We pay $2,800.


      - Is it me, or is every damned thing in NJ illegal anymore? Take your pick. If it isn't breathing or eating, it's probably legal in PA and DE and illegal in NJ (though DE is catching up quickly). Geez, folks, what isn't regulated to hell and gone there?


      - Paranoia about traffic speed. Ever been to Pennsauken? 'Nuff said.


      I could probably go on but it's time to get some work done (sigh).

    9. Re:welcome to new jersey by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      If those are the limits then most, if not all, are within those specs.

      I'd say given the increases in Gs experienced over the last few years, and our known limits that this is a good course of action.

      People black out of current rides (I do on the extreme ones). So preventing more intense rides from being build (stress wise) is a GOOD thing.

      --
      Rod Taylor
  15. Jet Pilots: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "hey I want to be the only one able to brag that I pulled 10 G's and didnt black out"

    1. Re:Jet Pilots: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jet pilots wear special uniforms that keeps the bloodflow to the brain at higher G's than normal. Namely, very tight pants to keep the blood from rushing to the legs...

      Not a fair comparison.

  16. tilt-a-check by quannump · · Score: 2, Funny

    from the but-is-the-tilt-a-whirl-is-still-safe dept.

    "... but the question still remains. Is our children learning"?

    --

    1. Re:tilt-a-check by Spaceman+Spiff+II · · Score: 1
      "...but the question still remains. Is our children learning"?

      That's el presidente Bush right?

      --
      I understand that life's not fair, just why is it never unfair in my favor?
    2. Re:tilt-a-check by Debillitatus · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      but the question still remains. Is our children learning

      You have no chance to learn make your time

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    3. Re:tilt-a-check by quannump · · Score: 1
      --

  17. Come on by cdf12345 · · Score: 2

    People, really what the hell are people thinking, the last thing anyone needs now is new laws,

    It's not like people are being forced to ride roller coasters. It's a risk, one that millions of people take. Just like smoking and drinking, and driving.

    What would regulating really do?

    Keep people from riding? Doubt it.

    Make people want to ride "black market" roller coasters? HA!

    "Yeah kid, I know where you can find a little illegal roller coaster action"

    --
    Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
    1. Re:Come on by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1
      the last thing anyone needs now is new laws

      Actually, the last thing most people need is a casket.

    2. Re:Come on by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      Funny how all of the risks you mentioned are heavily monitored and restricted.

      As an example, you probably cannot sell home distilled moon-shine, or put gasoline in wine to give it more kick.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    3. Re:Come on by cdf12345 · · Score: 2

      exactly my point, do we really need to add Roller coasters to this list?

      --
      Chicago2600.net more than a lifestyle, its a survival trait.
  18. Deaths? by Calrathan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Does anyone have any links to stories about deaths which have occured from riding roller coasters? Other than having a heart attack, [which means you shouldn't have been riding in the first place] how would riding a roller coaster kill you?

    This whole thing about creating a legal g-force limit is once again our government stepping in and saying "you people are too dumb to make your own decisions... we're going to protect you from yourselves". Its similar to the stupid McDonalds Coffee incident. People should be held accountable for their own [sometimes stupid] actions. You don't see the government banning skydiving because some people smacked into the ground and died. You're expected to know and accept the risks.

    People need to stop blaming other people for the results of their own actions.

    1. Re:Deaths? by gadfium · · Score: 1

      You could try a google search for "roller coaster deaths".

      The problem isn't that people die from the g forces, the problem is that badly designed or badly maintained roller coasters break. People are killed by falling from the (broken) track, or by sudden stops of the roller coaster, or kids are killed by climbing out of inadequate restraints during the ride.

    2. Re:Deaths? by nucal · · Score: 3, Informative

      This site on Amusement Park Accident Reports was a bit of an eye opener.

    3. Re:Deaths? by Omnifarious · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, this would be all fine and good if I were adequately informed of the danger of riding a particular coaster. I'm certainly no engineer, and couldn't make any kind of good assessment of the safety of a particular roller coaster.

      So, if there isn't going to be regulation as to how many Gs you can expose riders to, there should be a requirement for them to prominently post information on maximum expected g-forces, and comprehensive safety history of that particular ride.

    4. Re:Deaths? by Calrathan · · Score: 1

      Which brings us to the question, 'why the limit on g-forces'. I'm speculating here, but I believe the problem g-forces themselves cause would be with the circulatory system [jet pilots have systems to pump the blood from their legs back to their heads during high-g maneuvers], and thus the danger would be to the heart.

      But once again, other activities which provide more direct stresses to the heart aren't restricted. Are they thinking about regulating coasters just because they're so popular? Why does 'volume' of use always direct public attention and thus regulation! My guess: we live in a political world, and people try to affect as many other people as possible in what they hope will create a net gain of approval.

    5. Re:Deaths? by Slurpee · · Score: 1

      Regulate Disney!

      http://www.snopes2.com/disney/parks/deaths.htm

      deaths at Disney!

    6. Re:Deaths? by eyeball · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Its similar to the stupid McDonalds Coffee incident...

      This is somewhat off topic, but please read up on the facts on the McDonald's Scalding Coffee incident. Look here or do a quick search on Google. I can't find it, but there's a great site out there that talks about all the highly publicised lawsuits (like the guy who got 300 million dollars for a bad paint job on his bmw), and debunks the myths around each case. Fun read. Media loves twisting these and other so-called frivilous lawsuits to boost their ratings. Pass it on. Thanks.

      That said, I do agree with you that people should be held accountable for their own actions. I don't like being parented by government.

      --

      _______
      2B1ASK1
    7. Re:Deaths? by Calrathan · · Score: 1

      Which I believe is a good idea, but ultimately the responsibility falls to the rider. If I go to a haunted house and stick my hand in a box, and am frightened out of my wits by what I feel, do I have a valid complaint in saying "you should've warned me it was going to freak me out!".

      Even if I didn't realize that I was at a haunted house, or that haunted houses are meant to creep you out, I DID stick my hand in a box which I couldn't see in, with no clue as to what was in the box. No one forced my hand. I made the decision as a free liberated adult.

      As long as there wasnt malicious intent behind the actions [putting razor blades in the box/removing a section of track on the roller coaster] or gross negligence [leaving food in the box to spoil and spread disease/letting a rollercoaster fall into disrepair] the proprietor of such entertainment services should not be held responsible from problems stemming from normal use.

      If the proprietor is so inclined as to provide warnings, then more power to them.

      ----

      I do understand that the concern is over these 'traveling carnivals' with poorly inspected systems, but I firmly believe that society should enforce good laws vigoriously, and not restrict normal freedoms in the proliferation of over-broad legislation meant to quench all situations in which bad events MIGHT happen.

    8. Re:Deaths? by tdelaney · · Score: 1

      Well, if the sudden changes of acceleration stress the roller coaster itself (frame, carriage, etc) beyond its limits you could well claim that a person died from "g forces", if indirectly.

      Besides, a sudden stop of the roller coaster is definitely within the domain of (negative) acceleration.

    9. Re:Deaths? by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      And overall, that reduces the *fun factor*.

      If there was a large notice: "This ride has had 3 significant safety incidents in the last 4 years", would you ride it? Would you let your kids? You'd have to stop and think, removing the suspension of belief. What would that type of information do for you Is that good or bad? Define 'significant'. Is 3 G's good or bad? IS it good for *you*? No way to know until you've done it.

      Ride = fun, not ride = possible death.

      If there was a warning on your new cars sun visor: "This model car was involved in 1,000 fatal accidents in the past 12 months", would you buy it? Would you let your kids ride in it?
      Chances are, the model car you drive was involved in many, many fatal crashes in the last few months. But people drive each and every day.

    10. Re:Deaths? by bobgoatcheese · · Score: 1

      I believe people should be held accountable for their own actions, but there are good reasons to set limits on how far one can stretch the limits. For one thing people assume they are safe when they get on a roller coaster. Even if there were a coaster out there that pulled 10 G's in a turn there would be people riding it because, "Hey, they wouldn't operate it if it wern't safe." Was that old lady stupid for spilling coffee all over herself? Sure. But there was no reason for the coffee to be at eight hundred degrees either. The government isn't trying to ban roller coasters, just regulate them to a point where Joe Average doesn't crush himself for a thrill.

      --
      How's my typing? Call 1-800-eta-shut
    11. Re:Deaths? by Monkelectric · · Score: 2

      Does anyone have any links to stories about deaths which have occured from riding roller coasters? My x-g/f (total bitch, but thats a story for another topic:) witnessed a six flags employee basically get splatered on the wooden roller coaster at six flags california (I think its called "cyclone" but I dont remember). The breaks failed and the employee was standing on the tracks -- now thats a dumb thing to do to begin with, but the thing hit at full tilt and well, there wasn't much left.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    12. Re:Deaths? by AnotherBlackHat · · Score: 2

      Well, this would be all fine and good if I were adequately informed of the danger of riding a particular coaster. I'm certainly no engineer, and couldn't make any kind of good assessment of the safety of a particular roller coaster.

      So, if there isn't going to be regulation as to how many Gs you can expose riders to, there should be a requirement for them to prominently post information on maximum expected g-forces, and comprehensive safety history of that particular ride.


      What if the sign posted the relative risk compared to driving?

      "Driving home from this amusement park is 660 times more like to kill you than riding this roller coaster."

      If you really want a labeling law, how about listing the risk per second,
      and determining an amount below which labeling is not required.

      I suggest that anything less risky than riding in a car be below the threshold.

      -- this is not a .sig
    13. Re:Deaths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Citizens who ride a roller coaster have a very reasonably expectation of safety. The ride is promoted in this manner, and it is the place of legislation to ensure that regulations are in place to prevent false advertising.

      There are many good reasons to object to excessive legislation, but preventing fraud and trickery is not one of them. I am not capable of evaluating the risks associated with riding a particular coaster, and probably would not be permitted to determine those risks by the owner should I express an interest in doing so as a public citizen.

    14. Re:Deaths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cannot think of a single death due to poor design. Lack of maintenance, yes, but most deaths and injuries are due to ride misconduct, plain and simple. If people would simple follow the rules and use common sense, 99% of injuries would be avoided.

      -an ACE member (www.aceonline.org)

    15. Re:Deaths? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      How bout the one where the 39 year old woman and her 8 year old daughter died when the car when they were in didn't have enough momentum to completely go over the rise and they ended up crashing into the car behind them and dying. That sounds like a death due to poor design, doesn't it to you?

    16. Re:Deaths? by Australian+werewolf · · Score: 1

      "The breaks failed"

      I think you meant that the brakes failed. I do hate to sound pedantic, but it really hurts to read grammar that bad.

    17. Re:Deaths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, down in Kings Dominion, Virginia, a few years ago someone decided to fall off the shockwave, a standup coaster. It was shutdown for the rest of the season I think, but I still ride it =)

      Not that this has ANYTHING to do with G's.

    18. Re:Deaths? by flewp · · Score: 2

      I could be wrong, but I thought the systems (suits) pilots wear to help them with the G-forces just help keep blood from pooling in the lower extremeties. I don't believe they actually pump the blood to the brain. Basically, it's a suit with pockets that fill up with air around the legs to provide some pressure to keep the blood from all going to the legs.

      --
      WWJD.... for a Klondike bar?
    19. Re:Deaths? by ImaLamer · · Score: 2

      There is... at my local park ( Kings Island ) there is cute little pictures.

      If you are a stork you can't ride.
      If you have a bandage on your head then you can't ride (oh, and also a bandage on your arm and the sling must hold your arm up by your head).
      If you are a heart with a band aid you can't ride.

      There are others but I haven't been yet this year.

      BTW, in the state of Ohio line jumping is a fourth degree minor misdemeanor.

    20. Re:Deaths? by Beliskner · · Score: 2

      Yeah, if I decide to hijack a plane and smash it into WTC what the fuck is the US government doing saying, "No, you people are too dumb to make your own decisions... we're going to protect you from yourselves". Its similar to the stupid McDonalds Coffee incident. People should be held accountable for their own [sometimes stupid] actions" Yeah, bring Mohammed Atta to trial.

      --
      A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
    21. Re:Deaths? by Omnifarious · · Score: 2

      Well then, you're saying ill-informed people should ride roller coasters and get killed in the name of 'fun'. People bungie jump, base jump, skydive, hanglide and do any number of other things that have well known poor safety records, and it doesn't reduce the 'fun factor' for them.

      Most people thing amusement parks are supposed to be completely safe. If they aren't, then people have to choose how much of a risk they want to take. It's wrong to let people take risks they haven't been given any chance at all to understand.

      I'm all for the warning in the visor of the car. If all cars had such warnings, people might make more intelligent descisions about risk. For example, most people seem to be under the greatly mistaken impression that SUVs are safer. From what I've read, it seems that SUVs are no safer for the driver or passengers, and lots less safe for people in non-SUVs. Perhaps, if people actually knew that, they wouldn't buy them for reasons of safety.

    22. Re:Deaths? by zevans · · Score: 1

      "But there was no reason for the coffee to be at eight hundred degrees either"

      It's a hot beverage, you idiot. There's every reason for it to be hot.

      --
      "... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972
    23. Re:Deaths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, then people might buy SUV's for the fun factor. Kind of a sick thought I had, so I'm going to post anonymously, but..

      SUV's could also have a sticker for how many people they've killed. You know, have a count for each model of SUV. That way you know how your chances fare against those piddly econoboxes.

      And no, I'm not buying an SUV. I like my power in cars that handle... :)

    24. Re:Deaths? by bobgoatcheese · · Score: 1

      Coffee is supposed to be a hot beverage, not one that scalds after three seconds of contact with skin. Roller coasters are supposed to be fun, not crush you. This is what I like to call "drawing a parallel." Read between the lines, you idiot.

      --
      How's my typing? Call 1-800-eta-shut
    25. Re:Deaths? by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      "People are killed by falling from the (broken) track"
      Happened once. Maybe. Roller coasters are inspected each and every morning by trained mechanics. Every inch of track is thouroughly inspected for problems.

      "or by sudden stops of the roller coaster"
      Approx. 0-1 incidents each year.

      "or kids are killed by climbing out of inadequate restraints during the ride."
      Approx. 1-2 incidents each year.

      So dangerous! 1-2 incidents!

    26. Re:Deaths? by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      Sounds like an urban legend. Wait, it is. This never happened, and roller coasters have sophisitcated "blocking" systems to prevent this situation from ever occuring. The way it works is, on a 3-train coaster for example, there can be 1 train on the lift, 1 train in the station, and 1 train after the mid-course brake. If the ride sensors detect that continued operation would cause two trains in the same block (a "blocking violation"), it will stop trains from leaving the station, stop the lift hill, and activate all brakes.

      The only way this COULD occur is exceptionally high winds. When I have been in parks when there have been high winds, they limit the number of trains on the course to prevent this from happening even if there WAS a roll back. By the way, roll backs occur on a monthly basis. Nobody has died from them.

    27. Re:Deaths? by martyn+s · · Score: 1

      It was mentioned in the report on the senator's website. I'm not necessarily saying we should definitely have G restrictions. Maybe they should just mandate these sophisticated systems you're talking about. But the fact is, not all rollercoaster have your sophisticated systems, and they didn't always have them.

      Stop saying nobody has died from them. Isn't possible that these mechanisms were created in response to an unnecessary death? You are defending your point that G's should not be restricted by law, without being intellectually honest. Conceding that my point might be right is not conceding that G's should be restricted by law. But it seems that you believe it is.

    28. Re:Deaths? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, coffee is supposed to be a hot beverage. As a matter of fact, I believe it is supposed to be BOILING hot. Last time I checked, that was how most people make coffee. They boil the water.

      Now if I remember my physics correctly there is an upper limit to how hot you can get water before it turns from a liquid into a gas. I believe that is called the "boiling point."

      Yes, there are some effects from adding coffee to the water that may raise the boiling point, but I find it hard to believe that it was that much higher then the 100Celsius.

      The point being, that you should expect your coffee to potentially be at the boiling point. If you don't, then you are a moron. If you don't expect boiling water to scald you, then you are also a moron.

      So, I strongly disagree with your statement that "Coffee is not supposed to be one that scalds you after three seconds of contact with skin"

      It's boiling water, that's what it does. If you spilled it on yourself, well that sucks, but it isn't McDonalds fault for making coffee like everyone else in the world does.

      Take responsibility for your own actions.

    29. Re:Deaths? by enol · · Score: 1

      I've actually heard of a woman who suffered an anuerysm while riding a coaster and died. She had no previous illness/weak heart but I guess her brain couldn't take it. A while back there was an article that described how the headache you get after you get off could be triggered by the mild aneuryms in your brain. I'm not sure if this affects a lot of people but I DO get headaches so I tend to stay away from them.
      I don't know how this relates to the legalization though. I'm assuming it's the same for skydivers, bungee jumpers, etc. I guess coasters are becoming more "extreme" :)

    30. Re:Deaths? by bobgoatcheese · · Score: 1
      Iced tea is also made by boiling water and passing it through a substance. Yet it is served, get this, cold! Not boiling!
      http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htmSays:
      McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultants advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.


      PS - The (normal) boiling point of water is 212F, higher than both the normal served temperature of coffee, and the temperature of the McDonald's coffee.
      --
      How's my typing? Call 1-800-eta-shut
  19. There really is cause for concern by b.foster · · Score: 2, Flamebait
    I used to think that the veritable laundry list of anal little safety requirements on amusement park rides were nothing more than C.Y.A. drivel from Six Flags' lawyers. After all, how many undeserving people actually got hurt on roller coasters? As far as I had ever known, the only injuries and fatalities at amusement parts were a direct result of blatant stupidity, and these instances provided fodder for many eager Darwinists and other persons interested in the well-being of the greater gene pool.

    All of that changed, though, in one terrifying incident: my cousin, a perfectly healthy 16 year old kid, suffered a serious blackout during a particular roller coaster ride. My family obtained video evidence of his unconscious state from one of the cameras mounted on the ride to take visitors' pictures; he was completely limp and had passed out during one of the steeper drops. In the ensuing weeks after the vacation, he had frequent blackouts and seizures. His driver's license was revoked, and he lost his summer job as a result. Although the problem went away a few months later and now he is back to normal, it was a scary reminder of the fact that we really do not understand all of the potentially harmful effects of large gravitational fields on the human body. And maybe we should wait until we do before we subject the public to these risks.

    1. Re:There really is cause for concern by tiwason · · Score: 1

      Although its terrible for your what happened to your cousin.. Why was his driver's license was revoked?

      Did he pass out while driving ? How would anyone with the ability to revoke his license know about his condition?

    2. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > it was a scary reminder of the
      fact that we really do not understand all of the potentially harmful
      effects of large gravitational fields on the human body. And maybe we should wait until we do before we subject the public to these risks.

      You *do* understand that the local gravitational field hadn't changed in any measurable way; he was feeling the effects of acceleration & inertia, not a change in gravity.

    3. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In most states (mine included), you have a legal and ethical obligation to notify the DMV if you develop a condition that makes it unsafe for you to drive. For instance, when you renew your license, they are required to ask if you experience epilepsy, alcoholism-related blackouts, or any other condition that could cause you to hit something.

      -B.

      Anakin's mom is sold, dies. Dokoo severs Anakin's arm; escapes with Death Star plans. Stormtroopers are clones. If you haven't seen the movie already you're not a true fan anyway.

    4. Re:There really is cause for concern by jheinen · · Score: 3, Informative

      "potentially harmful effects of large gravitational fields"

      Roller coasters do not generate "gravitational fields." They generate no gravity whatsoever. The do create acceleration forces which cause effects similar to gravity, and we actually know quite a bit about those forces. Fighter pilots regularly undergo forces of up to 9 Gs, and this is an area that the military and NASA have studied extensively. They have things called "centrifuges" which can subject people to very high accelerations. All fighter pilots spend time in the centrifuge learning how to handle high G loads.

      As for your cousin, I suspect he had some other nascent condition which the ride exacerbated. The fact is, you're probably more likely to be hit by lightning than to be hurt on an amusement park ride, and no one is saying we should make it a crime to go outside in the rain.

      --
      -Vercingetorix
      "Necessitas non habet legem." -St. Augustine
    5. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Fuck your spoiling ass, bitch. Who's the little shit who says that you have to be a "true fan" to go see and enjoy a movie? Just because I didn't catch the 12:01 showing like your pathetic ass doesn't mean I'm not going to go or that I deserve to have it spoiled because I "don't care enough about it". How fucked up is that?

      Feel free to smoke my pole, you motherfucking asslicker.

    6. Re:There really is cause for concern by bshanks · · Score: 1

      the articles on the web site posted seemed to indicate that most of the people affected were previously healthy individuals.

    7. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      a scary reminder of the fact that we really do not understand all of the potentially harmful effects of large gravitational fields on the human body.

      Are you really as retarded as this comment makes you appear?

    8. Re:There really is cause for concern by tkwire · · Score: 1

      What makes you think legislators are stupid? Why should they care whether or not you go on roller coasters any more? In a few months, or at least by election time, this incident will have blended with every other "legislators are stupid" incident rendering our votes a shameful prop for an incestual system of spoils.

      If this passes, legislators can argue to senior citizens, young mothers, Christians against Roller Coasters, etc. that they "saved" how ever many lives they can conjure up. Legislators aren't stupid, they are only trying to keep their lucrative jobs and hope for the chance that their new found celebrity will give them more money, power, your interns.

    9. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Roller coasters do not generate "gravitational fields." They generate no gravity whatsoever.

      Wrong, every physical object generates gravitational field. Please make sure you are correct next time you go on nitpicking.

      The fact is, you're probably more likely to be hit by lightning than to be hurt on an amusement park ride

      Are you stupid or something? The chance of being hit by lightning does not depend on your medical condition, and unless amusement parks provide for extensive testing of G-force effects on each individual, it is not peoples' fault that they ride on roller coasters with "some other nascent condition".

    10. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Roller coasters do not generate "gravitational fields." They generate no gravity whatsoever.

      So roller coasters are massles ? Damn. That's cool. We can just build a roller coaster to low earth orbit, instead of trying to figure out how to build that giant beanstalk with the elevator.

    11. Re:There really is cause for concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're probably more likely to be hit by lightning than to be hurt on an amusement park ride, and no one is saying we should make it a crime to go outside in the rain.

      You mean nobody told you not to play golf in a thunderstorm?

      of course, you have someone to blame when something is poorly designed/maintained. Who do you blame the lightning on? Being hit is a transaction between you and God. Maybe it's not a crime because they respect God's authority on the subject. (heh)

    12. Re:There really is cause for concern by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

      Principle of Equivalence (from GR -- slightly reworded): There is no difference between an accelerated frame of reference and a frame of reference in a gravitational field.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    13. Re:There really is cause for concern by HD+Webdev · · Score: 1

      That's logical.

      People who get ill tend to be previously healthy.

      --
      This is not a dream, not a dream...we are transmitting from the year 1-9-9-9.
    14. Re:There really is cause for concern by infobhan · · Score: 1

      If you have a seizure, your driver's license must be revoked until you have 6 months without seizures.

      --
      infobhan
  20. Disney Isn't Worried... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Disney isn't worried about regulations on their parks' coasters--they already own a senator.

    1. Re:Disney Isn't Worried... by alizard · · Score: 2
      Disney isn't worried about regulations on their parks' coasters--they already own a senator

      No, at least two.

  21. 57 known cases by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    According to Markey's page, there have been 57 known cases of this type of injury. Only 57 cases, ever! Millions of people go to theme parks every year! Has the whole world gone crazy, when congressmen are spending their budgets investigating a one in a million occurrence while ignoring the continual erosion of our civil liberties? It's my right to go on a roller coaster and kill my brain any damn way I want to!

    Just another example of what big government causes.. useless legislation, inquiries into problems that don't exist. Your tax dollars at work! Welcome to the New USA, designed to protect yourself from yourself. I'm ashamed to say this buffoon is from my state, Massachusetts. I'll also mention that not a single injury of this type has actually happened in Mass - I guess he's just trying to prevent the one or two injuries that MIGHT happen this season.

    It just makes me angry when people focus on extremely rare, freak problems.. like people making such a fuss about school shootings, or shark attacks last summer. Statistically speaking, these things simply do not happen! Why don't we focus on a real problem?

    1. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The number of deaths from coasters is tiny in comparision to the number of lives we could save if we reduced the speed limit on roads and highways, along with better construction of the roads and more helpful signs. The government regulators need to get their priorities straight.

    2. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to Japan if you don't like the shit the US government is pulling. I hear they just built the WORLD"S FASTER ROLLER COASTER!

    3. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only 57 cases, ever! Millions of people go to theme parks every year!

      That's probably less than the number of injuries occuring to idle people. If legistators acted logically on these statistics, they might have to mandate high-G roller-coaster trips in their bill instead.

    4. Re:57 known cases by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

      Cool. But dangerous!

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    5. Re:57 known cases by Monkelectric · · Score: 2, Troll
      Legislators are stupid ... similiar situation: a couple years ago here in california, some school kid got himself darwined by running across the street and into the path of a car after getting off a bus.

      Our legislators in their finite wisdom decided that to avoid this in the future, drivers would have to *stop* on *both lanes* of trafic anytime a school bus was unloading. The fine for not stoping ? 1500$.

      I have nearly gotten in 5 accidents because of this -- people slam on their breaks when the buses flip on their stop sign because they're afraid of the amazing fine (and guess what -- cops are following the buses so they can *give* amazing fines). Then invariably a busy street or expressway comes to a halt with screaching tires. And yes ive narowly avoided some fantastic collisions only by luck.

      If I ever meet the fucker who wrote that bill, I'm going to kill him for nearly getting *me* killed 5 times.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    6. Re:57 known cases by BlueFall · · Score: 1

      Good points. I think that legislators probably focus on these rare events because they are so rare. They stand out and make the news. "Poor family evicted from home" as a headline doesn't make "good news" because it happens all the time. Signal-to-noise ratios are probably the issue.

    7. Re:57 known cases by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      Somebody mod the parent up, this is a pretty funny post. Clearly this guy can't be serious.

      -Paul Komarek

    8. Re:57 known cases by istartedi · · Score: 2

      Get used to it. Virginia has had a similar school bus law for years. In fact, when I was a delivery driver I used to say "I'm stuck behind a portable stopsign" whenever I was stuck behind a school bus.

      OTOH, we don't have any law that says you have to stop for pedestrians who step on the road outside of a cross-walk. I've heard that drivers in CA are obliged to come to a full stop even if the ped is jay-walking. It seems like that would cause more problems since pedestrians are not always obvious, whereas a big ugly yellow bus is hard to miss.

      The bottom line is that you will get used to the new law. I haven't heard anybody in VA complaining about it *ever*.

      Also, don't label the kid as a "darwin" type. It's amazing what can happen to otherwise intelligent people. Big bus, quiet luxury car, lots of ambient noise, distractions... THUD. It could happen to anybody. In fact, to prevent bus drivers from running over their own kids, our buses now have a flip-out betal barrier to prevent kids from walking too close to the blind spot in front of the bus. When I was in jr. high they didn't have that. Instead they showed us a film called "Death Zone" that warned you not to linger too close to the bus. I don't recall their stats on kids who got konked in the blind spots, but it was enough for them to make a movie about it.

      They should still show Death Zone just for the heck of it... I mean... it's a classic. That, and that movie where there's no oxygen left on Earth. Anybody else here remember that one? The one where it's the little girl's birthday and she and her grandfather get surface passes?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    9. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And can you imagine the thousands of lives saved it they lowered the limit to 10 MPH? Think of the children!

    10. Re:57 known cases by GeckoX · · Score: 1

      Hey asshole, there's a reason that _kids_ don't qualify for Darwin awards. Same reason good parents hold their kids hands when crossing the street.

      Could you do us all a favor and apply for a darwin yourself someday soon? tx.

      --
      No Comment.
    11. Re:57 known cases by Monkelectric · · Score: 2

      I am 100% and completley serious ... this is a real law in california. its funny because its trajic

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    12. Re:57 known cases by randombozo · · Score: 1

      57? ha! I can do better than that! There are 0! zero! cases of me ever punching you in the nose. Statistically speaking, I simply do not punch you in the nose! Continued law enforcement activities preventing me from punching you in the nose are a waste of time! Why should my tax dollars be used to prevent me from punching you in the nose? Why don't we focus on a real problem?

      This message paid for by the Coalition to Legalize Punching Moronic Libertarians in the Nose. No Libertarians were harmed in the posting of this comment.

    13. Re:57 known cases by sirinek · · Score: 1
      I dont know what rock YOU live under, but that is a law in almost EVERY state. I certainly know it is in Illinois, Florida and Georgia. I think Louisiana too. I mention those four because I lived there, but theres many others.


      There is a good reason for it too.


      siri

    14. Re:57 known cases by randombozo · · Score: 0, Troll

      You forgot to mention the vast right-wing conspiracy to disprove the theory of evolution. Fundamentalist Christians purchase bible-thumping politicians and force them to pass laws to prevent natural selection. Once this results in an America which has regressed to the point where it is inhabited only by slack-jawed droolmeisters, they will declare victory.

      And everyone will be a Fundamentalist Christian to boot!

    15. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Our legislators in their finite wisdom decided that to avoid this in the future, drivers would have to *stop* on *both lanes* of trafic anytime a school bus was unloading

      That's and old and widely adopted law in many States. No passing a stopped school bus with its lights flashing. Period.

    16. Re:57 known cases by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It just makes me angry when people focus on extremely rare, freak problems.. like people making such a fuss about school shootings, or shark attacks last summer. Statistically speaking, these things simply do not happen! Why don't we focus on a real problem?

      Ever heard of this thing called a trend? Quoting from Senator Markey's report:

      At that time, Rep. Markey noted that 14 of the 15 cases had occurred in the 1990's, which he noted coincided with a building boom in the roller coaster industry that was leading to a sharp increase in the average speed and force designed into the rides.

      Here's the problem. If high-G roller coasters can already cause harm, and yet roller coasters are only getting faster, how much more damaging will the next generation of roller coasters be? That's why it might be a good idea to set limits now!

      Quoting from the MSNBC Article:

      "We have right now in America, a roller coaster arms race where each amusement park advertises that they have the fastest, the most dangerous ride," says Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.

      If there's any truth to this statement, then I can sure see how this could become a big problem.

      Assuming it's not a big problem now, that is. If a drug caused 58 cases of brain damage, it would be pulled! People may expect a few side effects from a drug, like drowsiness. But brain damage? That's a little too much! Likewise, the vast, vast majority of people expect that the worst thing that'll happen to them when they go on a roller coaster is that they'll get dizzy and puke afterwards. If they end up suffering permanent harm, there's a problem.

    17. Re:57 known cases by sholden · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Legislators are stupid ... similiar situation: a couple years ago here in california, some school kid got himself darwined by running across the street and into the path of a car after getting off a bus.

      Our legislators in their finite wisdom decided that to avoid this in the future, drivers would have to *stop* on *both lanes* of trafic anytime a school bus was unloading. The fine for not stoping ? 1500$.

      I have nearly gotten in 5 accidents because of this -- people slam on their breaks when the buses flip on their stop sign because they're afraid of the amazing fine (and guess what -- cops are following the buses so they can *give* amazing fines). Then invariably a busy street or expressway comes to a halt with screaching tires. And yes ive narowly avoided some fantastic collisions only by luck.

      Which indicates that you shouldn't be driving.

      There's this concept of keeping enough distance between you and the car in front so that if they slam on their brakes you have time to slam on yours - without being even close to hitting them.

      Only an idiot who drives way to close would manage to come close to crashing in those circumstances, let alone do so five times.

      What happens when the car in front sees some kid step out from between parked cars and you don't because from your viewpoint they are obscured by something? Do you almost have an accident because the other driver slams on their brakes?

      Braking hard is dangerous (especially if the guy behind you is changing radio stations at the time) but sometimes you need to. Hence you should always leave enough room and assume the other driver just might need to (or maybe the other driver is an idiot who will slam on his brakes because he missed his turn off)...

      Kids have underdeveloped peripheral vision, they are bad at judging speeds and distances of object moving at the speeds cars go, they are easily distracted, and often do not notice what is happening around them when focused on something (like getting their ball that just bounced onto the road, or seeing their mother who is an idiot and is on the other side of the road). All this means they will run onto roads...

      Stopping for buses to (un)load seems silly to me, a slow speed limit when the bus is (un)loading seems better.

    18. Re:57 known cases by abolith · · Score: 2, Funny

      yes he is fucking god damned serious. I know I *WAS* fined $1000 for that bullshit. oh did I forget to mention that kids were getting ON the bus not off? but the judge didn't see it that way I mean holy shit look out! some kid might be getting home from school at 7:00 A FUCKING M in the morning!

      --
      if you want "No More Hiroshimas" then I say "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."
    19. Re:57 known cases by ObviousGuy · · Score: 1

      I can think of the children falling out of the roller coaster during these low-speed loops.

      --
      I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
    20. Re:57 known cases by IHateUniqueNicks · · Score: 1

      Why should my tax dollars be used to prevent me from punching you in the nose?

      They:
      a) Shouldn't, as you pointed out, it's a large waste of money since it's not going to happen.
      b) Aren't. Name one bill or law that is the government is paying to support that prevents you from punching this person in the nose.
      c) Would not want to do, since they would wish to encourage you to punch him in the nose for the sheer joy of watching you get the crap kicked out of you in retaliation.

      All in all, I agree 100%

    21. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So let me get this straight, 50-year-old women are eligible for Darwin Awards but not kids? Am I the only one who sees the flaw inherent in this proposition?

    22. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have nearly gotten in 5 accidents because of this -- people slam on their breaks

      Them's the brakes. In the screwed up state where I live it's even worse -- if someone comes to a sudden stop right in front of you and you crash into them... it's YOUR fault!! Is that dumb or what!

    23. Re:57 known cases by Soulslayer · · Score: 1

      Not funny. True. Austin, Texas has the same sort of law. I moved down here not too long ago and was totally unaware of this particular bit of law till I was grumbling at the people on the opposite side of a divided road stopping for the bus across the street and my passenger informed me of it.

      Stopping both directions on a residential street makes sense. On a divided road especially one with a large median it seems a bit excessive.

      --


      Once more unto the breach dear friends...
    24. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually in CA pedestrians don't have the right of way unless they're on a crosswalk. Most people don't realize this... that is until they get into my car! They always wondered why I had crosshairs mounted on my hood.

      (There a nice web site where you search the California Vehicle Code to find the exact wording).

    25. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Has the whole world gone crazy, when congressmen are spending their budgets investigating a one in a million occurrence while ignoring the continual erosion of our civil liberties?

      There were far fewer than 57 cases of anthrax in the U.S. mail terrorism of last fall. Even more people use the mail than use roller coasters, so would you regard government actions to prevent the spread of anthrax through the mails as similar foolishness?

    26. Re:57 known cases by Soulslayer · · Score: 1

      Take care with statistics. They are next to useless for anything other than broad generalizations unless taken in context. And the context may be far more complicated that it first seems.

      If there was a boom in coaster building it follows that there were more people riding coasters. More people riding coasters means greater chance of accident.

      But there can be any number of additional factors. To make any real use of the numbers each accident would have to be sub-categorized into the exact nature of the accident and cause as well as what measures were in place to prevent such incidents and whether the patron ignored these measures.

      Patron error != coaster engineer responsibility anymore than loosening all your lug nuts on purpose and then driving at high speed while wearing no belt makes the resulting accident (and your probable death) the auto manufacturers fault.

      Regulating G-Forces is all well and good. But I would rather that if new laws were to be passed they be of the more sane variety such as enforcing requirements to have g-forces (negative and positive) listed on a sign near each coaster as well as warnings for that those with health problems should not ride.

      --


      Once more unto the breach dear friends...
    27. Re:57 known cases by kubrick · · Score: 1

      OTOH, we don't have any law that says you have to stop for pedestrians who step on the road outside of a cross-walk. I've heard that drivers in CA are obliged to come to a full stop even if the ped is jay-walking.

      If there is a person jaywalking in front of you, though, what are you going to do? Maintain the same speed and run them over? Darwin might support you but I'm sure the judge probably wouldn't (unless, of course, you would have caused a more gruesome accident by slowing down,because all the other drivers on the road were stupid enough to be driving wuth 2ft gaps between the cars, as sometimes happens here).

      --
      deus does not exist but if he does
    28. Re:57 known cases by Crazy+Diamond · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trend? I see incomplete data. Also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Where are statistics about ridership versus injuries?

      "If a drug caused 58 cases of brain damage, it would be pulled!" Do some research. Do you know how many thousands of deaths each year are attributed to very popular FDA approved OVER THE COUNTER drugs? Do Tylenol and Asprin ring a bell?

      Why don't you work on banning alcohol which causes orders of magnitude more deaths and permanent injuries than something as insignificant as roller coaster.

      Don't you understand that we have much greater problems to worry about in this country and regulating roller coasters is not the best place to spend our tax dollars right now?

      Today in terms of safety expenditures, we spend $0.0021 per mile for airlines, $0.00015 per mile for automobiles. If we spend $0.00015 per mile on roller coasters we would only be spending $75,000 per year. In 1997 there were 21920 auto fatalities, 3 roller coaster fatalities.

    29. Re:57 known cases by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      Kids damn well *should* qualify for darwin awards. Just because their parents have already managed to reproduce doesn't mean that the defective genes should be allowed to propogate further.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    30. Re:57 known cases by Interfacer · · Score: 1

      yes it is your right to damage your brain the way you want to, but then you shouldn't copmplain and sue the theme park if exactly that occurrs. americans are known for wanting to be protected from their own stupidity. btw my having a nail clipper on an airplane is a real problem?

    31. Re:57 known cases by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 0

      No, it's not dumb at all, it's YOUR responsibility to maintain a safe distance.. you did read that little booklet they gave you when you got your license, right?

      Really, what if the person has a completely valid reason for stopping suddenly (a child runs out into the street for example).. as far as I know, almost every state has laws to this effect..

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    32. Re:57 known cases by Mac+Nazgul · · Score: 1, Troll

      what about the morons behind you who are riding your rear bumper when you stop?! Even if you compensated for the driver in front of you, it won't protect you from the jerk behind you. I think was the point the original post was making.

      Besides the fact that most driver's license tests are a complete joke!

    33. Re:57 known cases by seinman · · Score: 1

      In many states, the law states that if you are on the other side of a road with a concrete or grass median, you do not have to stop. However, if you're on say a 4-lane road with just a yellow stripe down the middle, well you'd better believe that all four lanes have to stop.

    34. Re:57 known cases by LordKronos · · Score: 1

      Here in Michigan (and I always thought it was the same everywhere else), every school bus has blinking yellow and red lights. When the bus starts to slow down, the driver flips on the blinking yellow lights. When the bus comes to a complete stop, the driver throws on the red light and you are required to stop. The principle is the same as a trafic light, and you have about 5 seconds to make up your mind which way you are going to do things. As long as you are paying attention, there should be no reason to ever slam on the brakes. In over 10 years, I've never once even come close to getting into an accident in such a situation.

    35. Re:57 known cases by dennism · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sitting down and writing this guy a letter -- what a coincidence, he happens to be my rep.

      Not only has there not been an accident of this sort in Mass, the area he represents doesn't have any rollercoasters worth mentioning, if at all.

      What I don't understand is that he is elected to represent my area -- how does spearheading a bill that's trying to reduce the chances of something thats safer than walking across the street and isn't even a problem at all in my area represent me and the people who are also in this district?

      No wonder we have problems -- these guys don't even know what their job is...

      --
      dennis
    36. Re:57 known cases by dschuetz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The bottom line is that you will get used to the new law. I haven't heard anybody in VA complaining about it *ever*.

      You're about to hear a complaint.

      I grew up in MD, and have now lived in VA for 10 years, and both states have the same "stop for school bus" law -- including the provision that if there's a median between you and the bus, you don't need to stop. I grew up with the law, I understand its need, and I can live with it.

      What I don't understand is why we don't seem to have well-defined bus stops. First, let me explain the architecture of western Fairfax County -- lots of newish (5-15 years old) developments, off a main (4+ lane) highway, with no interconnections between the different builders' neighborhoods. So the buses don't go into the neighborhoods, they simply stop on a major commuter road and pick kids up. Then they drive on a block, and pick up 3 more kids. Two more blocks, and another 5 kids. It's crazy.

      Now, I don't mean to start an old fart whining battle, but when I grew up in Bethesda, we had TWO stops on our bus, about 10 blocks apart, and each serving something like 20-30 kids. Why on earth Fairfax can't at least make these kids all walk the extra three blocks to a central stop, and thus stop traffic only once instead of 5 times in less than a mile, is way beyond me.

      End of rant.

      Now, what were we discussing before? I honestly don't remember... ..sometimes the off-topic digressions really are more interesting. :)

    37. Re:57 known cases by IxnayOnTheIxnay · · Score: 3, Insightful

      what about the morons behind you who are riding your rear bumper when you stop?!

      If you aren't following so close that you need to slam on your brakes, then it shouldn't be a problem. And if you're behind a bus, be prepared, idiot!

    38. Re:57 known cases by mobets · · Score: 1

      Don't the busses have yellow lights that thry blink to warn you before they stop? Thats how it is here in TX. The buss driver hits a switch when he/she is getting close to a stop, turning on the yellow lights. Then the red lights start when the door is opened. If your busses don't work this way, maybe you should suggest it to your congressman/woman.

      --

      It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
    39. Re:57 known cases by zevans · · Score: 1

      You forgot to mention the vast right-wing conspiracy to disprove the theory of evolution. Fundamentalist Christians purchase bible-thumping politicians and force them to pass laws to prevent natural selection. Once this results in an America which has regressed to the point where it is inhabited only by slack-jawed droolmeisters, they will declare victory.

      Clearly the plan is proceeding satisfactorily. They have already acheived this in some localities, notably the Whitehouse.

      --
      "... and more and more now there are all kinds of electronic goodies available" -- Pink Floyd 1972
    40. Re:57 known cases by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      I think that's the law in Illinois as well.

      On four-lane roads where traffic moves in both directions, drivers traveling in the same direction as the school bus must stop when the red lights are flashing and the stop sign is extended. Students are not permitted to cross a four-lane roads where traffic is travels in both directions.
      http://www.hoffmanestates.com/Police/Safety_Alerts / olice_school_bus.htm

      I've never seen anyone almost cause an accident because of having to stop. The bus starts flashing as it slows down and the stop sign doesn't come out for about 10-15 seconds after the bust stops by which time most cars have started slowing down.

      Sure, it is a drag to have to stop for 5 minutes on your way to work. We wouldn't have a law like this if moron drivers hadn't run down kids as they passed stopped school busses going 50 mph. This is what happened to my sister-in-law when she was 10.

      Should a 10-yr old know enough to look before crossing the street? Sure.

      Should a 30 yr old know enough to slow down and look out for kids when passing a school bus. F-ing A right.

      The only way to get through to the 1% moron drivers that they need to slow down/stop around school busses is to hang the threat of $1,500 fine over their heads.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    41. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, that's right... kids _never_ cross the street when going _to_ school, only when they come home. ;-p

      Serves you right, dumbass. The law is the law, not your interpretation of what seems reasonable.

      Stop sign, eh? It's 4am, what are the chances that there are any other cars on the road. F-it.

      School bus? It's 7am, they're all _going_ to school, no need to stop!

      I hope you get raped on your insurance you 'tard.

    42. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly how many roller coasters are in Massachusetts?

    43. Re:57 known cases by flink · · Score: 1

      They've had the same law in MA since I was in grade school at least. I never saw it cause any problems. People just generally know to keep their eyes open when a school bus is around (they should anyway regardless of laws). I don't know if the MA fine is that severe though, I think it's more like $100.

      On the right of way thing... In Boston it is a point of pride among pedestrians that the normal mode of crossing the street is to hurl yourself into traffic. You can always spot the tourists waiting at the corner for the light on Mass. Ave. Of course, it made for a rude awakening the first time I went to New York ;-) I heard that pedestrian right of way dates back to the revolutionary war. Rebelling colonies like MA passed right of way laws while Torrie states like NY didn't.

    44. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey Einstein, he said he *almost* got into accidents. Which means he didn't. Which means his driving is fine.

    45. Re:57 known cases by Mostly+Monkey · · Score: 1

      I think he means, if the cars behind you are bumper-riding, It won't matter if you have time to stop. They'll slam into you anyway and possibly cause you to hit whatever is in front.

      --
      Chika Chik-ah... do-e ow ow.
    46. Re:57 known cases by LF11 · · Score: 1

      The cops following... good trick. Pee on them.

      Here in Machusetts, there's no yellow lights before red lights, just RED FLASHING LIGHTS! SLAM BRAKES!

      In MA, both lanes of the road are *required* to stop, except the opposite lane of a divided highway.

      -Chris

    47. Re:57 known cases by Paul+Komarek · · Score: 2

      It appears I should have been more clear. I thought the guy could not have been seriously objecting to this law. I've never lived in a state that didn't have this law (well, I've only lived in Washington and Pennsylvania). I think it's a damn good law.

      When one is driving in a school zone, behind a bus, or in a residential neighborhood, one should be watching for kids. However, there are a lot of reckless, impatient drivers out there. Heck, I've even seen one driver ignore school crossing guards and go blasting through a crosswalk while kids were crossing. I think it's clear that such a law is needed in order to curb the many idiots behind the law. For those of us with brains and a heart, we need to follow the law, too.

      In some places where drivers are particularly reckless, I've seen the schoolbus stop the bus across both lanes to stop people who ignore the fine. Fine by me. The schoolbus is in charge, as far as I'm concerned.

      -Paul Komarek

    48. Re:57 known cases by WinDoze · · Score: 1

      The fine in MA is $200. I happened to be standing in the police station a couple months ago when a woman came in to report a car running a bus stop sign and they said they'd issue a $200 ticket.

    49. Re:57 known cases by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

      duh, but the two cars won't hit the front car as fast or as hard.

    50. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you ever stop and look? Not all kids get on the bus because not all are going to the same school from the same bus stop.

      Parents don't feel safe sending their kids alone to the bus stop because they're afraid assholes like you will do just what you did. So they have to bring all their kids, the young ones who do not get on the 7AM bus but on the 9AM bus. And when the 7AM bus leaves, those parents head back home with the young kids in tow.

      I'm glad you got fined, they should have yanked your license. And the idiot who moderated it funny, I hope that moron never has kids.

    51. Re:57 known cases by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 2

      > Quoting from the MSNBC Article:
      >
      >"We have right now in America, a roller coaster arms
      >race where each amusement park advertises that they
      >have the fastest, the most dangerous ride," says
      >Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass.

      Has anyone, anywhere, ever heard a park declare "Come ride the most dangerous rollercoaster ever!"? I don't think so. Taller, faster, more inversions, newest gimmick, most coasters. All claims that are made. Scariest, wildest, biggest, again, all claims that are used. But most dangerous? I don't think so.

      From my vast personal experience, you are much more likely to get injured on an older coaster than a newer one. Expecially if you're big (like me... 6'3", 250lbs), since most of the older coasters assume a much smaller rider (so your knees get jammed into the car in front, restraints don't brab onto the correct parts of your anatomy, etc.)

      The most painful coaster I have ever ridden is "Outer Limits" Flight Into Fear". It's LIM-launched, completely in the dark, and has very, very sharp corners. The head restraints are only an inch or so away from each ear, and your head gets boxed around side to side for the entire 90 seconds of the ride. Ouch. After 6 rides in a row, I was dizzy :-)

      On the other hand, Raptor (which is shown in the video in this story) is gentle in comparasin. Amazing first drop, tonnes of great features, plenty of thrill. Still my favorite coaster of all time. But hardly a sharp jolt or nasty bump in the entire ride.

      --
      "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    52. Re:57 known cases by Rob+Parkhill · · Score: 2

      Here's my question... what the hell is the school bus driver thinking letting kids on/off the bus on a busy road or expressway? Yikes! Sounds to me like the right way to fix this problem is to not load/unload kids in the middle of an expressway. If a kid has to cross any busy road (without a set of lights/active corsswalk/overpass), then the bus is letting kids off in the wrong place.

      --
      "Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
    53. Re:57 known cases by istartedi · · Score: 1

      You've pointed out one of the critical problems with the current arrangement--if the bus stops on a divided highway, the kids are unprotected when they cross the other side. OTOH, it isn't practical to require the other side to stop because there might be trees, bushes, walls, etc. dividing the highway so it might not even be possible to see the bus. You could make it illegal to have children cross the divided highway (and repeal the requirement for anybody to stop when the bus is on such a highway) but then you would have to have the bus double back for any children who lived on the other side.

      However, the real crux of the problem is Fairfax's layout as you describe. You can't change it either because the Home Owners Association Taliban will be all over your case about cut-through traffic. Every once in a while some developer will screw up and create a delightful little short-cut. That happened in Kings Park and they went nuts with speed bumps, calming circles, etc. OK fine, I understand they don't want people going 50 mph by their front yards, the bumps don't bother me that much. Then again, maybe the sanest thing to do is have little gates that would raise only for buses, emergency vehicles, and certified residents. Then of course there would be a gate vandalism problem, so you would have to camera the gate and ticket people...

      Oh... I have all kinds of ideas about city planning... better to leave off here.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    54. Re:57 known cases by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      "There were far fewer than 57 cases of anthrax in the U.S. mail terrorism of last fall. Even more people use the mail than use roller coasters, so would you regard government actions to prevent the spread of anthrax through the mails as similar foolishness?"

      No. It is possible to prevent anthrax deaths through mail by a variety of methods. However, roller coasters are machines. No amount of regulation or maintenance will completely eliminate deaths. Nearly all of the deaths on roller coasters were caused by the rider or a freak accident. Government oversight of ride maintenance might, MIGHT reduce the average number of US coaster deaths per year (what is it, about 2? yeah...) by .01. Anthrax and roller coasters are completely different situations, and it is inappropiate to compare them like this.

    55. Re:57 known cases by dickens · · Score: 1

      Wrong. There are blinking yellow lights on MA school busses. There were 25 years ago when I rode them, and there are now when my kids ride them.

      BTW, the blinking red lights come on automatically when the door is opened, unless they're overridden by another switch.

      So perhaps you have a bus driver who isn't with the program... ?

    56. Re:57 known cases by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      There's this concept of keeping enough distance between you and the car in front so that if they slam on their brakes you have time to slam on yours - without being even close to hitting them.
      If the traffic is thick enough then that just isn't possible, period, so long as there are other drivers willing to tailgate (and if the traffic is thick enough, there *will* be drivers willing to tailgate.) Why do I say this? Because if you leave a large gap between you and the car in front of you, someone else pulls in front of you to fill that gap. So you slow down more to leave a gap behind him, and someone pulls in and fills *that* gap, and so on and so forth. If the rest of traffic is comforatble with a very small following distance, then there's nothing you as an individual driver can do to give yourself more room, short of not driving during busy times.
      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    57. Re:57 known cases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a common myth, perpetuated by people who have never tried to keep any sort of safe following distance. Two seconds. Try it, it's not as far as you think it is. You won't have people cutting in front of you much, and when they do, you don't have to slow down, really. There's a big difference between pulling back and slowing down, but most people don't realize that. And I've commuted on a busy interstate in Dallas, Texas, so don't tell me I've never seen REAL traffic.

    58. Re:57 known cases by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
      It's a real law in a lot of places, not just California. It's been that way since I was a kid riding the bus in the '70s and '80s here in Wisconsin. The fine isn't typically that absurdly large, though, although that might be a result of the fact that all legal operating costs for drivers in California are outrageously expensive, and not exclusive to just this fine alone.


      How annoying it is depends on how busy the traffic in the street is at the time. If it's a small subdivision road I don't mind. But when they block a 4 or 6-lane boulevard in rush hour I start getting annoyed. If the children aren't responsible enough to safely cross such a busy street, then don't force them to by dropping them off on the wrong side of the really busy street. Sure, the drivers who don't watch out when they see the bus stopping, and hit the kids trying to cross the street are incompetent and dangerous, but even more so the route planners who forced those kids to have to cross a busy street are even more incompetent and dangerous. At least drop them off at intersections with crosswalks, for crying out loud, instead of having surprise dashes across the street at a spot where drivers don't normally expect to see pedestrians crossing.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    59. Re:57 known cases by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 2

      You keep using that word prevent. While you obviously have no clue what it means, you bring up a good point: There is a difference between preventing something, and punishing something. Nothing is preventing you from punching me in the nose.. IF you choose to do it, you might be punished for it.. but nothing prevented you.

      On the other hand, this roller coaster thing is preventing people from doing what they like, before the fact. It's an attempt to protect people from themselves..

      Anyways, I'm a busy man and I don't waste my time arguing with children. Stop calling names, and maybe I'll give you the time of day.

    60. Re:57 known cases by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2

      I agree that maintaining two seconds is possible. I do not agree that two seconds is a safe following distance.

      --

      Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

    61. Re:57 known cases by chihowa · · Score: 1

      I used to drive a small (10 ton) truck for a part time job and we had to maintain 4 seconds between us and the car in from of us. Even that wasn't that big of a distance, but it left plenty of time for switching the radio station or really slow reaction times.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    62. Re:57 known cases by Caez · · Score: 0

      Yeah the bus thing is offtopic, but I really hate having to wait for the kids to get on. I come up to the sign, stop, and then go, whereas everyone else seems to think that it is a red light, not a stop sign. Maybe you're supposed to stop until the bus is fully (un)loaded, but it's pointless if you have to. You can see around the bus if you stop and then pull up slowly. Plus our buses have a big yellow stick to make kids walk farther in front of the bus, therefore making them better targets- i mean, more easy to avoid.

      --
      http://www.mistersampo.com
    63. Re:57 known cases by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 2

      Trend? I see incomplete data. Also a self-fulfilling prophecy. Where are statistics about ridership versus injuries?

      Self-fulfilling prophecy? How so? Ridership vs. injuries? If this or that roller coaster applies enough G-forces to cause damage once, why can't it do the same again? Incomplete data? Well, yes. Of course, you can't include every detail. There isn't an autopsy on every G-force related death, for example. The question should be whether there's enough data to prove a point? (And if not, should more research be done?)

      "If a drug caused 58 cases of brain damage, it would be pulled!" Do some research. Do you know how many thousands of deaths each year are attributed to very popular FDA approved OVER THE COUNTER drugs? Do Tylenol and Asprin ring a bell?

      What were you just saying about statistics on usage vs. injury (or something like that)? Plus there's a benefits vs. risks issue. If aspirin (for example) might prevent you from having a heart attack, maybe it's worth the risks. Even the benefit of preventing a little pain might be worth a miniscule risk (no risk at all for normal, healthy people, I suspect). What are the benefits of roller coasters? A few minutes' fun? That's not much of a benefit to gamble against permanent injury.

      Besides, aspirin bottles are covered with warnings. Aren't most of those deaths caused by misuse of the drug (taking it regularly over a long period of time without a doctor's recommendation, taking way too much) or by drug interactions, or by otherwise ignoring the warnings? Perhaps if roller coasters had warning signs about potentially causing brain damage (like they do about not riding if you have a heart condition), then I'd agree with you. If informed riders want to ride roller coasters despite the risks, then sure. But of course it would probably take legislation to require signs on roller coasters which apply more than a certain amount of G-force on riders...

      Why don't you work on banning alcohol which causes orders of magnitude more deaths and permanent injuries than something as insignificant as roller coaster.

      Because they tried that once and it caused more problems than it prevented? Besides, why waste time finding out exactly which cause of death is most dangerous? Why not just deal with them as they come up?

      Don't you understand that we have much greater problems to worry about in this country and regulating roller coasters is not the best place to spend our tax dollars right now?

      See, if I took the time to sort through and rank every problem with this country I could think of, I'd never spend any time solving them! My rule is more like "Anything that causes deaths is a problem and should be addressed", even if it's only 8 deaths so far. Yes drugs and cars are more dangerous than roller coasters, but the former can save lives, and the latter are vital to our economy -- and of course, they both already have lots of safety regulations applying to them!

      Anyway, what makes you think that a restriction on roller coaster G-forces would cost the government anything? Maximum G-force could be just another form to fill out. Testing the specifications of the roller coaster would be the job of the builders. Making sure they're under the limit would take two seconds for some bureaucrat. And how many roller coasters are built every year anyway? Last year 79 new roller coasters opened in the world (see www.rcdb.com). Doesn't exactly sound like a massive job to me.

      Today in terms of safety expenditures, we spend $0.0021 per mile for airlines, $0.00015 per mile for automobiles. If we spend $0.00015 per mile on roller coasters we would only be spending $75,000 per year. In 1997 there were 21920 auto fatalities, 3 roller coaster fatalities.

      A restriction on the maximum G-force a roller coaster rider should experience should be enforced one time per roller coaster -- during the building phase probably, or during initial safety testing. It's not a per-mile thing. I assume you were thinking about costs of regulating roller coasters in general, not just G-forces applied, right?

    64. Re:57 known cases by caryw · · Score: 1

      FCPS is a bunch of crack whores. Trust me, I know. (Chantilly, VA resident)

      One word of advice: don't EVER run those little red stop signs the busses shove out into the middle of the road. There is always a safety patrol in the back of the bus writing down liscense plate numbers. (I used to be one of them).

      Just FYI.

    65. Re:57 known cases by abolith · · Score: 2

      you fuckwad, I didn't stop because I didn't know about the fucking law. i do NOW, a bit on the late side.

      --
      if you want "No More Hiroshimas" then I say "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."
    66. Re:57 known cases by Crazy+Diamond · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are many factors involved and I'm not so sure people are willing to investigate them before coming to a conclusion. Think of the many things going on:
      1. More riders at amusement parks
      2. Constant rate of injuries
      3. Increasing G-force rides
      4. Increasing awareness and record keeping

      Possible Conclusions:
      1. Increased g-force rides causing more reported injuries? (trend?)
      2. Increasing ridership causing more reported injuries? (incomplete data?)
      3. Increasing awareness causing more reported injuries? (self fulfilling prophecy?)

      As for usage v.s. injuries I was talking about possible conclusion #2 regarding increasing ridership.

      After I pointed out Tylenol and Aspirin you started to understand the concept of acceptable risk, significantly more than 58 deaths is apparently something that many people are willing to accept for drugs that may be beneficial. Strangely enough it is often thought that if the FDA were to go through an clinicial trial of aspirin today they would not allow aspirin to be an OTC drug. By the way aspirin bottles don't list side effects.

      As for why I said we should focus on the biggest factors of death? Simple. It's because we have limited budgets. Maybe you might not mind being taxed even more but I know that I'm taxed far too much as it is. So if we are dealing with limited resources, and we are in the business of saving lives, I want to save the most lives for the available resources.

      By the way, you don't have to waste your time finding the most dangerous things, that's already been done for you:
      http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/datawh/statab/unpubd /morta bs/gmwki10.htm
      (/. inserts an extra space in the url)

      You can even find that in 1992, there were two people over the age of 100 that died as a result of injuries while on ice skates, skis, roller skates or skate boards. Total number of deaths were: 57.

      23 people were killed by lawn mowers.
      137 people literally starved to death.
      530 people died in their swimming pools.

      Even if you still want to regulate g-forces on roller coasters, you're looking in the wrong place to reduce the number of amusement park deaths. Most deaths are attributed to poor maintanence and human errors, not g-force brain injuries: http://members.aol.com/rides911/accidents.htm Remember that we have virtually no data on the actual number of lives that will be saved by the g-force limitations.

      As I said before, with limited resources, we don't have the luxury of inefficiency if we are trying to save lives.

  22. Re:Great... by tunah · · Score: 2
    The whole idea is to propell your body through time and space as quickly as possible.


    Look at me, mom! I'm going at three seconds a second! Wheeee!

    --
    Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
  23. It's the jerk by kenneth_martens · · Score: 2

    "G-forces on roller coasters last for nano-seconds," says [Six Flags president Gary] Story.
    I've ridden on the roller coasters at Six Flags, and from experience I can say that it isn't the high G-forces that are dangerous, it's the jerk. (Jerk is the term for rate of change of acceleration, for the physics-challenged.) I love the high G-forces, but especially in the newer magnetically accelerated rides, the jerk is just too much for my neck and back to handle. (And I'm only 21!) Any regulations that are put in place should address jerk as well as acceleration limits.

    1. Re:It's the jerk by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
      I can say that it isn't the high G-forces that are dangerous, it's the jerk

      So maybe I should start teaching third-order ODEs in my DiffEq class?

      Heh.

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    2. Re:It's the jerk by _bobs.pizza_ · · Score: 1

      Very true. Airplanes and trains have to be designed within certain jerk limits for operation. Rollercoasters shouldn't be an exception.

      Jerk - Third Derivitive of Position

      Speed never killed anyone. It's the jerk that hurts.

    3. Re:It's the jerk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Any regulations that are put in place should address jerk as well as acceleration limits.

      If jerks are outlawed then only outlaws will be jerks.

    4. Re:It's the jerk by ImaLamer · · Score: 2

      "G-forces on roller coasters last for nano-seconds," says [Six Flags president Gary] Story.

      Most rides only last for seconds anyways.

    5. Re:It's the jerk by rtaylor · · Score: 2

      And what exactly do you think the jerk is? It's an unwanted acceleration probably well above the limits they intend to put into place. It is the G-force they wish to remove.

      Curious people who complain about the things that are fixing the problem.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    6. Re:It's the jerk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speed never killed anyone. It's the jerk that hurts

      Yes, but what if the jerk is on speed? Bet you didn't think of that, did you?

  24. Bad G forces by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
    Actually, I've noticed that I've been getting less and less tolerant of roller coasters myself. For example, last summer the gf and I, and some friends, went to Six Flags and we did that Superman crazy ride, and all of the other rides also.

    Now, I thought I was just getting too old for this kind of thing (my age is a perfect number about to turn into a prime), but, then again, maybe the rides are getting crazier, and perhaps they're getting too crazy. In particular, I was extremely dizzy after some of the faster rides (didn't have any trouble with the spinning teacups or whatever). Also, the whole crew I was with (all about my age) got a little sick. Again, I thought it was because the old crew is getting too old to be flying around, but maybe it's the coasters, too. Any younger folk have similar experiences over the last few years?

    I don't know if I'll worry about it too much, since the tin foil hat I use to keep out the CIA beams isn't working so well either.

    --

    Come on, give it up, that's

    1. Re:Bad G forces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      my age is a perfect number about to turn into a prime

      As opposed to all those perfect numbers that are not one digit away from a prime.

    2. Re:Bad G forces by hdparm · · Score: 1
      (my age is a perfect number about to turn into a prime)

      What, too quick for you and you're only 40?

    3. Re:Bad G forces by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

      To all the mathematically challenged out there, he's 28.

      --
      Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    4. Re:Bad G forces by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, I thought I was just getting too old for this kind of thing (my age is a perfect number about to turn into a prime),

      You're six?

    5. Re:Bad G forces by Alioth · · Score: 2

      I've been getting MORE g-force tolerant as I've got older. But that may be to do with the fact I fly aerobatics (typically pull about 4Gs in the entry to a loop, around 5 during a split-S, and occasionally -2.5 during a "blown manuver" - these are sustained for a few seconds, not incredibly brief like on roller coasters). The only thing that gets me dizzy these days are inverted spins, but they are fun :-]

  25. What about roads and highways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The number of deaths from coasters is tiny in comparision to the number of lives we could save if we reduced the speed limit on roads and highways, along with better construction of the road and more helpful signs. The government regulators need to get their priorities straight.

    1. Re:What about roads and highways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we need to raise the speed limits and kick about half of the drivers off the damn roads.

      Lack of training is the cause of most accidents on the highway today.

    2. Re:What about roads and highways? by qqtortqq · · Score: 1

      Keep my highways the same speed or faster. Make other highways for morons that have this slower speed.

    3. Re:What about roads and highways? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lack of -training-? No, I think it's jsut that there's a lack of skilled drivers. That involves training, but is not the sole factor. We have drivers that are fearful, drivers that do things they shouldn't while driving (eating, talking on the phone, etc.), poor dextrousity, poor eyesight, and such. Training is just a small factor. Probably also a factor, is the ease that exists in getting a license. It shouldn't be as cheap as it is (cheap to renew, yes, after a basic review of continued competence), and the testing procedure shouldn't be as momentary - they should have to drive on, say, an obsticle course in an unfamiliar vehicle (one big cause for accidents), etc...

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    4. Re:What about roads and highways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Speaking about training and skill:

      Here is Europe, there is this persistent UL that in the US you do not need to pass a test to get your driving license, but that you buy it? Sorry for the silly question but: is there any truth to this? Is it only true in certain states? Or just mindless US-bashing?

    5. Re:What about roads and highways? by ROBOKATZ · · Score: 2
      I would start with implementing simple, obvious regulations on commercial transport (TRUCKS) before spending money on roads and signs.

      Obviously that's not going to happen, because god forbid we cost our domestic manufacturers money to buy lights to put on the sides of trucks or lower rear bumpers so people aren't decapitated when they run into a truck. We'll just keep blaming the mexicans and using highway truck deaths as an excuse to place restrictions on mexican imports, thank you very much.

    6. Re:What about roads and highways? by ROBOKATZ · · Score: 1
      You need to pass a test, but the test is usually a joke. As far as the 'buy' the license thing goes, unless you're illegally acquiring one you don't buy it. You pay a small processing fee of a few dollars. It sounds like anti-US embellishment trying to make it sound like the rich-get-to-drive-while-the-poor-can't-afford-to-b uy-a-license or something.

      In short, pretty much anyone can get a license. Money is only a barrier when you shouldn't have a license in the first place (e.g., you can't pass the test :)).

    7. Re:What about roads and highways? by ProfBooty · · Score: 1

      it used to be that many tests had you go out on the road, most now are on closed courses with no traffic. when i gotmy license 7 years ago, the driving portion of the test was less than 3 minutes. (no exageration).

      higher fines for careless driving, stricter licensing, more driver training(have a part of driver training be driving through something like an autocross course) would make the roads safer and allow for higher speed limits.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    8. Re:What about roads and highways? by Boiler99 · · Score: 1

      Out of curiosity, compared to the number of morons driving SUV's at 90+ MPH down the highway doing a quadruple-lane-change without a turn signal while talking on the cell phone and trying to eat Wendy's, how many semi-truck drivers have you seen doing crazy stuff? Not many.

      In general I think that truck drivers are some of the more safe and conscientious drivers on the road. You know that metal bar on the back of the trailer? Yeah that's what is supposed to protect you from being decapitated, all trucks have them. There has been quite an effort to increase the awareness of trucks on the road, including the lights you mentioned.

      I drive I-94 between Detroit and Chicago on a regular basis, and that is one of the most busy truck routes in the country. I've never had any trouble with trucks, I'd rather be around trucks than oblivious soccer moms or crazy ass teenagers any day.

    9. Re:What about roads and highways? by Longstaff · · Score: 4, Funny

      You know that metal bar on the back of the trailer? Yeah that's what is supposed to protect you from being decapitated, all trucks have them.

      If you had ever worked with large trucks first hand you'd realize that those things are largely worthless.

      First, there are loading docks that actually latch onto the underride bars to keep the trailers in place - how many times do you think people forget to disengage them before trying to drive off. This doesn't always tear the guard off, just weakens it.

      Second, those guards are often too high to stop a car from underriding. The theory is that they will hit your engine block, collapse and scrape along your hood - buckling it - until you stop. Um, yeah. That works great if you're in something with a hood that high. (hint: Metro and Miata drivers are screwed)

      Anyway, I agree with you that there is a higher percentage of safe and conscientious drivers with a CDL than not. The real problem is that 1 bad truck driver can 100x more lethal per incident than some poor schmuck in an Aspire with no clue. Unfortunately, there are too many schmucks on the road creating too many incidents.

      Back (sorta) on topic, there definitely needs to be *some* sort of regulation on coasters - operationally as well as mechanically. At the bare minimum, I'd like to see info outside the ride on max speed, max G, sustained G and running time - so I don't wait 2 hours in line for a 10 second ride! ;-).

    10. Re:What about roads and highways? by ROBOKATZ · · Score: 1

      My problem isn't with the people driving them so much as the trucks themselves. My biggest annoyance as far as drivers is oblivious old women in their 300HP+ luxury cars doing 40 on the on-ramp.

  26. Cedar Point, OH by Petrox · · Score: 1

    I am an Oberlin College student. To the uninitiated, Oberlin College (in Oberlin, OH) is about 30 minutes from Cedar Point, the amusemtn park with the largest number of roller coasters in the world. I went to Cedar Park for the first time today (I am a senior here, and will be graduating next week). I went on all of their roller coaters and truly believe that going on such big, amazing and exciting coasters was a transcendental experience. Smooth and surreal.

    I didn't wait in line for 2 hours to go on the world's most amazing coaster (the ironically named 'Millenium Force' coaster---truly astounding and so smooth!) to be limited in the number of G's they would let me pull. Come on now, I knew what I was getting myself into: the fear is part of the thrill.

    --
    sig my booty, check my website
    1. Re:Cedar Point, OH by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
      truly believe that going on such big, amazing and exciting coasters was a transcendental experience. Smooth and surreal.

      Well, after that description, I certainly believe you're at Oberlin...;-)

      --

      Come on, give it up, that's

    2. Re:Cedar Point, OH by havblue · · Score: 1

      Obviously though, the Millenium Force isn't the only rollercoaster at Cedar Point. While I unfortunately haven't been to the park for a couple years and therefore haven't had the opportunity to ride Millenium, I can say there are good rides and bad ones. My two favorites: The Magnum (former tallest steel at Cedar Point) and the Raptor (legs free coaster) They're both incredibly exciting while smooth at the same time. My two lease favorites: The Mean Streak (gigantic wooden) and the Mantis (stand-up) The Mean Streak was so jarring that while it was an exciting coaster, it was mostly painful and nautious. I felt kinda sick after riding this one. My limbs just aren't what they were when I was in high school 5 years ago. The Mantis was one of the worst coasters I've ever been on. While you wouldn't think a steel to be so jarring, this one whips you from one direction to the next rapidly, slamming your head against the harness. The G-forces seem pretty high and discomforting, because when you finally get off you feel miserable, at least my dad and I did. To make matters even worse, as this is a stand-up coaster, you have to sit on what basically amounts to a bicycle seat. Instead of your cushy rump taking the force, it all goes to... your groin and your legs. "That will chafe my willie." I'm in pain just talking about it. Good luck walking afterwards. Heyyyyy, you probably know my friend Atley right? He went to Oberlin.

  27. No by vjlen · · Score: 1

    I spent a week last summer going to Kings Island, Cedar Point and Six Flags Ohio to ride nothing but coasters.

    I'm not the pinnacle of health, but except for the headache I got after riding the Tidal Wave in Six Flags Gurnee 30 times straight I've never had a problem with any roller coaster.

    YMMV, of coursre.

  28. Don't be a jerk. by jimhill · · Score: 2

    I'm probably pissing into the wind here, but would you mind explaining exactly why you found it necessary to spoil a newly-released movie with your sig?

    --
    Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus
    1. Re:Don't be a jerk. by Carbonite · · Score: 1

      Hey buddy, Dokoo is spelled Dooku and those are Clonetroopers, Stormtroopers. Thanks for spoiling it, jackass.

      --
      ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
    2. Re:Don't be a jerk. by TurboThy · · Score: 1

      Erm....haven't you all seen episode IV-VI? What is there to spoil, when you have seen 5 hours of the films *after* this one?

      --
      78% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
    3. Re:Don't be a jerk. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish people who commented on sigs would quote the sig in question.

    4. Re:Don't be a jerk. by Carbonite · · Score: 1

      It wasn't spoiled for me, I'd already seen it twice. What that guy did was list plot points that are NOT revealed in the original trilogy.

      Saying that Anakin becomes Darth Vader, fine.

      Divulging the plot of a movie that's been released for only a few days, not fine.

      --
      ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
  29. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hrm.... you could always have constant velocity... your body doesn't feel the G's, but your eyes see you moving really fast...

  30. McDonalds Coffee incident by alphaseven · · Score: 2, Informative

    Its similar to the stupid McDonalds Coffee incident.

    Hey, that poor lady needed skin grafts, they shouldn't have been serving coffee that damn hot. If they just offered to pay for her medical bills they could have avoided the whole thing.

    McFacts about the McDonalds Coffee Lawsuit

    Aside from that, I agree that this roller coaster law is stupid, but if you know the facts of the coffee case its a bad example.

    1. Re:McDonalds Coffee incident by Soulslayer · · Score: 1

      Eh? I hate this case.

      Boiling water will cause 1st and second degree burns. Not a shock.

      Frsh coffe is just below boiling temp.

      Handicapped indeividuals may need to rely on non-handicapped individuals for assistance in performing certain actions. This is not demeaning, it is merely common sense.

      Attempting to remove a coffee lid (which by the time you are 87 I hope you know is designed to stay on the cup to prevent spilling and can be difficult to remove) without the full use of your fingers while it is clasped between your legs in an awkward position while sitting in a car is not wise.

      Particularly when you have another person in the car who is perfectly capable of doing that for you.

      Basically they sued after she made a number of poor judgement calls and burned her self severely. The accident is not amusing, but the law suit was incredibly stupid. That she won is just further indication that we've reached a point where americans are so self involved that when the world does not work for them they must instantly blame someone else.

      --


      Once more unto the breach dear friends...
    2. Re:McDonalds Coffee incident by jonerik · · Score: 2

      Hey, that poor lady needed skin grafts, they shouldn't have been serving coffee that damn hot. If they just offered to pay for her medical bills they could have avoided the whole thing.

      When I order coffee, I expect that it's going to be hot. Any rational person does. As a result, you try to avoid situations in which it'll get spilled on you (like placing it between your legs in a car), whether it's 120 degrees or 200 degrees. As far as I'm concerned the company has done their job as long as they serve the coffee in a container that can stand up to the heat and has sufficient insulation not to burn my hand while I'm holding the cup. I'm not much of a fan of fast food companies, but McDonald's got screwed in this instance.

    3. Re:McDonalds Coffee incident by jratcliffe · · Score: 1

      McFacts? Well, sort of. This link is from the Ohio Trial Lawyers Assoc., not exactly an unbiased source.

  31. Re:Great... by dei_ukdkbr · · Score: 1

    "I was about to be regulated because they were worried about what consenting adults did in their spare time" Kinda reminds me of the usless war on drugs ...

  32. Re:Great... by neuroticia · · Score: 3, Funny

    If that argument worked, do you think that marajuana, heroin, meth, e, etc. etc. etc. would be illegal?

    The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.

    And those who are willing to risk them have the job of coming up with new un-regulated ways of risking them.

    Speeds along the process of innovation, and adds some interesting entries to the Darwin Awards timeline.

    -Sara

  33. McD's coffee incident - OT... by LoadStar · · Score: 1

    As long as we're riding the off-topic train...

    That page clearly takes the side of the plaintiff. This page is a much fairer look at the facts of the lawsuit.

    The plaintiff in the lawsuit was an 81 year old arthritic individual, who was a passenger in a sports style car with leather or leather-like seats. They ordered a coffee with cream, and from what I understand (this part may not be correct) the plaintiff declined the offer of the store to add the cream for the plaintiff.

    The plaintiff then proceeded to wedge the coffee between her legs as she tried to remove the cover. As she was arthritic, her attempts to remove the cover caused the coffee to spill, and because the seats were leather or leather-like, the coffee pooled under her lap.

    The driver, her grandson, failed to get immediate help for her, apparently only having her exit the vehicle "to cool off." As a result, the burns were significantly worse than they should have been - and partially self-inflicted to boot.

    There are two sides to every story...

    1. Re:McD's coffee incident - OT... by bshanks · · Score: 1

      still doesn't seem like her fault. what's wrong with having leather seats, being arthritic, and opening coffee? if i were in that position i would reasonably expect that any burns i would suffer from a spill would be minor.

    2. Re:McD's coffee incident - OT... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What's wrong with having leather seats, being arthritic, and opening coffee?

      Between your legs?

      Hmm, yeah actually, nothing -- why don't you try it some time and see how that turns out for ya.

  34. More G force than Astronauts? Well, yes but... by RockyMountain · · Score: 5, Informative
    As a former aerobatic pilot, who frequently flew between -4 and +6 G, I'm familiar with this subject matter. I'm no longer active in this sport because of inner ear dammage, probably unrelated to the aerobatic activity.

    Space launches have steadily reduced their peak G forces over the years. During the Mercury and Gemini programs, the Astronauts were exposed to as much G force as modern jet fighters do in a dogfight, and for as long. The heavier Saturn launch system of Apollo was gentler, and the Space shuttle is very tame by comparison. Russian cosmonauts still get a better (in roler-coaster terms) ride than their American counterparts.

    Given how tame the shuttle is, maybe it's technically true, if misleading, to say that roler coasters give the rider more G that an Astronaut experiences. (They did after all say "astronaut", not "cosmonaut") A space shuttle jockey, just barely goes over 3G. Some roler coasters may peak at 5. But here's the difference: The shuttle sustains the 3G for the entire duration of the post-SRB-separation boost. That's several minutes of continuous burn. I doubt whether any roler coaster ever peaks over 3G for more than 2 or 3 seconds at a time, if that.

    The physiological risks associated with high G are not determined by the magnitude of the G alone, but mainly by other factors:

    The duration that high G is sustained. Long duration deprives the brain of blood long enough to cause very bad things to happen. No real risk there on roler coasters.

    The onset-rate. How suddenly the G force starts and stops. High onset rates cause all kinds of problems, including back and neck problems, inner ear problems, and even brain dammage in extreme cases. Once again, no issue in a well-designed roler coaster.

    Head movement. High G forces, especially combined with high onset rates, are aggrivated by sudden head rotation. This can be a problem even if the G forces are only momentary. Inner ear problems can result. Roller-coaster designers have little control over this factor, so perhaps it is a real concern.

    Negative G. (Negative means the blood rushes to your head). High negative G can cause all kinds of problems, including burst blood vessels in the eyes. I've personally never heard of a roler coaster that goes beyond about -0.5G or so, and even then for less than a second, so I doubt that this is an issue.

    Sudden transitions from positive to negative, or vice-verca. All the bad things associated with high positive G are accentuated if it immediately follows a period of negative. And vice verca if negative follows a period of positive. This will become a real issue if roler coasters ever start exploring the negative regime. Frankly, I doubt that they will. The average rider views positive G's as exhilirating fun, but would find negative to be obnoxious and uncomfortable.

    Frankly, I'm much more worried about the structural design and maintenence of the coaster than the G-profile. But then, I've flown to WAY higher positive and negative G forces than either roler coaster or space shuttle experience, and I know the breathing techniques, and I know to keep my head relatively still. Roler coasters all seem really disappointing to me.

  35. Good mathematical question by Debillitatus · · Score: 2
    As opposed to all those perfect numbers that are not one digit away from a prime.

    Two things:

    1. There's only one that would really belong to a /. poster.

    2. Interesting question: are perfect numbers always followed by primes? I can't think of any reason why this should or shouldn't be true.
    --

    Come on, give it up, that's

    1. Re:Good mathematical question by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      25 ... 26

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
    2. Re:Good mathematical question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, 25 is not a perfect number (see http://primes.utm.edu/glossary/page.php/PerfectNum ber.html).
      Second, the original poster (the one whose age is a perfect number and about to be a prime) is, I'm guessing, 28 years old and is almost 29.

    3. Re:Good mathematical question by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      oh duh, my bad

      sorry too many years since math class, and now that you mention it I can't even figure out why I chose 25 heh

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
    4. Re:Good mathematical question by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      wow it's been a long time since I dabbled with math, your right

      and to show I learned something heres the output of a quick program I just wrote to find perfect/prime pairs in the acceptable range..

      28/29
      36/37
      66/67
      78/79

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
  36. Video Game companies in big trouble... by The_Bitter_Admin · · Score: 1

    *Gasp*
    I didn't realize that Roller Coasters and G-Force could be that dangerous.
    Guess I will have to go back to DOOM on my 486...
    Curse this new technology.
    I hate Moore's law...

    --
    I hate sigs.
  37. Was I the only one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who saw the headline and thought: Coasters == CD-Rs, and recalled the story a while back about people spinning up CDs with a clothesdryer motor to a rim speed of about .5 sonic before they exploded? And thought, "Oh great, another repost".

    ~blake

  38. Maybe it's the rattling they need to control. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

    I happen to prefer roller coasters that are Very Fast and Very Smooth. The Alpengheist at Busch Gardens and The Hulk at Universal are the best I've been on. They often create very high g-forces when pulling curves. Yet, I feel pretty good when I disembark.

    The other trend in coasters is ones that don't go so fast, but they take turns very hard and shake you up quite a bit. These tend to give me headaches. Sometimes I don't feel so good after these - it feels a bit like jumping out of a car. The coaster at New York, New York in Las Vegas is the best example I can give of this type. If you're ridden it, you know what I mean.

    It's different than the old wooden coasters that are all over the place - those shake due to poor tolerences, these are all metal, by design.

    Now, as much as I hate to use such a sad example, it might make sense to look at babies that are swung around alot, vs. those that are shaken alot. The swinging babies tend to be just fine. Shaking is bad for the brain.

    Besides the physiological side-effects, you'd have to imagine that kind of motion could take a more severe toll on the superstructure of the roller coaster.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Maybe it's the rattling they need to control. by RideMan · · Score: 1

      Alpengeist is a pretty good example of why this regulation is so meaningless. Alpengeist is a modern, well-designed coaster, and for the convenience of Physics students, Busch Gardens has mounted crude accelerometers to the backs of certain seats.

      If you sit in the seat right behind the accelerometer you can see dynamically that the ride doesn't ever exceed +4G, and when it does so, does so very quickly. And New Jersey is talking about limits up to +6G for impulse. So the limits will have no significant effect on new rides, old rides probably already comply...so the new regulation accomplishes nothing.

      --Dave Althoff, Jr.

  39. Just Rode Goliath! by JungleBoy · · Score: 1

    I recently rode Goliath a couple times. Its a great ride. That long corkscrew got me too (though I remember it being a descending corkscrew). The first time was really bad for me. Tunnel vision all the way. I almost blacked out. It was great. The second time it wasn't so bad, only fuzzy vision around the edges. I guess thats what its like to have the blood pulled out of your head and shoved into your legs. For me this kicked is just at the end of the corkscrew, so it wasn't a continuous sensation. This is exactly why I ride roller coasters. I wish I had an accelerometer to know how many positive Gs were in that turn.

    Any way here is a URL to the coaster: Goliath.

    Have fun!
    The JungleBoy

    --
    "You never know when some crazed rodent with cold feet might be running loose in your pants."
    -Calvin
    1. Re:Just Rode Goliath! by Tackhead · · Score: 2
      > I wish I had an accelerometer to know how many positive Gs were in that turn.

      According to a groups.google.com search, between 3.9 and 4.5Gs. Many rides pull those kinds of Gs, but Goliath is unusual in that the Gs are sustained throughout the helix.

      After reading this thread, I have only one thing to say:

      "Fuck, I've got to ride that thing!"

    2. Re:Just Rode Goliath! by TomServo · · Score: 1

      You really, really do need to ride it. I couldn't ride roller coasters (too scared) until about July of last year, then my friends took me there and forced me to ride Goliath. After going hoarse screaming for my mom, I had so much adrenaline running through me that I barely knew what to do with myself. That initial drop is the single most insane thing I've ever experienced. I've ridden it 3 more times since then, and it *never* gets old ;)

  40. Re:Great... by G-funk · · Score: 2

    You can't go through time and space as quickly as possible. They're mutually exclusive ;-)

    The quicker you go, the slower you go through time.

    --
    Send lawyers, guns, and money!
  41. Your a fucking asshole by lowell · · Score: 0, Troll

    fucking dick, spoiler mother fucker, i will eat your children for that, fucker, you have been warned.

    PS the lameness filter that picks up on all caps suck ass, if i want to yell I will, fucking GEEKS

  42. Expensive and always the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've never understood why people pay a lot of money to ride something that is essentially the same every time. I get bored after a couple of runs.
    Flying a little plane is a lot more fun, and can often be cheaper. $70/hour is much more interesting than $5/minute for most rides.

  43. Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by aralin · · Score: 2

    ... but HOW EXACTLY you are going to get more than 1-G from a rollercoaster? These things use the gravity force to accelerate and decelerate. Let's say that the coaster starts straight down, even then the acceleration cannot surpass 1-G evidently. Unless you put something in the road of the coaster or make it slow down a lot more than the gravity pull during the way up, I cannot imagine that its going to decelerate way more than 1-G. Of course, the speeds can go pretty high, but we were talking about the acceleration, right?

    --
    If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    1. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by freeweed · · Score: 2

      Easy. Imagine a coaster that accelerates down for a while. Yes, only at 1G. But it accumulates a LOT of speed during that time.

      Now, the coaster reaches the end of the slope, and suddenly the track curves upwards. Pull out your slide-rule, and figure out the force experienced by the riders in that 1/10th of a second (remember, ALL of their accumulated downwards velocity has been cancelled here).

      It's the sudden ups and downs you experience with a coaster that cause such incredible G forces - bassically, if Mr. Newton was right, the track as you curve back up is going to impose several G's on you in order to change your direction so violently.

      --
      Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    2. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the acceleration, it's the change of direction from down to up. The curve at the bottom of a hill (or in a helix) is where you gain the most positive g's, pushing you Down in to you seat. You are correct in that you will not get great than +1 g pushing you to the BACK of the train unless the ride has a launch mechanism. There are a few coasters out there today that launch from ground level, one being Hypersonic in Virginia, which does 0-80 in 1.8 seconds. I think that is about +5 g's, give or take, pushing you BACK in your seat. When you hit the slope going up, you experience downward g's. Here is a link to info and pictures of the ride. http://www.rcdb.com/installationdetail729.htm

    3. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by russh347 · · Score: 1
      It's not the acceleration, it's the change of direction from down to up.


      Um... that's called acceleration. You slept through physics too.
    4. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by russh347 · · Score: 1
      Yep, You slept through physics...

      Acceleration is not just what happens when you step on the gas. It's also what happens when you step on the brake, corner... any change in the magnitude or direction of the velocity vector.

    5. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These things use the gravity force to accelerate and decelerate.

      But gravity isn't all they use. They also use a track, which is what makes rollcoasters different from skydiving. The track pushes up against the rollercoaster. When the track curves and cars are moving along it, it can accelerate the cars greater than 1G.

      A simplistic way of looking at it, would be to go back to skydiving, on a planet with no atmosphere and you've forgotten your parachute. When you jump out of the plane -- oops, no atmosphere .. um.. when you jump out of your rocketship -- you accelerate at 1G toward the planet surface. You reach for your cord and then remember that you forgot your parachute (not that it would help you, because there's no atmosphere), and then you scream francticly as the last act of your life. But no one hears you scream, because there's no atmosphere. I guess you're screaming into your oxygen mask. If you've got a radio in your helmet to talk to the guy flying the rocketship, maybe he can hear you scream. Um, there is a guy flying the rocketship, isn't there? Won't it crash if no one is flying it? Oh, maybe that's why you jumped out -- it was about to crash anyway. Ok, I guess that makes sense. So anyway, no one hears you scream.

      (I'm starting to not like this example. I recommend you stick to skydiving on planets with atmospheres. And remember to bring your parachute. And there should be a pilot for the airplane, some guy who isn't jumping with you.)

      Anyway, you accelerate at 1G toward the rocky surface, due to gravity, and only gravity. Then something interesting happens when you reach the surface: another force comes into play. The planet decides to push against you. At this point -- when you go from fast to still in an instant -- you encounter acceleration greater than 1 G. A lot greater. You can probably imagine what it's like and it'll intuitively make sense to you, I think.

      The rollercoaster forces are kind of like that last force at the bottom of a parachuteless skydive, except tamer.

    6. Re:Maybe I slept on physics lessons, .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By using centripetal forces + gravity

      --Joey

  44. Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by shoemakc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I do know that I blacked out for a few seconds while riding Nitro in Six Flags / New Jersey. It was right at the top of a peak and I imagine the coaster was pulling some serious negative G's.

    Anyway...I remember my vision starting to darken and then go black....and returning a few seconds later. I'm a young adult, in fairly good shape and could see how this could become a serious problem for other riders.

    Remember....think back to early Coney Island when there were very few safety regulations, and injury was more the norm then the exception.

    -Chris

    --
    --an unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys--
    1. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by prockcore · · Score: 2

      Exactly.. people are going on and on about how there are "only XX cases in the entire world!"

      How about the unreported cases? I almost blacked out on a roller coaster at magic mountain. My vision started to go grey at the bottom of a large drop.

      Did I call the authorities? Did I report it to anyone? Nope. And I bet you didn't either. That doesn't mean it's safe. People blacking out or greying out might be a fairly common occurance.. but no one reports it because they aren't "harmed". Who knows what kind of damage it could cause.

    2. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Peyna · · Score: 2

      Does anyone else experience terrible headaches after riding roller coasters? Usually it takes a few, but it seems like every time I go to Cedar Point or King's Island I leave with a pounding headache. If this is more common than I think; I doubt anyone reports it.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Muad'Dave · · Score: 2
      I don't think the pulling of negative G's caused your blackout. Negative G's tend to cause 'red out', where the blood is forced into the brain (and eyes) causing much worse problems than blacking out. It sounds like the rollercoaster's previous dip is what caused your blackout, and it happened to occur at the next peak as apoxia took hold of your brain. Just MHO.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    4. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That might have something to do with the 8 pounds of
      cotton candy you ate?

    5. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by hottoh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You sir are an 1d10t. - Gs = blood to the head.

    6. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No roller coaster pulls "serious negative Gs". First off, military aircraft are only rated for about 4 negative Gs, even though they pull 9+ positive Gs. Second, roller coasters don't pull negative G's because it's a safety risk. They get close to 0 Gs, perhaps, but they don't go negative so you don't go flying off the top of the coaster if your safety harness fails.

      And if you're getting tunnel vision, just clench your stomach muscles (and leg muscles, if you want). That constricts the blood vessels down there, preventing blood from draining to your feet. That keeps blood near the brain, which will help prevent blackouts.

    7. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by mrjah · · Score: 1

      I guarantee you that you didn't black out due to negative Gs.

      And I further guarantee you that even if you were particularly sensitive to negative Gs, you certainly would not experience them on Nitro at Six Flags New Jersey. Not even at the top of a hill; not even on the first drop.

    8. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by DigiBoi · · Score: 1

      I almost blacked out on a roller coaster at magic mountain.

      I almost shit my pants on one at Valley Fair

      but no one reports it because they aren't "harmed".

      well, duh. no harm, no foul.

      -benb

      --
      I put on my robe and wizard hat.
    9. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by SamTheButcher · · Score: 1
      I pretty much stopped riding coasters in my early 20's because I started to black out on them, which I determined for me, was not good.

      So I stopped riding, I didn't need someone to tell me to stop riding. But perhaps I'm a bit more intelligent than some coaster-riding dopes who would say "hey, dude, I blacked out! Cool! Let's ride again" and end up hurting themselves.

      Then again, that's why they're called the Darwin Awards....

    10. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the top of a peak you get close to 0 G that does not cause any blackout, it just makes you scared. Negative G's do not cause blackout either, they cause redout.

    11. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by malIgna · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a pretty easy thing to solve. Don't ride rollercoasters.

      --
      Nothing to see here, move along.
    12. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by benwb · · Score: 2

      The entire reason I ride roller coasters is so I can pretend to be a fighter pilot and tense up my stomach muscles, hold my breath, and try not to pass out from the g-force.

    13. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by [l0l]Bobo · · Score: 1
      I remember my vision starting to darken and then go black....and returning a few seconds later

      THat would be the effect of a lack of blood circulation of your brain, caused by positive G's.

    14. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      In modern coaster riding, the number of people killed by the forces of a roller coaster is, as I remember 2. That is perhaps even too high. The forces on a roller coaster are not deadly, no matter how much you have been lead to believe. Read up on it.

    15. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      This is not a problem. The coaster was designed to do this. The "damage" it causes is well known. The year is 2002, and the effects of G-forces on the human body are, believe it or not, known. And you are not endangared by this. Read about the dangers of brief, rare "high"-G exposure on rides like this and you will discover that it IS NOT a health problem.

    16. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by Alioth · · Score: 2

      I don't think age has a lot to do with G-force tolerance (well, at least the normal active agebracket). I took a friend of mine (who's a new private pilot) who's 18 years old and in good physical condition up in the Decathalon to do some aerobatics. He blacked out during a split-S that pulled 4.5Gs, and complained of nausea (so we went home after that one). One the other hand, one of the aerobatic instructors at H&R at La Porte is 80 years old and happily pulls over 5Gs without a problem. I've known aerobatic instructors who look terribly unfit (250lb fat guys) who would be tired out from a mile walk, but who don't have a problem yanking and banking.

    17. Re:Blackout on Nitro in New Jersey by SamTheButcher · · Score: 1
      I'm sure it's a low number, and I'm not saying that it was the forces of the coaster. I'm just saying that for me, blacking out was kind of a sign that maybe coasters weren't for me, anymore, at least not the inverted-g's coasters. A normal up/down around-the-corner coaster is fine.

      I guess what Im trying to say is that I might have been anemic at the time, which might have contributed to my blackout, but it had never happened before, so I just put coasters on hold.

  45. in related news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In related news, it is reported that New Jersey is drafting legislation to prohibit children from nodding their heads yes and no. The sudden acceleration forces due to nodding is the cause of several hundred unknown injuries per year as well as three unexplained deaths.

  46. Coasters? by wheany · · Score: 1

    Does it mean crappy cd-burners can't get faster?

    Even though they fail to burn cds, they must not spin fast enough for them to disintegrate.

    *rimshot*

  47. Re:New Jersey??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, we secretly siezed control of the federal government, so technically we're a country now. We did everything important before that anyway. Go back to your wheat fields in Kansas or wherever you come from.

  48. Some limits are necessary... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the record - I am scared shitless of roller coasters. Mainly because I've got a mechanical engineering background and I just don't have a lot of confidence in the bozos that are supposed to be maintaining the rides - Six Flags, Disney, whatever. I've been on TWO roller coaster rides in my entire life - Kiddie Land when I was 5 and Great America when I was about 21 (I was physically dragged onto the ride by my friend...).

    Hated the things both times... So I avoid them. But some people (like my buddy) love the things - can't get enough of them.

    I say - to each his own - enjoy what you want. BUT, let's be realistic - how many G's are too many? At some point you start killing people, and that cuts down on ridership, so that's a definate ceiling - I don't think too many people would disagree...

    Let's move on down the scale - when 50% of the riders black out from the blood pooling in their legs? Even pilots and astronauts have pressure-suits to force the blood back into their brains - but definately not some roller coaster rider. What are the permanent effects of removing blood from the brain for extended periods of time? Multiple times in a row (loop-'d-loops, dips, etc...)? The information is probably classified by the Air Force so we'll probably never really know.

    So let's drop down even lower - how many G's do you have to pull to still get a good rush, but not black out or break a neck or cause a seizure? Could ya live with that as a ceiling? If not, why?

    Remember - I'm not promoting the law - I'm just curious as to what the argument could possibly be to allow a ride operator to cause people to black out...(maybe if they told them - some sort of disclaimer...but they'd need to be fully informed...)

  49. not "considerably greater" than race cars by Eric+Seppanen · · Score: 2
    3 Gs in a corner is typical for a high-performance open-wheel race car, when you're doing everything right. That's corner after corner, lap after lap, until the race is over, and that's a lot longer than a roller coaster ride.

    Crashing race cars, however, routinely see over 30 Gs. That's ten times the force on your body. Real problems start around 40-50 Gs, because you can fracture your neck or the base of your skull from the deceleration alone. With the proper safety gear, even these crashes are survivable.

    Still, rollercoasters are hardly in the same category, unless someone plans on building a coaster that randomly flies off the track and smashes into a wall.

    --
    314-15-9265
    1. Re:not "considerably greater" than race cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still, rollercoasters are hardly in the same category, unless someone plans on building a coaster that randomly flies off the track and smashes into a wall.

      Surely a Microsoft Rollercoaster?

  50. Hey baby... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a rollercoaster.
    Ride me.
    Feel the power of 'G'.
    It's such a thrill you'll lose track of time,
    and when it's over you'll be left with a craving for more.
    You'll ride me again and again and again.
    Nothing will ever be the same, ever be as great, as when you are riding me.

  51. Re:G-forces or ...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    was it some weed

  52. G-Force by KinkyClown · · Score: 1

    First thing that cam to mind while reading this: "How the hell can you limit a G-Force 4?" Nerdism at it's peek I guess :)

  53. Risk Management given incomplete information by jbf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm reading a lot of people's statements about P(killed on ride) vs P(killed in car on way home). This isn't the only story: long-term effects are also a big deal. In addition, even that probability is so corrupted by noise (you can get great numbers for driving, but not so great numbers for flying, because the rates of injury/death for flying is so low) that even if such signs were posted, they would be completely meaningless. For example, if no one had ever died or been injured on coaster A, what would you post? "You have a 0% probability of being injured on this ride?" That's a liability lawsuit waiting to happen.

    So what if we said "don't regulate dining establishments; if you don't want to get Hepatitis, then you can make your own evaluation of the place's cleanliness. On it's face, this seems outrageous; however, most of us have the skills to decide if a food preparation place is hygenically adequate. How many of us (or the general populace) has the skills to decide if a roller-coaster ride is safe, esp long-term? (I'm paranoid about things like this, to the extent that I don't do LASIK because there are no 50-year studies).

    Summation: informed consent is a good thing; some level of protecting idiots from themselves is also important, especially since most of us don't have domain knowledge in roller-coaster design. Safety vs car is apples-to-oranges, hence we should require, for example, 99th percentile Gs/time and jerk/time graphs, just like we have "SAR" for cell phones, for which no one actually knows safety parameters... By this logic, however, we should grade food establishments, make them post their grades, but never shut someone down for an F...

    1. Re:Risk Management given incomplete information by Fixer · · Score: 1
      Summation: informed consent is a good thing; some level of protecting idiots from themselves is also important, especially since most of us don't have domain knowledge in roller-coaster design. Safety vs car is apples-to-oranges, hence we should require, for example, 99th percentile Gs/time and jerk/time graphs, just like we have "SAR" for cell phones, for which no one actually knows safety parameters... By this logic, however, we should grade food establishments, make them post their grades, but never shut someone down for an F...

      And that's not a bad idea. I have no business telling you what you can and can't do. If you want to go eat at "Mama's Fat Grill" with it's F- rating, that's your funeral.

      It is my opinion that, if the risks are known, that you will do what is best for yourself, even if that is engaging in risky behavior.

      --
      "Avast! Prepare for the rodgering!" THWACK! "Arrr.. me nards.."
    2. Re:Risk Management given incomplete information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I don't do LASIK because there are no 50-year studies
      I would NOT recommend LASIK (sp?) to anyone that didn't absolutely need it. I didn't have much of a choice, myself; I was 18 years old (late 1997), and it was either LASIK or blindness in both eyes. I was lucky enough to have the procedure done by the guy who invented it, but I must say that my vision is generally poorer than what it was years ago. Previously, my right eye was great and my left eye was the main vision problem. Now, my left eye is decent and my right eye is blurry as hell. I now have to wear gradual trifocals since I hate contact lenses. But, of course, I'm not blind.
    3. Re:Risk Management given incomplete information by cthulhubob · · Score: 1

      > most of us have the skills to decide if a food preparation place is hygenically adequate

      This isn't really true. There are lots of vectors for harmful bacteria that the average person who ooks at home is unaware of. In general, only trained food-service professionals are aware of cross-contamination, for example.

      Cross-contamination occurs when two different types of meat come into contact with one another. For instance, seafood and beef. Shellfish harbor a symbiotic bacterium (like the ones in our intestines) that becomes virulent when it feeds on beef protein. This is why restaurants have color-coded cutting boards. (the blue one for fish, red for beef, yellow for poultry, etc...). Storage of the meat can also be a factor - seafood should never be placed above beef in a storage area.

      If you knew about that already, then my hat is off to you! I only learned about it day before yesterday from my landlady (who runs a meat packing plant).

      My point was that only trained professionals truly have the knowledge to judge whether practices in any profession are really safe or not.

      --

      In post-9/11 America, the CIA interrogates YOU!
  54. Why by Daimaou · · Score: 1

    Why do government officials think that their sole purpose is to create pointless new regulations, laws and special projects? I just want the damn fools to fix the damn roads and shut the hell up.

    This is almost as bad as the mayor of my city putting buckets of orange flags at all the crosswalks in town. The idea was that the pedestrians would wave the flag around in a mockery of the mayor and by doing so would alert drivers that they were there and hopefully the drivers wouldn't hit the pedestrians. Unfortunately, somebody stole all the flags (gee, didn't see that coming).

    This just goes to show how overbloated the government in the US is. If this is the most important thing they can come up with to work on then the New Jersey taxpayers really aren't getting their money's worth.

    I think we should fire government employees to the point that the remaining ones only have time for the important things.

    1. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a bill that would ban all new laws for
      one year? NO NEW LAWS!!! for any reason
      No amendments to existing laws. for any reason.

    2. Re:Why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Better idea:

      All laws only exist for one year.

      The lawmakers would have no time for stupid shit then, as they spend all their time just redoing the important laws.

  55. Just inform the public by RollingThunder · · Score: 2

    Rather than raise a hue and cry over how low the G limits are, they should just come up with a simple rating diagram that must be posted at the entrance to each ride.

    State max postive and negative and lateral G-forces, and duration, and then let the public decide. Brochures explaining the complex words available gratis at entry.

  56. It's about time... by Sokie · · Score: 1

    (inexcusible attempt at generic slashdot humor)

    It's about time somebody slowed down Nvidia...how the hell am I supposed to keep up with the superest, L3373$7 video card when they come out with a damn new one every 6 freaking months??

    What's that? Oh...different G-Force....sorry

    --
    ------
    Where are the slash-groupies? I distinctly remember being promised slash-groupies!
  57. Re:Great... by jhunsake · · Score: 1

    "The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them."

    And what tablet handed down from God had that one on it?

  58. Re:Great... by jhunsake · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    People who use drugs are much more likely to cause harm to other (innocent) people than those who ride rollercoasters. Hence your analogy goes nowhere.

  59. The Flip-Flap Coaster by Mr.Sharpy · · Score: 1

    Let us not forget that the first looping roller-coaster, the Flip-Flap, exerted 12g's of force on passengers as they went through 25-foot diameter loop. The coaster had a tendancy to snap people's necks as they went through the loop, sometimes killing them in the process. People paid just to watch it operate.

    1. Re:The Flip-Flap Coaster by T-Punkt · · Score: 2

      The reason for that was not so the high g force. The problem was that the high g force started and stopped immediately. Modern (or better well designed) coasters are build so that the forces gradually build up and gracefully go down without aprupt changes.

      That's why the loops in modern coasters are more elliptical than circular and don't have straights before and after the looping. Actually a looping in a modern roller coaster consists of two spirals (clothoids) joint together in the highest point.

      Read more about the roller coaster maths/physics here (with great picutres ;-), here or here if you are interested.

    2. Re:The Flip-Flap Coaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can they design a modern advanced rollercoaster
      that feels like an old wood rollercoaster? You know
      all the fun parts but safer than wood?
      Old wood roller coasters were great fun.

    3. Re:The Flip-Flap Coaster by jonerik · · Score: 2

      Can they design a modern advanced rollercoaster
      that feels like an old wood rollercoaster?


      It'd be tough, but maybe. The big difference, of course, is that wood coasters tend to give a bit. You can feel them move as the cars go around bends, hit the bottom of a hill, etc. As a result, they cushion the most brutal effects of the ride. Steel coasters can be assembled into a wider range of shapes and turns than wood coasters, but there's very little "give." They hold their shape, so a brutal ride is particularly unforgiving in a way that wood coasters aren't. In theory, though, I suppose one could design a steel ride that could incorporate joints and hydraulics and move similarly to a wood coaster within certain parameters.

    4. Re:The Flip-Flap Coaster by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

      Steel coasters DO flex a bit. Next time you watch a steel coaster, watch the support beams and the loops. They will sway and shake slightly.

      Also, I'd argue that a wooden coaster has more "roughness" than a steel coaster does. Not as smooth at all.

      --
      Not All Who Wander Are Lost
  60. Re:Great... by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 2, Troll

    Heroin is illegal for race reasons. While the Chinese slaves were building the railroads, they smoked opium. After the railroads were finished, the Chinese moved to the West Coast and frequented Opium Bars. White women were attracted to these opium bars (to smoke opium) and White men were upset. They outlawed opium. Now the derivitaves are also illegal.

    Marajuana is the Mexican name for Canibis. In America (about 100 years ago), Canibis was called Hemp. Ever wonder why Americans refer to a plant by it's Mexican name? Do you need three guesses to realise it's to make it sound "Mexican"? Guess who Americans hated around the time of the criminilization of Hemp?

    Once we started down the road of criminilizing things people liked doing, it really didn't stop. Well, you could say that it stopped with the nullification of prohibition, but in reality, that was just a minor bump. The government continues to restrict drug use in as many ways as possible. Just look at tobacco. Even people who smoke say it is a filthy habit. The government is slowly making everyone think the world would be better off without tobacco.

    --
    I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  61. Re:Great... by Ultra64 · · Score: 1

    Right, because so many people were killed when I got stoned yesterday.

  62. maybe add one more by Jafa · · Score: 1

    I've no where near your expertise, just a fan and follower of aviation. One point you can add to your list of factors associated to high G risks is the angle of the body. If you're sitting up straight and experience high G, the blood will leave the head even quicker. If you're reclined a ways, it will take a little longer to get the same blood loss.

    This is just a guess from the research that went into the F-16's pilot's seat angle.

    Jason

  63. Re:Great... by (outer-limits) · · Score: 1

    We were having a lot of jokes in Australia before the Olympics about the laws in Atlanta on sex. People make jokes aobut Muslims and sex, how about the laws in the Georgia about sex. I think they include no oral sex, no sex toys. In Little Rock, flirtation between men and women on the streets may result in a 30-day jail term. You might get to share a cozy cell together! Be careful! Don't get extremely cozy in that cell. Oral sex is considered sodomy in Arkansas and is punishable.

    --

    Microsoft - Where would you like to go today, Maybe Jail?

  64. 1G is nothing to sneeze at, ya know... by bafu · · Score: 1

    I had to ride a rickety coaster at a small amusement park twice in a row to appease my kids. Looking at the rusty supports it was hard not to imagine the thing collapsing, and somehow it didn't occur to me to take comfort from the fact that the fall would only be at 1G... ;-)

    1. Re:1G is nothing to sneeze at, ya know... by troc · · Score: 2

      True enough, a 1G fall will do you little if no harm - and is actually quite pleasant, just look at all the sky divers out there.

      The extremely high G landing (probably in the 100's if not 1000's depending on the surface - rising depending on how unyielding the surface etc etc) would I suspect put quite a dent in your day.

      And your head.

      And probably the floor.

      Troc

      --
      Troc's dubious podcast and blog: http://www.trocnet.net
  65. Re:Great... by more+fool+you · · Score: 1

    great idea. lets change all the signs that say "train station" to "roller coaster"

  66. Re:Great... by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 0

    Wait, you mean all those hippies at the greatful dead shows are dangerous people? Please, the only reason dangerous people and drugs are associated is the money you can make off selling them, which often attracts the less savory parts of society... if they weren't illegal, there wouldn't be money to be made.

    --


    He tried to kill me with a forklift!
  67. G-Forces greater than experienced by astronauts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...experienced by astronauts ... Why do they think people ride roller coasters to begin with?

    It's not NASA's cost cut-backs, is it? Some of those people who are on the high-G-force rides may be astronauts on pre-flight training... *g*

  68. Independent Accident Database by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  69. Not gravitational fields, but acceleration. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats really lame. I'm no physics doctor, but I don't think people experance gravitational fields, but accelleration. Just like gravity is about -9.8m/(s^2) on earth. So one g force would be 9.8m/(s^2) (acceleration) in the forward movement. I think gravitational fields are magnetic in nature and can cause acceleration, but I'm not sure. For the record, NHRA top fuel dragsters experance 20+g's when they leave the line and much more g's then the indy drivers. I also belive that jet pilots experance something like 10g's on take off from a carier.
    -James

  70. In NJ you can't jump any more. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I recall gravity works at -9.8 meters per second squared.... So kids no more jumping at parks or you will be procesicuted. Fire man are also not allowed to use the pole anymore... etc....

    1. Re:In NJ you can't jump any more. by a3d0a3m · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's -9.8m/s or 1G.

  71. Re:More G force than Astronauts? Well, yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    quote: Negative G. (Negative means the blood rushes to your head). High negative G can cause all kinds of problems, including burst blood vessels in the eyes. I've personally never heard of a roler coaster that goes beyond about -0.5G or so, and even then for less than a second, so I doubt that this is an issue.

    "Tower of Terror" in Disney MGM Studio Florida maintains negative Gs for 3 seconds. It might just be of interest.

  72. Trial Lawyer Flack Site by ccmay · · Score: 1
    This is somewhat off topic, but please read up on the facts on the McDonald's Scalding Coffee incident. Look here [lawandhelp.com] or do a quick search on Google.

    Then when you get done looking at this self-serving flackery put out by filthy greedy trial lawyer pirates, look at Overlawyered to see how these dirty bastards are screwing every other sector of American society.

    -ccm

    --
    Too much Law; not enough Order.
    1. Re:Trial Lawyer Flack Site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't be absurd. Lawyers are too ethical to do bad things like that.

    2. Re:Trial Lawyer Flack Site by eyeball · · Score: 1

      My point was that everyone only hears the sensationalized story 'some old lady got $2 million' (or whatever) from mcdonalds. They never hear the rest of the facts, like her inital award was equal to only 2 days of mcdonald's national coffee sales, and that the award was later reduced to something like $400,000.

      In other words, I wasn't siding with lawyers on the case, just pointing out misinformation. I happen to love the overlawyered site, and as a matter of fact, just donated money to them yesterday as a matter of fact!

      --

      _______
      2B1ASK1
  73. Re:Great... by Australian+werewolf · · Score: 1

    Yeah - and people who get stoned are really good drivers, too, I suppose?

    Give me a break. People who claim pot is 100% harmless are as stupid as the people who claim it is 100% harmful.

  74. Can someone point out these 'coasters to me before by phaze3000 · · Score: 2

    As a resident of the UK, I don't get to ride American roller coasters much. The best theme park I've been to was Busch Gardens, Florida, which ISTR had some pretty damn fine coasters.
    From reading this article I get the feeling I'm really missing out on some seriously good roller-coasters.. anyone care to enlighten me as to exactly where they are? :)

    --
    Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
  75. Re:Great... by SnatMandu · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.

    No, that's not their job. But sometimes they think it is, and that is pretty god-damned unfortunate.

  76. I'm go'na start bootleging roller coasters by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 2

    ok guys... I'm go'na start bootleging roller coasters. Anyone want in? We'll build them in Canada, part them up, move them across the boarder, and assemble them within isolated rural communities.

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    1. Re:I'm go'na start bootleging roller coasters by ComaVN · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe you could make a peer-to-peer rollercoaster network. Put a piece of it in everyone's backyard, so there's no individual to sue if things go wrong.

      --
      Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
    2. Re:I'm go'na start bootleging roller coasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am sure they would find someone to sue, those blood sucking lawyers!!!!!!!!

    3. Re:I'm go'na start bootleging roller coasters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "assemble them within isolated rural communities"

      I can see the advertisement now:

      Com'on everyone! You'll want to be the FIRST to ride the AMISH MAIDEN.

  77. Brain. by mrselfdestrukt · · Score: 1

    From what I've heard the story is like this:
    When you experience excessive G-forces, moments of weightlessness and stuff like that , you brain analyses all the weird signals and come to a conclusion: You've been poisoned! It the tries to fix it by either making you vomit out the "evil poison" or adjusting your body to cope with all the weird input signals. And when you're back on the ground, your brain in still adjusting to make up for the wild ride, so every step is a warning that some bad fall is gonna come next and sh*t like that. So... We have a neural network that learn from past experiences and tries to adapt / supress / analyse future possible scenarios. Deal with it.

    --
    "I used to have that really cool,funny sig ,but it got stolen."
  78. The G-Force strong with roller coaster is. by hokanomono · · Score: 1

    Soon i noticed, that G-Force is not GeForce...and right after that i was wondering if somebody could really aim to limit the gravitation. But since they tried to change $\pi$ to 4, too...

    Why G-Force? Isn't it called acceleration? When talking about mass next time, i will call it the kg-Force. (Of course -- as everybody knows -- RAM is called MB-Force.)

    --
    This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
  79. Newton called to account by Bazzargh · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trenton, N.J. - A New Jersey judge today declared that it would be illegal to expose citizens to gravitational fields greater than 0.2 G . "Every year more people are falling or jumping to their deaths," explained Justice Iverson, " a situation that cannot be allowed to continue. Every day on television I see coyotes cruelly crushed by falling anvils, and its time something was done. I am issuing an extradition writ for a Mr Isaac Newton who I believe is responsible for the problem."

    Cynics have suggested that Iverson is merely trying to improve his golf game. Since the ruling, he has been regularly driving the greens at exclusive Rolling Hills Country Club - with his sand wedge. Justice Iverson is aged 92.

    In related news, senior mafia officials pledged to 'eradicate chance' from casinos across the USA.

    1. Re:Newton called to account by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In related news, senior mafia officials pledged to 'eradicate chance' from casinos across the USA.

      There is chance in casinos? Like the chance that the machine is eating your money? Like the chance the proprietor wants to stimulate your neuroreceptors to make you addicted?

      Naaa...

  80. Re:Great... by jhunsake · · Score: 1

    No I mean that pimpled faced 130 pound highschool sophomore that decided to try 'shrooms after school, but oops he's late for dinner so he decides to drive his 3500 pound car, but oops there's a little girl walking home from school who just happens to be in his way.

    Laws won't completely prevent the situation, but they sure as hell make it less likely. And that's good enough for me and most of the rest of America.

  81. Rush! by palad1 · · Score: 1

    Wow, I was lucky to buy this nifty Geforce 4 before it is outlawed!

  82. Frighteningly easy. by jackal! · · Score: 2
    Probably also a factor, is the ease that exists in getting a license,

    When I was 24 I had never driven anything other than bumper cars, but learned that my workplace wanted me to travel to far off places that would require driving. (Before anyone gets angry about that detail, my job wasn't in danger, I could have telecommuted, but I liked the opportunity to travel, and was glad to AT LAST have a reason to learn how to drive.)

    Okay, so there I am with no experience at all, and 9 years removed from HS driver's ed. Only 29 days later I was driving. I don't mean I was merely taking lessons. After only 29 days I had gotten my permit, learned to drive, (after TWO lessons from a FRIEND), bought a used car, and insured it. Yes folks, I was on the road after 4 hours of lessons.

    These facts have never stopped terrifying me. If I can go from 0 experience to licensed driver in less than a month, that means anyone... oh, I just shudder to think about it.

    --

    Who moderates the meta-moderators?

  83. Duration of Force by donscarletti · · Score: 1

    Although costers may exert more force on their riders then most astranauts experience during takeoff the duration is shorter.

    It takes a fraction of a second to go round a tight bancked courner in a roller coster. An astranout endures a rapid acceleration for many minutes.

    The amount of deformation of an object (e.g. a human skull), as any high school physics student knows is dependant on the time period as well as simply the force. This is why one may survive a car crash at forty G's but one cannot survive having forty times their own body weight placed upon them.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  84. "Lobby Congress... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if you want to go faster!"

  85. Help get the statistics straight by nikmal · · Score: 1

    Contribute to the accident watch at this site

  86. Re:Great... by stuart_farnan · · Score: 1

    The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.

    This is not the governments job at all, or at least it should not be. If I want to ride a rollercoaster I should be able to, if I want to jump off a cliff I should be able to. The point is, its my life and my body, and having a nanny state that stops you doing as you want only helps the retarded members of society. There are indeed some people who are just too stupid to look after themselves, but law is not the way to protect them. As long as I am not affecting or endangering anyone else by my actions, i.e. if they only affect me, I should be able to do as I please.

  87. Re-post by inio · · Score: 1

    This was posted just over a month ago.

    Oh, wait, roller-coasters. Nevermind, move along, nothing to se here.

  88. The government's job? by testadicazzo · · Score: 1

    If that argument worked, do you think that marajuana, heroin, meth, e, etc. etc. etc. would be illegal?

    The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.

    Nowhere in the constitution have I seen anything to indicate that this is even remotely within the jurisdiciton of the government. Whether or not it should be is something I vehemently disagree to.


    The government's job is to: regulate trade between other nations, provide for a national defense, and enforce a social contract, as decided democratically.


    Now, within the social contract, I do not acknowledge the right of you as an individual, or a collective majority of you, to decide how I can live, or end my life. I do however acknowledge and agree with the need to protect individuals from other individuals (but not from themselves).


    Does this mean that I think heroin should be legal? Yes, but in the case of heavily addictive substances, the social contract argument becomes complicated, and I'm willing to entertain compromise on the issue, so I will defer discussion here in an effort to remain on topic.


    Specific to this case, the goverment's job is to ensure that Roller Coaster providers are providing sufficient information to their clientelle for their clientelle to make informed decisions... and not making false business claims.

    1. Re:The government's job? by Creepy · · Score: 1

      This is an argument I've thought about for a long time, and I've come to the conclusion that the goverment believes it has the right to protect its citizens in all ways, even from themselves. This is why suicide is illegal in many states, as is having a right to die. Why are there prescriptions for medicine or a legal drinking age and tobacco use age? The intent is to make the decisions for the people instead of letting them decide what is best for themselves.

      I have mixed feelings about this myself - in one respect, I think there should be a certain degree of protectionism - if I rewire my house, I should have to get it inspected for proper wiring, because it puts anyone who comes in my house at risk if it is done incorrectly. On the other hand, if I want to drop acid in the forest (where I can harm no one but myself), that should be my decision, not the government's decision, provided I'm informed of the risks of using the drug and the permanent side effects. Personally, I would never touch the stuff, but the government thinks I would if it were available, being an ignorant lemming that all citizens are. Those friends of mine who wanted to try it did anyway, and the government failed to stop them, so the whole self-protectionist "drug war" is a failure in my mind.

      Anyhow, I'm rambling. 'nough said.

  89. Re:Great... by rosewood · · Score: 1

    Hows about the use of Opiates in patent medicine and then in a majority of pain killers being sold in drug stores was causing a major adiction problem and was also causing quite a bit of deaths, from the random droping of the bottle of laudnum on one's foot to the stupid mom giving their crying baby a little morphine.

    Way to play race card in your troll

  90. Re:Great... by ImaLamer · · Score: 2
    Check out this site (url below)*

    My state (ohio) has legislated that carnival games can't cheat. Why? They always do.

    On the case of coasters - you can't outlaw the product. Just simulate and then if it's defective sue. Put up your warnings and then you can't be sued... that is the status quo right? (cigarettes et. al.)

    Listen to this about Bungee Jumping from my state:
    The following practices are prohibited:

    (A) Bungee catapulting when the jumper has the potential of coming in contact with overhead structures.
    Gee thanks... It's like thinking someone is going to design a coaster which will kill a fifth of it's riders. I understand there is problems with pushing the envelope but it is a risk people take. I would hope the coaster designers' morals will trump the demands of the park owners when it comes to safety.

    *LINK IS HERE
  91. Re:Great... by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    There was, in '93ish, a couple having sex in their house in Georgia. Someone taped them, and then called to police. The couple was charged with a publid display of lewdness and fined many hundreds of dollars.
    The Southern states SUCK...BAD.

    --
    I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  92. Re:Great... by Bios_Hakr · · Score: 1, Troll

    majority of pain killers being sold in drug stores was causing a major adiction problem

    Addiction is your problem, not mine. If I want to be addicted to moriphine, that is none of your buisness.

    also causing quite a bit of deaths

    If a bottle says take one every 24 hours, and you take one every hour, who is at fault? Should my right to have one every day be taken because you can't/won't follow directions. OTOH, if the bottle says take one an hour and that causes death, then the company producing the product is at fault. Do you then ban the product because the company was stupid, or do you just fine the company and have them change their labling?

    stupid mom giving their crying baby a little morphine

    Child abuse is already agianst the law. Why make things illegal just because they can be used to abuse a child?

    No, my friend, the politicians are not that manevolent. They banned drugs because they cannot control production. Any idiot can grow poppies and canibis. Tobacco is HARD to grow and alcohol is tough to distil. The government can license tobacco and hops fields and then tax the output. They can't tax you if you grow poppies for your own use. If they can't tax it, they ban it.

    --
    I'd rather you do it wrong, than for me to have to do it at all.
  93. G's -> risk -> adrenaline -> love it! by verbal · · Score: 1

    What is this? Maybe a warning here and there would be a good thing, but personally I would then only ride the coasters with a serious death warning. I want the thrill, I want to check how far I can take it. For me, that's the sport in coasters. Don't understand me wrong, it doesn't all have to be lethal, but risk pumps adrenaline and I just love that feeling.
    But hey, who am I to say anything. I don't even live in the USA, I'm not even a US citizen.

    Yeah to self-induced drugs!

  94. A day at the fairground... by saqmaster · · Score: 1

    Daughter: Wow mother, you look fantastic!

    Mother: Really honey? Thankyou!

    Daughter: You haven't been and had Collagen injections now, have you mother?

    Mother: *shock* No! I just got off the super-fast-twisty-shocker rollercoaster!

    The End.

    --
    "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story..."
  95. Re:Great... by Beliskner · · Score: 2
    This law is fair. I went on the Nemesis ride at Alton Towers a couple of years back. During the ride I almost passed out because of the g-forces (I thought that you were supposed to feel that - that it was part of the ride) and then 5 minutes later it turned into a splitting headache. I had to take a 2 hour break before being able to start driving back

    I'm surprised that everyone on /. thinks G-force limits is a stupid law. Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it. How is this differrent from the CDBPTA where Hollywood, actors and record companies are dazzled by CDPBTA being great because it obliterates our rights and gives them billions of dollars? The rollercoaster corporations aren't considering our safety and just building massive things with g-forces that'll knock your brain into your ass. Obviously the kids and /.'ers younger than 25 won't understand this, the only way they'll understand is if when they walk away from the ride one of them drops dead. And then they'll just feel bad for a month before forgetting it.

    --
    A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
  96. They're practically the same thing in the UK! by ringbarer · · Score: 1

    It's a sad state of affairs when Amusement Parks have stricter safety regulations than a country's rail infrastructure!

    --
    "Why did they cancel my favorite Sci-Fi show? I downloaded ALL the episodes!"
  97. You've Gotta Remember that this is New Jersey... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same state that won't let you pump your own gas. The same state that wastes valuable real estate for use as "jughandles" instead of simply having a left-turn lane. The same state that requires you to submit to licensing (not just background checks) to own a gun (not just a handgun, but rifles or shotguns) (not to have a concealed carry permit - but to *own* a gun - wtf don't they understand about "...shall not be infringed?!?!")

  98. Re:Great... by ComaVN · · Score: 1

    Yeah - and people who get stoned are really good drivers, too, I suppose?

    Same goes for a lot of pain killers you can buy in any shop. When using those, don't drive. When drunk, don't drive. When being stoned, don't drive. Why can't marihuana be treated the same as alcohol, coffee or tobacco?

    --
    Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
  99. Re:Great... by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    worried about what consenting adults did in their spare time

    Exactly. Everyone knows what to expect on a roller coster. There are signs warning that if you have specific conditions not to get on. And more importantly, you know how you've reacted to the rides in the past. So if you chose to get on, you should have every right to.

    I think the problem is that more and more however people watn the gov't to protect them. So thats what they are doing.

  100. Hardly a problem by Chetchez · · Score: 0

    Each year, more people die from toothpick related incidents. Roller coasters are extremely safe as they are now. The maximum G's experienced are only for a split second at the most. Not enough to case short or long term physical damage.
    -Jason

  101. Re:Great... by ComaVN · · Score: 1

    You obviously haven't played Civilization enough.
    Anarchy stops all tax and trade revenues and halts scientific progress. Anarchy can not be maintained for long. Even despotism is better than anarchy.

    --
    Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
  102. Why do they think people ride roller coasters? by Zapdos · · Score: 2

    Its the chance for a number of injuries and death over the next few years. Gee I hope I get a broken arm this time.

  103. The Skydiver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the most dangerous rides I've been on wasn't a roller coaster but a Ferris Wheel type ride called The Skydiver. It's the one where you get in the cage and go around the ferris wheel while the cage can spin in pretty much any direction. This isn't so bad when the ride is moving, as long as the cage is properly shut, because the g's are temporary. When they would let people off the ride one at a time however, you could end up hanging upside down and onto the cage bar for you life for a few minutes. You would be at the top of the ride upside down with just a metal bar between you and infinity. It wasn't over your shoulders so you could slip right under or over it. Especially when you're a little kid. It was fun but I don't think the ride is around today because it's too dangerous.

  104. Re:Great... by Peyna · · Score: 2

    Play the race card!!!! PLAY IT!!!!!! - Homer J Simpson

    --
    What?
  105. GeForce Limits???? by dkh2 · · Score: 1

    No! they cannot touch my graphics card! It is a necessary part of my system and I will not go console-less until the cranial interface is developed by Lt. Reginald Barkley.

    --
    My office has been taken over by iPod people.
  106. Re:Great... by fabjep · · Score: 1

    This idea is preposterous: "Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it. " In the narcotics market, overdoses indicate potency and boost sales. While a similar law may hold for rollercoaster thrill-seekers, park-owners, unlike dealers, are ultimately afraid of law-suits. I seriously doubt new rides are being constructed which intentionally disregard the safety of the rider.

    --
    - learn mathematics - shoot dope -
  107. Re:Great... by billcopc · · Score: 1

    The government's job is to keep preserve the lives of those who pay taxes. That's it. Gov't exists to try to make people happy in their country, so that they won't get pissed and move to some other country, taking their taxmoney with them. That's it. Government is a fucking business like any other. It's just dangerously large, stupid but powerful. Kinda like the Borg really.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
  108. Nothing close to astronauts by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not to have their bodies exposed to more forces and danger than most astronauts ever experience

    From the original post:

    the G-forces on coasters are considerably greater than even those experienced by astronauts and race car drivers...

    I flew military jets for 9 years, and I think these comparisons are crap. When people used to ask me how jets compared to roller coasters, I would tell them that the two experiences are totally different. It's a matter of scale. Sustaining 4G or more for even 10 seconds, let alone 30 or 60 seconds or more, is an experience that simply cannot be reproduced by any rollercoaster that can fit in a theme park. The effects of the sustained G are DRAMATICALLY different than the one or two second hits (or three or four...whatever) felt on a high performance rollercoaster.

    I recently road with my brother on a rollercoaster that I considered to be quite exciting, with corkscrews and consecutive loops, and when it was over he asked me how many G's he thought we had pulled. Based on the sensations I had felt (compared to my years in jets) I guessed 1.5-2. I was surprised to see a brochure later that claimed the ride pulled 6G. The two or three second hits just didn't have time to register.

    Another example: a person using an ejection seat pulls an ongodly amount of G -- something like 30 or 60, although the actual number escapes me. Obviously this is enough to kill a man, but the brief time period involved make it survivable. I've known people who ejected and were able to walk around with no problem immediately afterward.

    The point is that comparisons to astronauts and race car drivers is misleading. The maximum G must be examined only in conjunction with the period of time over which the G occurs. Brief hits DO NOT COMPARE to sustained G. Maybe rides should be limited and maybe they shouldn't, but the forces faced by astronauts are not part of the debate.

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
    1. Re:Nothing close to astronauts by Adrenochrome · · Score: 1

      Additionally, race car drivers don't generally face sustained big G's. Champ and F1 cars can corner and decellerate somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.5-2 G's.

      OTOH, they can be subject to very large G forces for very short periods of time. As in 200+km/hr->0km/hr in a few milliseconds during a head-on collision with a wall. Of course, track design is such that this is a very rare occurrence.

      "Welcome to the Days of Thunder coaster. Before the ride begins, everyone must put on their full-face helmets, close their visor, and put on their HANS device."

    2. Re:Nothing close to astronauts by DuBois · · Score: 2, Informative

      As an aerobatics pilot who routinely pulls 6 Gs for a second or two at most, I suspect roller coasters are somewhat less than that, and the Gs last for only fractions of seconds rather than a second or two. I've never blacked out at 6 G's but have seen grey edges on my vision. There is a phenomenon called "The Wobblies" that can happen to dehydrated aerobatics pilots. The cilia of the inner ear get hypersensitive during dehydration, possibly because some salts that are normally in solution in the inner ear precipitate out and irritate the cilia. So, if you want to avoid the wobblies, drink up!

      --
      The IPCC has purposely engineered a massive scientific fraud.
    3. Re:Nothing close to astronauts by xbytor · · Score: 1

      The maximum sustained force by and individual
      (voluntarily) was 45Gs by a Col Stall (MD), part
      of a team that was investigating restraints and
      ejection seat safety for the military. The force,
      though momentary, temporarily detached his retinas
      and collapsed his lungs. He survived the experience
      but obviously decided not to be a test subject
      anymore.

    4. Re:Nothing close to astronauts by cmdrwhitewolf · · Score: 1

      I'd have to agree with this statement that the G Forces encountered while on a Coaster DOES NOT at all compare to those of Astronauts & Fighter pilots. Roller coasters are only *very breif* exposures to high G forces, and not sustained ones which the astronauts & fighter jet pilots endure. Specifically, there's two reasons I can say this from, the first being my own personal experience - which was gained from a very short stint of storm chasing in college (during a sort of extreme meterology class) and having been physically tossed about by the heavy winds while in various vehicles first hand, and the second part comes from the special training we recieved which went into detail discussing the various medical effects of High G forces, which stressed that the short durations of high G's we sometimes were exposed to didn't cause the injury themselves but were due to the impacts, AND we were further shown what the effects of sustained High G's were, so we could clearly knew the difference. We were shown how the primary effects of High G, cause the blood not to flow as easily to the brain, sometimes causing greying vison, and if sustained for long enough, black outs & death. (The exact time period for each of these varies from individual to individual, as each person has thier own specific oxygen starvation tolerances.) Plus, at sustained upper G forces in a plane or rocker launch, the pressure exerted upon the body eventually also collapses the lungs, causing an inability to take a full breath, which further compounds the problem. This of course, is extremely discomforting - which is why I don't think our thrill seeking Roller Coaster riders would be going out of thier way to repeating... so clearly, you can't compare 'high G' roller coasters to what the fighter pilots & Astronauts are experiencing! - WW

      --
      [Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
    5. Re:Nothing close to astronauts by jimlintott · · Score: 1

      Last year at Texas Motor Speedway the Champ (CART) car race was cancelled due to concerns over excessive G-force. They were very concerned that someone might experience G-LOC. A car that is capable of 2Gs lateral acceleration on a flat surface can generate more than that on a banked oval for quite a sustained period, although the forces become less lateral and more vertical. I've heard that Top Fuel Dragsters pull around 6 Gs while accelerating.

  109. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is most definitely NOT the government's job to attepmt to preserve the lives of those people. Stupidity cannot be legislated out of existance. The only law we need in this instance is Darwin's.

    If a company were to build a rollercoaster that was grossly injurious, there would be legal ramifications. If a rollercoaster were built that regularly injured (let alone killed) people, people would stop riding it. Sure, not exactly an application of Darwin's Law the way he intended, but it's still survival of the fittest, only now we're talking about the most "fit" rollercoaster.

    Besides, if someone wants to do something risky, as long as they aren't hurting anyone else, why stop them?

  110. It doesn't matter by Xrkun · · Score: 1

    Lets look at the situation. I don't think we will have to worry. I'm pretty sure that the people who own and operate rollercoasters have enough cash to influence the government to not make such rediculous laws. Keep in mind, the government only makes laws to generate revenue now a days.

  111. it will never pass by primus_sucks · · Score: 1

    Don't worry it will never pass. For those of you not in the US, here's how our political system works: someone tries to pass a law (doesn't matter if it's good or bad), if the law hurts big corporations (which this one probably will) they get together and spend lots of money on campaign contributions/marketing campaigns and the law gets voted down. This is actually a great way to get campaign contributions, just propose stupid laws that will hurt rich people.

  112. G suits... by Scratch-O-Matic · · Score: 2

    You are correct: the G-suit is like a pair of pants that fills with air to pressurize the abdomen and legs, inhibiting the flow of blood to the lower extremities. This is not to protect the pilot's heart or to prevent other health problems, it's to keep the pilot from losing consciousness.

    --


    Evil is the money of root.
  113. Deaths in NJ (was Re:Roller Coasters in...) by pastie · · Score: 1

    ...there has only been one death ever in NJ...


    Blimey, must be getting pretty cramped there then, what with all those 200-year-olds sitting around collecting their pensions.

    ;)
  114. Umm, remember what Einstein said by squarooticus · · Score: 1

    There is no perceptible difference between acceleration and gravitation, assuming general relativity is correct.

    Wanna see general relativity in action? Put a helium balloon in a car and go around a corner. The balloon will move toward the side of the car on the inside of the turn!

    --
    [ home ]
  115. don't stop there! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    we need to curtail the eating of fatty fried foods, red meat, high cholesterol food like eggs and then we have the whole lot of smoking, drinking and drug using crowd... oh wait, put a check next to that one.

    Please Mr. Government come save me from myself! Please show me how I can regress further into sheep-hood and not be able to make decisions for myself, much less learn that life has very real consequences derived from the choices we make.

  116. Re:Great... by pmc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yeah - and people who get stoned are really good drivers, too, I suppose?


    Well, for some value of really good - see this for details.


    Here is a paragraph from the report referenced:

    Third, the style of driving performance after consumption of cannabis can be interpreted as cautious. Evidence of increased caution includes fewer overtaking attempts, larger distances required for overtaking, slower speeds, and larger headways. This caution can describe either the behaviour or the strategy of the driver. For example, cautious behaviour may arise without deliberation as a result of alterations in perception and control (e.g., distorted perception of time and space). Alternatively, a driver may decide upon a deliberate strategy to act cautiously by adopting a reduced threshold of acceptable risk. This decision may be motivated by the recognition of performance impairment. Of course, neither basis is mutually exclusive; changes in behaviour may be a result of both (unconscious) psychomotor impairment and (conscious) cognitive strategy.
  117. you, and your cousin by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1, Offtopic
    First off, you are a fucking asshole! You complete dick, you spoiled(to a admittedly small extent) EP2 for me. Why the fuck did you feel the need to do that? Fucking asshole...

    Second, if your 16 yo cousing blacked out on a roller coaster and continued to have blackout problems for a few months afterwards, there was almost definately ALREADY SOMETHING WRONG!!

    Third, you asshole! WTF is wrong with you? Why do you feel the need to be an ass?

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  118. Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nvidia is facing the Ge-Force limit.
    Fist there was the Geforce 2, now we are at GeForce 4 already. Soon it is going to start hurting...

  119. Re:Great... by MindStalker · · Score: 1

    So how is this ANY different than alcohol? Please tell me oh wise one!

  120. I wish the government would just... by squarooticus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...keep their goddamn hands off the things I enjoy.

    If you think regulating roller coasters is such a great idea, remember that a government that has power to regulate something you don't think is important about also has the power to regulate something you do think is important!

    A story like this should not have you thinking, "Well, that sounds reasonable." It should have have you thinking, "How much more personal freedom are We the People willing to give up?"

    --
    [ home ]
    1. Re:I wish the government would just... by Zapdos · · Score: 2

      Just be sure to participate. Vote in all elections that you are eligible to. Vote in the primaries. Just don't forget to Vote.

      You should write your senators and congressperson fairly regularly about issues that concern you. If you do not do at least this little then you get what you deserve.

  121. I'm proud to live in New Jersey by zombieking · · Score: 2

    I'm overjoyed that my state govenment is taking care of this issue. Now, if only they would get to the "Are we eating enough garlic as a state" issue. I'm so happy that my state lawmakers have nothing better to do but "busywork".

    --

    -----
    "The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
    1. Re:I'm proud to live in New Jersey by J.A.+Lizzi · · Score: 0

      Oh, certainly. This is obviously *much* more important than, say, the whole EZPass financing and installation mess, or the car inspection stupidity. And there's no reason why the whole "auto insurers are leaving in droves" issue should be a higher priority....

  122. gravitational fields by wiredog · · Score: 2
    Roller coasters do generate gravitational fields! Just as all objects with mass do! You and I generate gravitational fields!

    Admittedly, the fields are small, but still...

  123. Sucks I don't have any moderator points by tgd · · Score: 2

    Because your post isn't interesting or informative, its just plain wrong. Go pick up an elementary physics textbook. There is absolutely no physical difference between a strong gravitational field from a reference frame at rest and a weak one as experienced from an accellerating reference frame. General relativity goes as far as to say its absolutely impossible to differentiate between the two.

    So, good attempt at trying to look smart, but it didn't work, kid.

    1. Re:Sucks I don't have any moderator points by Richard+Platt · · Score: 1
      ecause your post isn't interesting or informative, its just plain wrong. Go pick up an elementary physics textbook. There is absolutely no physical difference between a strong gravitational field from a reference frame at rest and a weak one as experienced from an accellerating reference frame. General relativity goes as far as to say its absolutely impossible to differentiate between the two.

      That's not true either... consider someone free-falling towards a black hole (or anything else with a strong gravitational field). The field at their feet will be stronger than the field at their head, because the strength of a gravitational field falls off with distance, so they'd be stretched by the tidal forces. If gravitational fields and accelerating frames were indistinguishable, he'd feel nothing. Utterly irrelevant for a rollercoaster of course. (yes, it's true that it's impossible to tell the difference *locally*, but if it were true globally , the General Theory of Relativity wouldn't really have much to say).

      So, good attempt at trying to look smart, but it didn't work, kid.

      Well, quite.

  124. *Sigh* by Ixe · · Score: 1

    Another case that proves people are morons...
    This one is almost up there with the toilet scrubber that warned on it's label "Do not use orally"...

    What is the world coming to?

    --
    Sigs pose an operational security risk and help the baddies aggregate data. I guess commenting does too, oops.
  125. I'm probably wrong but... by datacaliber · · Score: 1

    I thought the basis of einstein's theories was that acceleration and gravity were basically the same and had the same effects.

  126. R U Stupid? by hottoh · · Score: 1

    The litigious behavior of the survivors or the survivor of an injury is sufficient to check the behavior of theme parks. Let this dear politician work on a real problem. Apparently you have never heard of marketing hype. For all the people who cannot seem to accept responsibility for their choices, here is a heavy chain and instructions on how to permanently chain your self to your bed. Now the rest of the world can live without your insanity.

    1. Re:R U Stupid? by Some+Dumbass... · · Score: 2

      The litigious behavior of the survivors or the survivor of an injury is sufficient to check the behavior of theme parks.

      Not yet it hasn't.

      For all the people who cannot seem to accept responsibility for their choices, here is a heavy chain and instructions on how to permanently chain your self to your bed. Now the rest of the world can live without your insanity.

      I accept responsibility for my informed choices (and uninformed ones which are my fault, of course). If information is intentionally withheld ("No, this ride won't hurt ya!") or important information is not acted upon ("This ride could be dangerous, but it would be bad for business to fix it."), then I have reason to be angry.

      Incidentally, would you like to buy my old stove? It has some little electrical problems which might cause a fire at some po... I mean, it's old, but still works! Interested?

  127. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that's what he meant.

  128. G Forces by lrdtux · · Score: 1

    Discovery Channel had a show on recently dealing with how many g's the human body can with stand and from what they showed the human body can with stand some serious g's (upwards of 20+) from about 60-0 in like .10 secs. I don't know about any of you but I haven't seen a coaster that can push the human body like that. and if there was one the "body cage" should be more horizontal than vertical, kinda like a luge. Now that would be ride!

    --
    Life is too short to crash.
  129. BUILT rickety by bluGill · · Score: 2

    Those old rust, rickety roller coasters are often built that way. From day one they look and feel like they just barely passed inspection this morning, and tommorow they will close it forever.

    Unfortunatly that means there is no way to tell the difference between a well maintained coaster ment to look and feel like it is about to fail, and a unmaintained one that will fall at any time.

    1. Re:BUILT rickety by Karen_Frito · · Score: 2

      Actually, there are a number of ways to tell the difference.

      In most of the coasters built to appear rickity, the wood is aged through paint or stain, rather than actual weathering - in addition, while there is a full support structure, the designers add additional useless 'supports'.

      These additional false supports are further aged to look far older than the rest of the wood, and are placed so to create the illusion that they are the actual supports.

      In addition - on a well-maintained ride, while it may have the false apperance of weak supports, if you look closely at the rails, lift or breaking equipement, you'll see no rust and clean, well maintainced chains and breaks.

  130. This is What Civil Suits Are For... by dbretton · · Score: 2

    For the Love of God, NAFL (Not Another Fucking Law)!

    OK, so some roller coaster company builds a ride that may cause permanent brain damage, or kill, somebody.
    Big deal.
    Let the affected parties sue the amusement park/roller coaster company/etc. Chances are, if the company was truly negligent, there will be a big settlement, and the park/etc. will have to now take a proactive stance to prevent losing the shirt of their financial backing. :)

  131. Re:Can someone point out these 'coasters to me bef by J.A.+Lizzi · · Score: 1

    The best coasters in the US are generally considered to be located at Cedar Point in Sandusky, Ohio. The same people also own and operate Dorney Park in Pennsylvania.

  132. Solution to this problem... by gosand · · Score: 2

    Easy solution, just build your own coaster in your back yard. :-)

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  133. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could you repeat that ... i'm high ;)

  134. It is NOT a force.......sloppy word use. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    G-force does not exist. G, or more correctly g, is the acceleration due to gravity, or the gravitiational field strength. It is measured in newtons, or N/kg.

    Since F=ma, the force on 2 people of different masses undergoing the same acceleration is different. Obviously the concept of g-force is one of those classic mis-grasps such as "weightlessness" and centrifugal force.

    1. Re:It is NOT a force.......sloppy word use. by RideMan · · Score: 1

      Actually, while they're talking about accelerations, since F=MxA it IS a force that they're talking about. Trouble is the exact magnitude of the force will vary with the mass of the rider.

      This is where the whole idea of G-force comes in. A force of 1G is equal to a force of 32 pounds per slug, or 9.8 Newtons per kilogram. It's only appropriate to talk almost interchangeably about forces and accelerations because under normal circumstances, the mass is held constant in the system.

      --Dave Althoff, Jr.

  135. Re:More G force than Astronauts? Well, yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah you are absolutely right.

    I fly fighter jet aircraft for the military, and even with up to 9 Gs there is nothing that would really hurt you. Of course I got a G suit and all that crap, but then, a roller coaster never gets anywhere near that region.

    The Gs are really of no concern.

    The only problem is that some of the people riding roller coasters are not in a good shape. I know (and personally witnessed) people passing out at as low as 3 Gs.

    And thats the problem roller coasters have.

    People

    - are fat
    - have no muscles, especially not at the neck
    - have high or low bloodpressure
    - have heart problems
    - get dizzy if you turn them around 3 times.

    There is no way to design a roller coaster thats fine for all of us.

  136. The logical end by Eq+7-2521 · · Score: 1

    If anyone is interested in a fictional work that deals with the logical end of this kind of legislation, read The Giver by Lois Lowry. Although a novel for children, its subject matter is very applicable to this situation.

    --
    At my age I find coming up with a witty signature too exhausting.
  137. Roller Coasters are fun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I ridden as may as I since I was young in
    California( Santa Cruz, Long Beach, ...,
    San Diego). I agreed with one guy who said,
    "Would it be great to taken on a roller-coaster
    ride up to the point of unconsciousness. Just
    fun.

  138. Millennium is spelled with two n's :) by RideMan · · Score: 1

    (sorry, that was a thread that ran for two and a half years on news:rec.roller-coaster, mostly dealing with how to count the new millennium) Cedar Point's Millennium Force is yet another example of why the kind of regulation New Jersey is talking about is a total waste of time. That ride is 310 feet tall. It goes 92 MPH. It might come close to an instantaneous load of +4G. Designers have become really good at this, and because high G-forces tend to create motion sickness in a lot of people, the forces on rides are getting more and more controlled all the time. Taller, faster, scarier, but also smoother, and with more tightly controlled G-forces. Instead of wasting time yelling about G-forces, why dont the regulators concentrate on something that might actually prevent injuries, such as operator training and certification, or fault tolerance testing of control systems? --Dave Althoff, Jr.

  139. Re:Great... by slugo3 · · Score: 1

    I think its job Used to be...

    1. protect any one state from becoming too powerful and attacking a neighboring state.

    2. protect the states from foreign aggressors.

    thats it.

  140. Nitpick by jonnythan · · Score: 2

    If there was a boom in coaster building it follows that there were more people riding coasters. More people riding coasters means greater chance of accident.

    No, the chance would remain the same, but the number of cases would go up ;)
    1. Re:Nitpick by Soulslayer · · Score: 1

      ROFL.

      This is true.

      The actual chance of accident would remain constant (if one assumes that greater riders does not equate to more difficult maintenance and sloppy safety handling by operators) while the number of incidents would (probably) rise.

      --


      Once more unto the breach dear friends...
  141. Positive and Negative by pclminion · · Score: 2
    First, thanks for the post. You clearly have much experience.

    I'd like to point out that, in the parlance of physics, the onset rate as well as transitions from positive to negative are known as "jerk." No, really.

    Also, there's no deep difference between positive and negative G. They are merely accelerations in different directions. If the acceleration is skyward, we call that positive G, and if it is toward the ground we call it negative. Of course, it really depends on which way your body is facing.

    1. Re:Positive and Negative by Noel · · Score: 4, Informative

      In this context, positive and negative Gs are relative to the body orientation: positive Gs are directed from head to feet; negative Gs are directed from feet to head.

      In physics, there may be no difference between positive and negative Gs, but there are definite physiological differences in how the body reacts to positive and negative Gs, and how much the body can tolerate in each direction. Like the previous poster said, negative Gs cause increased blood pressure in the head, which can lead to bursting blood vessels. Contrariwise, positive Gs cause decreased blood pressure (and flow) to the head, and can eventually cause blackouts.

  142. No need for regulation by Goner · · Score: 1

    Once I was at the great Cedar Point, I was probably 13 or 14 or so, and I got in the back car of that one seemingly rickety (but new) wooden coaster they have. (the wolf, or something). And it flew down, and at the end of the big hill, the wind was completely knocked the heck out of me.

    The coaster continued on it's frenzied path, really a great coaster, and then, right before our set of cars slid back into the loading dock, and the other set of cars flew down the first hill, the coaster was halted. The people in front of me were all messed up. One really overweight guy was all red, and apparently I looked rather strange due to my gasping for air during the majority of the ride. We probably sat there for 10 or so minutes before they started the coaster back up again.

    Final point is that I think the coaster designers/handsomely paid completely sober operators can handle their machines...

    peace, rich

  143. just like the government by mikenb · · Score: 1

    So why is it the government deems it necasary to regulate every aspect of our lives? If i want to ride a roller coaster until I pass out... that should be my choice to do so. We are in war-time right now. Surely there's better issues that the government needs to deal with. How bout... say getting some supreme court justices confirmed? Stay out of stupid "issues" that this and get to more pressing matters.

    --
    "Sometimes the most intelligent statement is the one that is left unsaid"
  144. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ummm you're one dumb motherfucker. tobacco is a lot easier to grow than marijuana or poppies. and alcohol can be distilled in your fucking kitchen. you're whole post reeks of nerdum. atleast try drugs before you spout out a buncha false facts. goon.

  145. Re:Can someone point out these 'coasters to me bef by maxume · · Score: 2

    Try cedar point. Only problem is that it is in Ohio, which has no real other reason to exist. It is in Sandusky, which is a bit west of Cleveland. They have the tallest coaster in the states right now, but I think there is a taller one in Japan. They even have a web site: Cedar Point, which claims that they are the Roller Coaster Capital of the world, so it must be good. I must say though, I don't experience a hint of nostalgia when I ride on the damn wooden coasters, just a bunch of pain...

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  146. Re:Great... by 8Complex · · Score: 0

    I think the point is - if you are willing to risk your life, you should be willing to accept the consequences.

    Someone can dive off of a building into a lake, but if they haven't taken the consequences into mind before they jump, it's their fault if the water is only 2 feet deep and the die upon impact.

    IMO, the best thing the government could do in regards to this is to put a rating system on coasters with the info on g-forces freely available to all riding them. If you know you can't handle 3 g's, don't get on the ride, dummy!

  147. Rollercoaster regulations.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I rode your mom like a rollercoaster last night, will those excessive g-forces be regulated by this?

    [This post brought to you by the Troll under the sink]

  148. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And what tablet handed down from God had that one on it?

    It's the tablet that says: The candidate who says "We have to do something about this problem!" is the one who gets the votes. The incumbant who licks the soccer moms' boots, gets to stay in office.

    That tablet from God. Do you really have any doubts that such a tablet exists?

  149. Ducking the issue by sharkey · · Score: 2

    G-forces? Whoopty-doo. When are they going to take action against the true danger to people on roller coasters, the geese? Fabio still has nightmares.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  150. Re:More G force than Astronauts? Well, yes but... by Noel · · Score: 2
    I know the breathing techniques, and I know to keep my head relatively still.

    Ah, now that does make a difference, though. How many of the general public know anything about these techniques? I suspect people often hold their breath from excitement, and keep turning their heads to watch whats going on around them on the coaster.

    <tongue location="firmly in cheek">
    Perhaps what we need is certified G-force education, and have to present our G-card before riding any good coaster.
    </tongue>

  151. G-forces aren't interesting by edp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Why do they think people ride roller coasters to begin with?"

    Like many things, the reason people think they do something is not necessarily the reason people do it. If a person gets on a roller coaster, enjoys it, and does it again, they may figure they like the G-forces they experienced. But a lot of people don't understand physics or the human body or their own mental processes, so their simple correlation of one part of the experience with the cause of the enjoyment is not necessarily indicative of a causal relationship.

    Ask objectively, is it the G-forces people enjoy? Isolate the G-forces to see. Suppose you put somebody in a roller-coaster car mounted over some artificial gravity plating. You dial up the G-forces to two gravities, three, maybe even six. Then you ask the person if they're having fun. The answer will pretty much be no. At two gravities, maybe some people will be interested in what they are feeling, but it isn't really exciting. At higher gravities, they'll be uncomfortable. Even if you don't sustain six gravities but merely pulse the plating for fractions of a second, they'll still be uncomfortable. Above two gravities, there is really nothing new to the experience; it is just more of the same, and it is boring, if not painful.

    Objectively, I think a claim that G-forces (really acceleration) are the source of enjoyment won't hold up. Here are some other candidates for the true sources of pleasure: The thrill of the appearance of danger. The unusual perspective of being upside down. The surprise of the unknown as acceleration and velocities change without warning and in unusual ways.

    The appearance of danger is thrilling because evolution naturally produces a fascination with danger. Evolution causes an organism to be fascinated with danger because if your brain focuses intensely on danger, you are better able to avoid it. (You recognize it, you avoid it, you figure out what to do,...) Because avoiding danger is very important to survival, your brain is very attracted to focusing on danger. And it is not just focusing; there is also pleasure. The reason for the pleasure is to reward you for having learned something. You have done something good for your continued survival, so there is pleasure associated with it.

    Being upside-down and experiencing unusual changes in acceleration and velocity may be entertaining simply because we are curious and enjoy being stimulated. Curiousity is also a feature of an organism making its way in a complicated world. It's pleasurable just as above, because learning enhances survival, although not as intense as apparent danger.

    Personally, I enjoy free-fall more than high acceleration. It's a more unusual experience, and zero-gravity is qualitatively different from two-gravities. And, of course, the feeling of falling is highly correlated with great danger, so it produces some of the same intense mental focus on the experience.

    So, no, G-forces are not the real reason people ride roller coasters. They may play a role, but there are plenty of other factors, and there are plenty of ways to use accelerations entertainingly without cranking up the acceleration to dangerous levels.

    1. Re:G-forces aren't interesting by cthulhubob · · Score: 1

      You're obviously not an engineer :)

      The very factors you list as entertaining *require* a certain level of acceleration to be viable.

      Being upside-down can't happen for very long in a traditional (wheels under the car, no other means of attaching to the rail) coaster. It is required to switch back and forth, or corkscrew -- each change in velocity (direction is a part of velocity as well as speed) implies a change in acceleration.

      Free-fall is the other big one you mentioned. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my assumption is that if you like free-fall, you'll like a longer sustained duration of free-fall even more. Free-falling for 1/2 a second won't give you as much of a rush as free-fall for 3 seconds, right?

      Well, at some point the free-fall has to end in a curve upwards (unless you like to hit the ground at the end of your fall - I don't). This curve is a change in velocity and acceleration which is measured as a scalar of G. A more gradual curve may pull 1.5 G, while a more sudden change in direction (which is more thrilling because the rider feels that he/she has been saved from death by a split second) will assert more force - in the vicinity of 4 or 5 G.

      You can't rationalize physics away - if you take away more powerful G forces, you *do* by necessity reduce how thrilling the ride is.

      --

      In post-9/11 America, the CIA interrogates YOU!
    2. Re:G-forces aren't interesting by spun · · Score: 2

      I agree with you completely on the point of fascination with danger, and what makes roller coasters exciting. Roller coaster rider's brain activity after riding an enjoyable ride is similar to brain activity after snorting cocaine. That is, for people who enjoyed the ride. For others the experience is more akin to drinking some syrup of ipecac.

      When I was a kid, my parents held me a lot. They also swung me around and tossed me in the air. I can still remember my exhilleration at two years old, flying up over my dad's head or around in circles.

      I remember reading that in the early days of building skyscrapers, companies hired Native Americans to work high in the buildings, as they never seemed to be afraid of heights or to get motion sickness.

      I think that maybe the human brain goes through a developmental stage where it either learns to be comfortable with lots of kinesthetic changes, or it doesn't. Maybe babies left on their backs in cribs all the time grow up to be carsick, roller coaster fearing types.

      I know from experience that high G-forces aren't the fun part of coasters. Being mildly tossed into the air is fun. Being thrown upwards to the point of eye-popping blood flow to the head is irritating and usually over too quick to be fun. Going through a vertical loop or corkscrew at high speed doesn't even give the sensation of being inverted. Going through those inversions slowly is exciting, especially if you didn't see them coming. It's the seconds long, less than one G feeling of plunging that's exciting, not the momentary 3-6 G force at the bottom.

      A roller coaster is a type of performance medium that conforms to Aristotle's laws of Poetics. It has a plot, and should build dramatic tension by asking and resolving questions. When are we going to go through that big loop I keep seeing? What's around that corner there? Is my head going to whack that track we're passing under? Will we crash into the ground at the bottom of that hill? As with any drama, we know the answers, at least we think we do.

      A good coaster is like a good story, it has exciting or confusing parts interspersed with tame parts. Modern coaster builders understand this, at least the good ones do. It's about drama and surprise, not G-forces.

      Part of the excitement of a really good drama, or any extreme sport, is that we don't actually know if it's a heroic drama, or a tragedy. Sometimes the hero dies.

      Usually, though, the cavalry comes through at the end, the hero finds new inner strength to fight on and win, and your head doesn't whack the tracks above. Quite frankly, the dramatic tension inherent in the question, "Will I survive the drive to and from the theme park" should be far greater in any rational person's mind than that inherent in the question "Will I survive the theme park?"

      P.S. Anyone who has played Roller Coaster Tycoon much knows that peeps like coasters with positive vertical Gs below 5, negative G forces no higher than 1, and horizontal G forces under 2.5. Oh, yeah, and if you whip them suckers back and forth with high G side to side motions, you better hire a lot of guys with mops and buckets! ;-)

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
    3. Re:G-forces aren't interesting by edp · · Score: 2

      "The very factors you list as entertaining *require* a certain level of acceleration to be viable."

      That is a non sequitur, because the fact that X requires Y does not mean that liking X implies liking Y. For example, I like eating, and I have to work to eat, but that does not mean I like working. Now, remember my claim is that people likely do not enjoy acceleration, not particularly anyway. So the fact that acceleration is required to get what they do enjoy does not show they enjoy acceleration.

      Yes, you need acceleration to turn people upside-down, and you need acceleration to get people to the point where they can go into free fall or recover from it. But you do not need "G-forces", if the term means multiple gravities of acceleration. When a roller coaster is upside-down, it does not need multiple gravities to pin people in their seats. It only needs one gravity to counter the force of gravity plus some margin for safety. (And then the net force on the riders can be slight, less than the force due to gravity.)

      "... if you take away more powerful G forces, you *do* by necessity reduce how thrilling the ride is."

      There is no conservation of acceleration in the laws of physics. You do not need to compensate for free-fall in once place with high gravities in another. There is conservation of position in the end, if you want to return the riders to their starting point. However, that can be accomplished with free-fall in one place and mild acceleration of a longer duration in another place. In fact, the ride up to the first drop in traditional roller coasters is generally longer than the free fall that follows. You could even make the times closer by doing the ride up at two gravities (one from the Earth, one from mechanics). You wouldn't need to get anywhere near the six gravities mentioned in the article.

      You want thrilling? Tell me which is more thrilling: Being at the top of a loop pressed firmly into your seat for a fraction of a second, too uncomfortable to pay attention to the experience, or being at the top of a loop for several times long and having the feeling that you're floating out of your seat a bit. The former happens at multiple gravities. The latter happens at, say, a half-gravity. The former is merely a quick visual whirlwind. The latter is visual and visceral.

    4. Re:G-forces aren't interesting by edp · · Score: 2

      "Will we crash into the ground at the bottom of that hill?"

      Yes, and a nice example of that is the Superman ride at Six Flags in Massachusetts. Spoiler warning! Stop reading if you want to be surprised on the ride.

      There's one point on the Superman ride where you crest a hilll and plunge downward. You see the ground, and you're waiting for the track to bottom out, and the ground keeps coming, and you get concerned, and the ground keeps coming, and the train plunges straight into the ground!

      There's a hidden tunnel there.

      It was very well done, a complete surprise to first-time riders if they did not inspect the track before entering the ride. You don't see the tunnel coming up, and the entrance is hidden in mist so you don't even see it during the final approach. It's a real scare, and the amount of acceleration required for this effect is zero.

    5. Re:G-forces aren't interesting by cthulhubob · · Score: 1

      I agree with your loop remark at the bottom there :)

      But I still think that being whisked away from sudden death at the bottom of a long fall is more exciting than looking down for a third of a second and then gradually tilting back from vertical to become level. If a momentary force of four, five or even six gravities is going to be felt after the sudden swoop upward, well that's just the price I'm going to pay because otherwise the ride certainly wasn't interesting enough for me to wait in line for.

      --

      In post-9/11 America, the CIA interrogates YOU!
  152. Hmm...me too by Funk_dat69 · · Score: 1

    I had the exact same symptoms, but it occured after eating a amusement park hotdog and drinking the water in the "It's a Small World Afterall" ride.

    And with you symptoms, by any chance did you also see waves of muscial color or a rather talkative water fountain?

    Damn these rollercoasters. It was them all along.

    --
    FUNK!
  153. Re:Great... by dmarx · · Score: 1
    The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.

    No, Its job is to protect people from harm from OTHERS, not themselves. My life, my prerogative if I want to risk it.

    --
    "Do I dare disturb the universe?"
  154. Headaches...only Mean Streak by Noel · · Score: 2

    At Cedar Point, I only get a headache after Mean Streak. That's an uuuugly ride, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. The rest of the coasters are wonderful - although Mantis is getting a bit rougher as it gets old.

    1. Re:Headaches...only Mean Streak by Peyna · · Score: 2

      Yeah, either I'm just more sensitive to all the getting jarred around, or rides really start to suck with age. If you've ridden The Magnum lately (the original real tall one there), it feels like it's going to come apart going over those hills. I wonder if the new one will age even faster with how fast it goes and all the forces at work on the track, etc.

      --
      What?
  155. Your sig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Explain why we should give a flying fuck about your cousin, when you have the shittiest sig I have ever seen on Slashdot.

    Let's see, why would you feel the need to spoil every major thing that happens in Episode II? Maybe you are such a loser that the only way you can feel "elite" is by thinking that people who haven't seen the movie by now deserve to have it spoiled? Maybe someone ruined it for you, and you're so selfish that you want to ruin it for anyone else you can? Maybe your mommy touched you in a bad way and now you have a grudge against the world?

    Honestly, you are the worst troll I think I've ever seen. At least the other trolls are at -1. It's too bad you didn't black out on that rollercoaster.

  156. Re:Great... by Creepy · · Score: 1

    Minnesota has some fun ones too -

    I remember from some research I did in high school (many moons ago) that pre-marital sex is illegal in the state, as is oral sex. I think oral was considered a sodomy gross misdemeanor, with a maximum penalty of $10 (from a 1910-20 law, so it was a realistic amount at that time). Several governors have tried to rid these blue laws from the record books, but many of these attempts have failed because the laws are still used to add sentencing to rape and incest cases.

    I recall worse laws, though, such as one eastern seaboard state that has a death penalty for slurping soup (I think it was Massachusetts, but I really don't remember the state as much as the law :)

  157. Your sig by Dephex+Twin · · Score: 2

    Could you please explain why you feel the need to spoil every major plot point of Episode II in your sig? I'm curious what would possess someone to do that.

    mark

    --

    If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
  158. Re:Great... by Tosta+Dojen · · Score: 2
    I agree. It is not the government's job to protect me from myself. It is their job to protect me from other people (and other people from me).

    This is where it gets tricky, because is the government here wanting to protect you from yourself or from the sometimes sloppy roller coaster manufacturers and designers? The government does that sort of protecting all the time; the whole idea behind the Consumer Product Safety Commission is to protect people from the oversights of the big corporations.

    That said, the situation here is probably not as simple as we would think.

    --

    I have a strong belief in the Second Amendment.

  159. Haiku! by Haiku_troll · · Score: 1

    All the fun coasters
    Will soon be slow and boring
    Thanks to New Jersey

  160. Re:Great... by purpledinoz · · Score: 1

    You Americans are lucky to have good roller coasters. The roller coasters at Canada's Wonderland (Near Toronto) aren't nearly as good as the ones in Cedar Point.... they haven't added a new coaster in like 5 years!

  161. Re:Great... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 2

    What about the people who fight and die over who gets to be the dealer in your neighborhood?

    What about the people who die trying to illegally smuggle drugs into the country?

    Unless you're making your own drugs for your own personal use, you're contributing to a large criminal network that does result in the death of many people every day.

    /gets down off his soapbox

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
  162. Re:Great... by neuroticia · · Score: 1

    and what tablet gave God the right to hand down a tablet? And what built the wood that built the house that....

    I think that overall one of two things happened that gave the government the 'right' to regulate the people. Either the people chose the government through a long process involving butterfly ballots, or the government came in with guns and told the people that those who did not love them would be shot.

    That does seem to be the most logical over-simplification of the past, no?

    -Sara

  163. Re:Great... by neuroticia · · Score: 1

    That is why we do not live in Arkansas, Atlanta, or New Jersey. :p Pick a state with laws that are the closest to how you would like them, and lobby your butt off to get the laws you don't like changed. If that doesn't work, build a rollercoaster in your backyard.. I'd put a link, but the poor guy already got slashdotted once.

    -Sara

  164. Re:Great... by neuroticia · · Score: 1

    I agree. I 100% agree. The comment about protecting stupid people from themselves was a joke. (mostly)

    The truth is that the government, in this incident, is attempting to protect people from something that could be quite dangerous. If people have died from rollercoaster-related injuries, then it's the government's duty to protect them because... When someone dies from a rollercoaster related injury what's the first thing we hear? A major public outlash about how the government should be more careful about inspecting the damned things.

    And what, if you were to ask the common Joe about rollercoasters, would you hear? "Oh, they're perfectly safe. The government inspects them and wouldn't allow anything that would hurt us." This is in the face of the fact that the statement is quite blatantly untrue.

    To err on the side of caution and regulate, or to face the potential backlash and anger of the voters? Hmm..

    -Sara

  165. Goliath... by Rorschach1 · · Score: 2

    Gives me tunnel vision for a second or two, during that fast spiral at the end. I can easily imagine someone with low blood pressure blacking out there.

  166. Riding Roller Coasters in general.... by greymond · · Score: 1

    (i'll probably get modded down for this but oh well)

    I just wanted to point out that I for one could never understand the point in being placed in a box and flung around in circles and loops for a given period of time as fun...

    then again i dont really understand why i accept being placed in a box for a given period of time and not moving every mon-fri....

  167. Speaking of FUD by SedentaryZ · · Score: 1

    You (and the rest of the pilots) ran 2.5 miles in 8 minutes 30 seconds? Damn!, you're fast! That means you averaged a 3:24 mile. Spectacular, when you consider that in 1999 the world record for the mile was 3:43.13. Time for the Air Force to start putting some pilots in the Olympics. :)

    If you're that fast on the track, I can only imagine your 'grunting' prowess...

    1. Re:Speaking of FUD by Mr.Intel · · Score: 2

      Please excuse my mis-type. It was 10:30.

      --
      ASCII tastes bad dude.
      Binary it is then.
    2. Re:Speaking of FUD by Ozymandias_KoK · · Score: 1

      Right...you had to run 4 minute 12 second miles? Either your math or your memory is failing you.

    3. Re:Speaking of FUD by SedentaryZ · · Score: 1

      Maybe he's right. It could be that a combination of the running and the boost from well-trained 'pot-grunting' could get him into this time range.

      There must be a big difference between being a pilot and qualifying for AFROTC. The Cadets only have to run 2 miles in between 12:30 and 18:00. I guess you can run faster as a commissioned officer.
      AFROTC Male Scoresheet

  168. The obvious next piece of legislation then by aztektum · · Score: 2

    If they're going to ban things that kill people when they choose to participate of their own free will though, when will they ban guns that are used to kill people against their will?

    57 people if that number is accurate is not an epidemic. When legislation like this builds momentum I stop and think "How many people are killed by guns each year?" and I'm not a gun control type, just a common sense person.

    Stop "trying" to make the public safe you morons, it isn't working.

    If this kind of protecting us keeps up soon there won't be any Darwin Awards to give out b/c everything foolish enough to try will be illegal.

    *sigh*

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
  169. one death a year? by meatbridge · · Score: 1

    those numbers aren't exactly staggering. this isn't a major issue like obesity or cancer. thats what is killing people. perhaps we should turn our attention to these things instead of wondering who is going to win the roller coaster death lottery.

    p.s. at least if you die on a rollercoaster you died having fun.

  170. Re:Great... by royalblue_tom · · Score: 1

    /jumps on your soapbox

    These deaths are only occuring because the drugs are illegal, not because of the effects of the drug itself. By your very argument, the government could legalise drugs, AND SAVE LIVES!

    /takes soap box, for use in storing soap

  171. Re: buses and school-related legislation by King_TJ · · Score: 2

    Bleah.... Dragging out the old "you should be in control of your own vehicle at all times" excuse doesn't cut it in my book.

    The problem is, legislators have gone off the deep end trying to pass any law related to the safety of kids in school. They know that this gives them "brownie points" towards their re-election, since it makes them look like they care - and makes them popular with parents.

    Where I live, there are all sorts of designated "school zones" where the speed limit suddenly drops to something ridiculously slow simply because the road goes past a school. They don't even do this with flashing lights that come on during the times school is letting out or starting... They simply tell you it's the law from 8AM to 5PM or something like that.

    Why in the world would school kids be out playing in a public street when they're supposed to be *in class*??

    A law regulating stopping on both sides of any school bus is almost as crazy. School buses shouldn't be turned into some sort of mobile traffic-blocker that everyone wants to avoid at all costs! Any kid that hasn't learned enough to not run out into the street when traffic is approaching is going to get him/herself hit eventually anyway. "Underdeveloped peripheral vision" and "easily distracted"?? Sounds like you're grasping at straws to find excuses.... I remember being a kid and sure I was easily distracted. I never got hit by a car though, and this was before all of this legislation about stopping anyplace near a school bus. I was simply scared into being careful by my parents, who taught me to always look both ways before crossing a street.

  172. Re:Great... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

    I wish I had a URL, but there was a study done in the Netherlands last year that concluded that a person driving stoned was a safer driver than a person driving sober.

    Jaysyn

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  173. Re:Great... by Kbug · · Score: 1
    That's true, but if I get caught growing pot plants in my back yard, I can still go to jail, DESPITE the fact that it's a weed and maybe well, it just "grew there". :)

    Think about the differences between alcohol (legal) and oh, for the sake of argument, marijuana (since that seems to have the biggest support of legalizing it).

    1. Alcohol is much more likely to make people violent. Marijuana just makes people sit around on their couches watching bad television and laughing at it anyway.
    2. Alcohol has a terrible affect on motor skills, hence driving while drunk is stupid and dangerous to you and (most importantly) others. Drunk people, because they think it is cool or something, often try (and succeed) to drive. Stoned people are much less likely to get up the impetus to go ANYWHERE.
    3. Stoned people smile a lot and generally affect those around them in a positive manner. Drunk people often become obnoxious, impossible to understand, and grope those around them.

    Okay, so maybe a comparison with alcohol is not the BEST argument for marijuana, but if the point of it being illegal is that you might hurt OTHERS... The people who are going to drive stoned are the same assholes who think it's cool to drive drunk. Stupidity is probably the biggest way of "harming others" and unfortunately, our society doesn't allow us to retaliate against stupidity.

    Ironically, this brings me back to the original argument about roller coasters. There are warnings all OVER them that say "if you have a heart problem, if you are pregnant, if you are not this tall, do NOT get on this ride." If you ignore those warnings and something happens to you, it's your own fault because you are... say it with me... STUPID.

    I went to an amusement park one REALLY hot summer day, and as I usually do, I went on the biggest roller coaster in the park. I passed out for about 10 seconds while on it, probably due to the heat. So, I didn't go ON any more roller coasters that day. I've since been on plenty, when it was NOT 100 degrees outside, and had no problems.

    Sure the government should be allowed to check the rollercoasters and make sure they're not rotting/rusting out, falling down, or otherwise being any more hazardous than being in a car with a race car driver at the wheel. And i'm not even completely against there being some limits to what the roller coaster manufacturers are allowed to do. Terms like "breakneck speed" should probably scare us. It sounds like the regulations NJ is trying to impose are reasonable, but I guess my worry is the whole "slippery slope" of government interference.

    Err, that was a long post...I'll shut up now.

    --
    ------------ Yoda Rocks my world. Seriously.
  174. Re:Great... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

    You believe exactly what they want you to.

    I can't believe you have never stopped to think: Well if this stuff, or at least some of this stuff was legal & taxed, considering it's much less dangerous than alcohol, then we'd have a little less crime & death in our society. Countries with lax drug laws have fewer drug problems.

    "Making Marjuana illegal is like saying God screwed up." -Bill Hicks

    Jaysyn

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  175. Race Car Drivers? BULL! by Banner · · Score: 1

    Race Car drivers DO NOT face that much in the way of G-Forces! Really now!! And Astronauts do face more, though more in training than in using the shuttle.

    As for your being dizzy a long time it could be due to G-forces, but more likely is do to your inner ear. I used to pull 7 to 8 on almost daily, you get used to it soon enough. I suggest you learn the M-1 manuever.

    1. Re:Race Car Drivers? BULL! by n3h3m14h · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but race car drivers do face 3 or more G's. One can argue if it's positive G's or lateral G's that are felt; that depends on the kind of circuit.

      You may recall that CART canceled the race at Texas Speedway last year because of the high speeds and resulting G-forces experienced on the banking. If I recall, it was something over 5 G's for significant amounts of time, and a number of drivers experienced problems as a result--including some crashes during practice. The faster you go, the steeper the banking, the higher the positive G's.

      In Formula 1 (my kind of racing), the drivers frequently race on circuits with high speed corners that pass 3.5 lateral G's... it's like someone is trying to rip your head off. Then there's the longitudinal G-Forces under acceleration and braking: 0-60 mph in 2.3 seconds, 0-100 mph in 3.6 seconds (that almost 1.5 G's). An F-1 car can scrub 100 mph in a second under braking (that's 5 G's). When braking and accelerating out of a corner, F-1 drivers can experience loads as high as 5 G's.

      Astronauts in the space shuttle are subjected largely to longitudinal G-Forces as the shuttle accelerates during launch. 3 G's of longitudinal acceleration in an appropriately reclined position is not that bad a thing.

    2. Re:Race Car Drivers? BULL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was watching the Indy 500 qualifying and they were talking about the new "soft" walls they installed this year. They said that during a crash the drivers were experiencing 100-110Gs and the "soft" walls cut the Gs by about 50%.

  176. What the frell! by Rexburg · · Score: 1

    The one thing I can still do without the MPAA/RIAA on my ass, and they want to legislate it!

    --

    ---------
    Launch all sig
  177. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In other words, to simplify: "The secret to driving stoned... is knowing that you're stoned!" - Jeff Spicoli, FTARH

    :)

  178. Re: buses and school-related legislation by RESPAWN · · Score: 2

    What everybody seems to be ignoring here is the fact that many kids might live on the other side of the street from where the bus stops meaning that they will eventually have to cross to the other side of the street to get home, so why the hell shouldn't they do it when they get off the bus? I know that in my area we've had this same law in effect since we moved here in 1988.


    I think it's a good law. Especially in light of the fact that some kids may be picked up and dropped off on very busy roads, making it dangerous for them to try to cross the street without the aid of the school bus to stop the traffic. So you have to stop for 30 seconds while a kid gets off the bus. So what? Is anybody really in that much of a hurry that they can't stop for 30 seconds to let some friggin' kids get off the damn bus? Christ! Have some compassion for the little buggers. Besides, I'm not sure about your area, but here as a bus approaches a stop they first turn on these little yellow lights that serve to warn the rest of the traffic to slow the fuck down, because I'm about to stop. As somebody already mentioned, kids aren't always the smartest people or paying attention so it's our job as motorists to watch out for them, not the other way around. In fact, the same applies to any other pedestrians. If you hit them, you are responsible. Period. End of story. Now quit bitching about having to stop for school buses and learn to drive with a little more caution.


    --Posting without karma bonus due to the fact that this discussion is off-topic.

    --

    If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

  179. Peer pressure by ClarkEvans · · Score: 2

    Ya, but the G forces are nothing compared to the peer pressure a 13 year old boy feels when his buddies prod him to go on the "big one".

  180. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, that's it... DEATH TO SOCCER MOMS!!!

    Sorry, I just had to say it.. why can't they mind their own damn business and stop trying to legislate their Puritan morals onto me? America really pisses me off sometimes. I was considering moving to Australia, but I couldn't live without my broadband. =(

  181. terrifying peer pressure thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    p.s. at least if you die on a rollercoaster you died having fun.

    Not exactly, I remember being a little 13 year old boy terrified of the things (and preferring much slower rides) and blacking out on one of them. For young males it isn't really a "choice" as much as a peer pressure thing...

  182. yeah woohooie.. rollercoaster fly-coon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it all happened quite suddenly...
    it was 3 am and i was playing rollercoaster tycoon so i was getting a little crazy you know so i like start to like build ridiculous rollercoasters that subject passengers to ridiculously high G's and then pick up people out of the park and make them ride and they get off and barf all over the place and i think its really funny ha ha ha. yeah. and its funnier if i make them barf and don't have anybody to clean it up and build a big ghetto amusement park with stupid rides and really expensive drinks. hahaha. and no bathrooms. hahaha. yeah hahaha. i'm crazy whack yo. hahaha.

  183. Re:Roller Coasters in Blackpool by 56ker · · Score: 1

    When they drained the pool under the rollercoaster at Blackpool's Pleasure Beach they found forty seven pairs of false teeth. People had screamed on the roller coaster and lost their false teeth!

  184. Coaster article in today's Washington Post by jonerik · · Score: 2

    Worth a read is this article in today's Washington Post. Nice to see that someone (Bret Lovejoy in this instance) has more guts to stand up to lawmakers than the guy running Six Flags.

  185. It's just natural selection by MagikSlinger · · Score: 2

    Imagine two couples going on a high-g coaster for a date:

    When the first couple gets on, the man is not physiologically fit enough to survive extreme g-forces and will be crippled for life, while his girlfriend survives fine. Meanwhile the second couple gets on and the woman dies from the extreme forces, but the man survives.

    This means the surviving male and female can meet beside the ambulance taking their former partners away and go on to have a happy, productive relationship producing the next generation of high-g enthusiasts.

    It's nature's way of breeding the next generation of fighter pilots.

    David Attenborough would agree with me!

    --
    The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
  186. Re:Great... by TomServo · · Score: 1

    I'm also in the "that's ridiculous" boat. Every roller coaster I've ever seen is *well* within the limits of safety, generally with huge margins for error when they run. The physics principles behind each and every roller coaster are sound, the trick is to make what is essentially very safe seem dangerous as hell. At Magic Mountain out here in Cali., I believe they've had one death, and that was a woman with a pre-existing condition that she was unaware of that caused an aneurysm or something similar. Either way, doctors later said that it was one of those things that was set off by the roller coaster, but a close call in the car, or a number of other situations could have just as easily caused it to happen, so ultimately it wasn't from the coaster.

    Ultimately, even on probably the highest G-Force part of the park, (Goliath, nearing the end, on the corkscrew down to the ground), it's still not so strong that I can't lift my head against it. Can't same the same for the vomitron 5000 at the local county fair...

  187. Face off. Kings Island. Outer limits. The Bat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Face off is cool, but a little short.
    Good loops if you like that.

    Outer limits was quite a brutal ride before they slowed it down. The warned you about earrings, because it would shake your head back and forth.
    The launch was the most G's that I have felt.
    But they slowed it down.

    The old Bat was good too. Then people died because of bad restraints. They replaced the restraints and slowed it down. Then the beastie was more fun.

  188. Fun is outlawed in shocking new bill. by Sj0 · · Score: 2

    Fun was outlawed today, as it was showed that it was possible for fun to cause bodily harm and death. "Fun is doubleplus ungood" said one senator, back from a one-year trip to the bahamas, "People are the property of the state, and we can't be risking our investement! After all, longevity is good! To think otherwise would be crimethink!". the passing of the bill was attributed to the support from right wing religious groups, such as "Fun is a sin group", and "the christian coalition for biblical scale suffering".

    Outlined in a new bill passed today, many forms of fun have been outlawed, the most notable(last minute additions) being sex, smoking, alcohol, frolicking without a permit, singing to yourself, and playing video games.

    When asked about this bill, the heads of the RIAA and MPAA were in agreement -- this bill would be essential for them to protect their copyrights. one key official, who asked to remain anonymous(lest somebody try to have some fun by egging his house), was in paticular agreement; "The fact that we can now enforce that nobody is allowed to sing to themselves, we plan on marketing a line of (doubleplus unfun) Britany Spears albims,". To ensure nobody tries to buy these albums because of the previous fun which some have had listening to her music, Spears will be changing her name to "Jocke da lumberjack".

    Sj Zero is a major proponent of "fun" everywhere, and author of his new book, "fun is doubleplus good".
    -AP

    --
    It's been a long time.
  189. Re:Great... by drauh · · Score: 1

    Yeah, there should be no limits on G-forces at all. I'd like a ride where you take people up 20 stories (200 ft -- ~70m), then drop them. The G-forces they experience when they hit the ground will be something that they have never experienced, nor ever will. (You took physics, you do the math.)

    --
    This is a tautology.
  190. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    massachusetts has no death penalty you ass-spelonker.

  191. Re:Great... by Sj0 · · Score: 2

    That's really cause and effect. If you make something illegal, the underground will spawn a criminal distribution network. That same distribution network is far more an arguement for legalizing a substance(hence making it available in a controlled manner, with controls in place to ensure that only safe drugs reach the people, rather than only having drugs available from the crazy guy on the corner) than against. If you are working on a high rise building, and people keep falling off this one place without a guard rail, it makes somewhat more sense to put a guardrail there than say "okay, falling off there is against the rules!".

    --
    It's been a long time.
  192. Re:Great... by Grunschev · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised that everyone on /. thinks G-force limits is a stupid law. Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it.

    I haven't heard of any theme park (or corporate owner thereof) making a ride without consideration of their customers. (Perhaps you can name one for me.)

    Roller coasters are huge investments and are not taken lightly by those spending the money. Remember, the point is to attract people to the park, not kill them. And it's hard to attract people to the park if the owners are sued out of business, or the national news is constantly running stories on people getting injured or killed.

    But you probably know much more about this than I do. I've only ridden about 30 different coasters and my ownership role in Cedar Fair was quite small.

    Igor

  193. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Heh. I knew a guy in college who got pulled over while driving on the beltway stoned. The scenario went something like this:

    Cop: Driver's license and registration please.

    Dude: Ummm, did I do something wrong, officer?

    Cop: Do you know how fast you were going back there?

    Dude: Errr ... I don't know. Was I speeding?

    Cop: No, you were going 15 MPH.

    True story.
  194. Re:Great... by Dudio · · Score: 1

    What about the pimply-faced highschool sophomore that's driving home from school while checking out his sister's hot freshman friend sitting in the back seat, but oops there's a little girl walking home from school who just happens to be in his way? Should there be a ban on highschool sophomores' sisters having hot freshman friends in order to prevent tragedies such as this? Perhaps people of higher than average attractiveness should be required to wear Taliban-style robes and such in public.

    Think of the children! Won't somebody please think of the children?!?

  195. All Disneyland deaths in detail.. by delus10n0 · · Score: 1

    Go here.

    It doesn't have the most recent, but it's got everything else. Enjoy!

    --
    Not All Who Wander Are Lost
  196. Why do they think... by theDEFT · · Score: 1

    people ride roller coasters to begin with? I ride to die. The fact that i don't die with every ride is the only dissappointment.

  197. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering just how ludicrously shady the "theme park" business is these assholes need a good old slap of reality.

    Sux Flags and Great America come to mind

    Yeah lets build a centerfuge whip people around in a poorly designed uncofortable saftey harness, then wonder why on earth people are conserend that saftey and fun are being comprimised

    now you peons wonder why senetors have a genuince consern, egad if you want to fucking help email them a constructive list of how far is TO far in g-force rides

  198. Do they have the power? by SeanAhern · · Score: 2

    Fine. Let's say for the sake of argument that you're right.

    Something that every person should do when considering whether a new law should come into existence is whether the legislating body has that power.

    Does the Constitution of New Jersey give the N.J. Legislature the power to regulate sporting and recreational activities? It certainly may, I haven't looked at it.

    But the point is that there are a heck of a lot of laws out there, both at the Federal and State levels, that dramatically overstep the bounds of what the legislative bodies are actually allowed to do.

    If the answer comes out "yes, they do have the power", only then should the merits of the law in question be debated.

    1. Re:Do they have the power? by lkaos · · Score: 2

      Does the Constitution of New Jersey give the N.J. Legislature the power to regulate sporting and recreational activities?

      Yes, they do have this power actually. One cannot operate an amusement park without obtaining a license from the state. This is because it is concerned a "dangerous activity." Being considered dangerous, allows for regulation of what would otherwise be none of the States business.

      New Jersey actually regulates a bunch of things based on this... Various sports and activities are considered "dangerous" and therefore subject to legislation.

      --
      int func(int a);
      func((b += 3, b));
  199. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dunno about about poppies, but there's a reason hemp is called "weed." Throw some seeds in a ditch, you'll have a flowering plant a few months later. It'll be shitty bud, but hemp is much, much easier to grow than tobacco, and growing it's a lot easier than distilling alcohol. The only difficulties in growing hemp are the artificially imposed ones in blue uniforms.

  200. Re:Great... by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    "Think about it the theme park (large multimillion dollar corporation) makes a ride without thinking about the safety of people riding it."

    Okay, I've thought about it and determined that they DO think about the safety. What is at risk? Their multimillion dollar international corporation running the park. The company that designed the coaster. The jobs of thousands of people. And insurance coverage. "Hey, Bob, it's Jim. Yeah, we just built a coaster that is unsafe. Can we get some insurance?" ...no

    "The rollercoaster corporations aren't considering our safety and just building massive things with g-forces that'll knock your brain into your ass"

    It is in their best interests to make a safe ride, for financial reasons. They are not out to bankrupt their company just to kill some people.

    "the only way they'll understand is if when they walk away from the ride one of them drops dead. "

    Show me a record of every time this has happened, and been CONFIRMED by an educated, LICENSED medical expert (means: not the media, not a congressperson, etc.). Once? Twice? Yeah, I'm fearing for my life. This is a 1 in 25 million chance. I think I'll go buy a lottery ticket.

  201. Re:Great... by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    Good post. Note - anneuyrsm on Goliath was just chance. Could have happened anywhere - even sitting on a bench. Going to outlaw benches now?

    BENCHES: A PUBLIC MENACE ;)

  202. Re:Great... by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    Their are many more people involved in car or train or plane or street-crossing related injuries each year than on roller coasters. The government cannot regulate and oversee everything, and should stick to bigger issues. A 1 in 25 million chance of death is nowhere near big enough for the government to seriously oversee. If you expect better than that, you're insane (sorry).

  203. Re:Great... by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    Having trouble telling if you're serious, but oh well. A company will not build a ride with unsafe G-forces. The risk? The company.

  204. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do you guys really know anything about the subject? The odds of being killed are around 1 and 250 million. You are more likely to die going to the park than actually at the park. There were 4 deaths last year related to amusement parks. All 4 were rider error, or not reading warning signs. The stupid thing is about this law is that there's only 2 rides in the world that go over 6 g's. Those rides would be Texas Tornado at Six Flags Astroworld, and Shaft of Terror in Africa. So this law will actually do nothing.

  205. Astronauts are safer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's just examine this statement. If you look at how many times people have been on roller coasters compared to the amount of deaths, and how many times people have been in space and died, it's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.
    Roller coasters are safer than astronauts.

  206. Millenium Force at Cedar Point by plover · · Score: 2
    We took a family vacation to Cedar Point two years ago just to ride Millenium Force.

    That ride is psychologically addictive. I have never before ridden anything so intense and scary and fun in my life. EVERYTHING about that ride is engineered to give you the biggest thrill ride you have ever experienced.

    This is a spoiler warning: if you haven't ridden the ride, you may not want to read about my experience.

    • The park has random arcs from Millenium Force visible from almost everywhere in the park. It lurks in your mind, beckoning you to ride it; taunting you that you haven't summoned the courage to go stand in line yet. You tell yourself "when the line gets shorter." It never does.
    • You finally queue up beneath the final turn into the station, where you hear the screaming and cheering of the riders as they fly into the only brake at about 55 MPH. You then watch trains of people grinning ear-to-ear as they get off, and you can hear them discussing how long the wait will be to ride it again. All the while, you are looking up 310 feet to the top of that first hill, wondering if you actually want to ride it.
    • You are quickly loaded into the train. A two-month-old ride has a suspiciously frayed lap belt, and a pull-down "T" lap bar serve as your only protection. A loudspeaker is braying cautionary words that are completely unheard by everyone present.
    • As you sit there, you realize what makes this train so completely different from every other roller coaster train you've been on: it has no deep sides to hide behind. It's like two rows of folding chairs sitting ankle deep below a deck.
    • You stare up the side of a 30 story building watching the silver dog as it glides down the track and silently attaches to your train.
    • It quickly and quietly starts pulling you up. (At this point, my 12-year-old clutched my wife's arm and whimpered, "I suppose it's too late now." That almost broke her.)
    • You realize you're flying up the first hill faster than any roller coaster has ever lifted you before, but because the hill is so high, it takes longer than ever. With no sides, the feeling of openness is overwhelming. If you can focus on anything but the bar in front of you, you realize that you're passing a stunning view of the lake, and you can see flat land and water for dozens of miles in every direction.
    • As you near the top, you feel the train actually speeding up! They don't intend to drop you from the top of the hill, you realize they are going to THROW you down. You are completely, utterly at the mercy of the engineers.
    • As you fly past the surprisingly huge glittery brass ball on the lightning rod, you know that nothing at all can stop the train anymore. The intensity of the rush reaches a level it's never hit before.
    • The first descent is engineered so that your view of the track is obscured. All you see for a very long three seconds is the ground, a long ways away but approaching faster than you can imagine, and the fear turns into the biggest rush of adrenaline you have ever had as you realize you're plunging face down a 30 story drop.
    • When you hit the bottom of the track, the average person will weigh about half a ton, and will be moving 90 MPH through the wind. A hundred feet of dead flat track passes by in less than a second and you arch up into a wonderfully smooth, graceful arc.
    • Two kinds of people are now present on the train: those that have absolutely fallen in love with the coaster, and those who are so terrified that they have literally wet their pants (about one or two riders on every other train has a "code yellow", according to the park employees who load the ride.)
    • If you're the kind who was terrified, you are hanging on, eyes shut, praying to any god who might spare you long enough to get off. If you're the other kind of rider, you realize that nothing will ever erase the rush from your mind. Believe it or not, I still get a rush just remembering the ride.
    Either way, it is truly a lifelong memory that will be burned in your mind that day. And to Hell and damnation with Congressman Markey for even suggesting limiting rollercoasters.
    --
    John
  207. Don't ban them, just rate them by Artful+Codger · · Score: 1

    The best approach may be to have the max G-Force of each rollercoaster measured as part of the inspection process.

    Each 'coaster would have to display its G-force rating, together with some guidelines for what means what, so that the consumer can then choose for themselves (" ... the 8-G coaster made me puke so I won't ride anything higher than 5-G")

    --

    ... plans that either come to naught, or half a page of scribbled lines...
  208. Re:Can someone point out these 'coasters to me bef by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    Also own and operate Knotts Berry Farm (california), Valleyfair (minnesota, and the "fair" in "cedar fair", the company that owns all these parks), Worlds of Fun (too lazy to look up state), Michigan's Adventure (michigan) and they operate Knott's Camp Snoopy in the Mall of America.

    http://www.cedarfair.com/

  209. Um... wrong by tgd · · Score: 2

    General relativity is very specific about this.

    In the case you are talking about, there are multiple rates and axis of acceleration happening to your body. The stretching (and squishing, depending on the axis and angle of acceleration) happens because different parts of your body are being accelerated at different rates. For example, you jump off a building. You die when you hit the ground because the bottom most part of you is accellerating (changing momentum, not just going faster, since in this case you are going slower) at a rate different than the top of you. It has nothing to do with gravity, it has to do with uneven rates of acceleration.

    Same thing going into a black hole. Your feet are moving downward faster than your head. One of two things will happen in that case, your head moves faster, or you rip in two.

    Here's another thing you can do. Climb up on your chair and step off. Guess what, your feet just accellerated faster than your head, just like with the black hole, because they are (very slightly) in a different reference frame than the rest of your body, being closer to the primary source of acceleration in your vacinity -- the Earth. When you hit the ground, you squish a little bit, because your feet are changing speed a LOT faster than your head. Your head has its existing momentum, plus a small amount of acceleration from the Earth, whereas your feet are losing speed much faster thanks to the (incredibly stronger) electroweak force making damn sure the atoms in your feet don't go through the floor.

    This is really basic physics... any book about general relativity (even one of the really poor pop-science examples) will get these correct.

    1. Re:Um... wrong by Richard+Platt · · Score: 1

      My point was that the indistinguishability of a gravitational field and an accelerating frame was true, but only over a region where the field strength doesn't change (i.e. locally). If it does, you can tell the difference. You refer to people hitting the ground after jumping off buildings, but in my example there was no force acting other than gravitation (in yours there was), and yet it was still possible to determine the existence of the gravitational field, which would be impossible in free fall if gravitation and acceleration were completely indistinguishable. You said that it had nothing to do with gravity, but what else could it have to do with? There are no other forces acting.(yes, I know GR doesn't consider gravity a force, but it's convenient to think of it that way here).

      To call it "really basic physics" is a stretch too - the equivalence of gravitational and intertial mass isn't trivial by any means. GR would be in trouble if it wasn't true.

  210. 47000 auto fatalities in 1997 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    21920 auto fatalities in 1997? Check your source. Mine (the world almanac) says ~47k.

    1. Re:47000 auto fatalities in 1997 by Crazy+Diamond · · Score: 2

      Read the links on Representative Edward Markey's home page. Those numbers are supposed to be from the National Safety Council. They do disagree with the NTSB/NHTSA numbers and even the numbers on the NSC home page so I have no idea where Rep. Markey actually came up with them. It still demonstrates the huge difference between the amount of fatalities.

      BTW a world almanac is not exactly a good source. The almanac should say that those numbers are from NTSB or NHTSBA

  211. Important reading by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

    People thinking there is a problem, or anyone interested in this issue, read these three articles (includes special media sensationalism bonus!):

    http://www.coasterbuzz.com/editorial/editorial.a sp ?FeatureID=3023 -- CPSC report problems
    http://www.coasterbuzz.com/editorial/edi torial.asp ?FeatureID=2104 -- Anti-markey letter
    http://www.coasterbuzz.com/editorial/edito rial.asp ?FeatureID=2649 -- Media

    1. Re:Important reading by LocoSpitz · · Score: 1

      Remove spaces between "asp" and "?FeatureID"

  212. Re:Great... by Beliskner · · Score: 2
    I haven't heard of any theme park (or corporate owner thereof) making a ride without consideration of their customers. (Perhaps you can name one for me.)
    I've heard Microsoft saying "We're not a monopoly".

    I've heard the telcos saying that mobile phones don't cause cancer for years. Oh what's the legally correct statement they always make when asked about it "We are unaware of strong evidence at this time conclusively indicating that mobile phone radiation can cause adverse effects". If that's not carefully crafted by lawyers then I don't know what is.

    I don't believe a word these people say, have these companies paid millions of dollars to independent scientists to actually find out whether G-forces harm people? OK I'll admit that the probability of finding a weakness in peoples' bodies during the ride is high, same as when a guy gets mugged and runs away a lot of the time he has a heart attack. His heart couldn't take a sudden stress shock because he works in a comfortable air conditioned office and drives a Cadillac Seville with leather seats where the most exciting thing he's seen is a guy doing a rolling STOP 2 years ago. This is especially true with Canadians, just say, "Can I borrow your wallet?" Canadian replies, "Yeah sure, here ya go. When are you gonna give it back?" and you say, "How about I take the cash out and give you your wallet back RIGHT NOW", Canadian says, "Great! Thank you" and then happily goes on his merry way.

    --
    A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
  213. Ride at your own risk!!! by xeromist · · Score: 1

    Did we get bored with trying to solve real threats so the government has to pick on amusement parks? All the energy they are putting into this lame legislation could save many more lives if properly channeled to a REAL problem. Do enough people die from coasters to really make it a problem? You could die walking down the street. People die...it happens.

    I'm sorry to sound cynical, but this sounds like some legislator had a family member die and now they are trying to find someone to blame.

    --
    This sig is exactly seventy characters long and a real waste of space!
  214. Re:Great... by allism · · Score: 1

    Actually, I don't know anyone who has ridden the Twister II at Elitch Gardens more than once...I am a roller coaster junkie but I found it extremely painful, not because of high Gs but because it is extremely bumpy and whiplash-y (yes I made up that word). Everyone I have asked about it says the same thing--I keep waiting to meet the one person who thinks it is an awesome ride. It looks really tame when you first look at it, too--I made the mistake of taking my husband (he doesn't like coasters) on it, thinking, "Oh, it's just a step above a kiddie ride"--and now I can't get him to go on another coaster. If that had been my first coaster experience in a long time, there's a good chance I would never get on another coaster, either.

    The good news is, if you want to try it, there's never a line.

  215. Actually by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 2

    Actually, there is no conclusive evidence of lower speed limits preventing accidents. In some cases accidents have even gone up.. I'm not suggesting a causal relationship, that has to be proven. But it's worth noting that the jury's still out on this one. Nobody will pay to fund the research though, because speeding is a cash cow for law enforcement, government, and insurance companies.

    Did you know that insurance companies give away enforcement hardware to PD's? Things like radar and laser speed detectors, photoradar trailers, etc. Think about it: everyone benefits! Cops catch more speeders, which brings in cash. Meanwhile, insurance companies have a justification for raising rates on people.

  216. A bunch by CaptainSuperBoy · · Score: 2

    There are a bunch at Six Flags NE.. good coasters too, and new ones. Batman just opened this year.

  217. Bad reasoning by DunbarTheInept · · Score: 2
    There have been several people in this thread that have said that regulations are needed because the coasters are dangerous, and then they go on to cite cases of coasters breaking, or safety harnesses failing to hold the passenger in place, and so on. Look, people, what does that have to do with putting an upper limit on G-forces, which is what this bill is about?

    I agree that I want coasters to at least be regulated enough that I know they've been maintained and don't suffer mechanical falures while I'm riding on them. But that doesn't mean I want them to become tame sissy experiences with no more thrill anymore. And besides, there is a difference between experiencing strong G's for a few seconds on the bottom of a dip in a coaster (which is typically where you get the biggest G's is when "pulling out" at the bottom of the first drop), and experiencing them steady for several minutes like an astronaut does.

    There was a ride I remember at Six Flags Great America (partway between Chicago and Milwuakee on I-94) called "The Edge". It was a simple gravity dropper. Your car lifted straight up one side of the elevator to the top, the car then shifted over a few feet to the other side of the tower, where the track was, and then the car was let go. It would drop in freefall for a few seconds, and then the track would level its path to the horizontal, where a braking system would stop it. That was all there was to it - a simple ride. But one day the mechanism to move the car over to the track didn't work right, and the ride operator didn't notice, and so he went ahead and pulled the lever anyway and dropped the car on the wrong side of the elevator, where there was no track, and no brakes - just a straight drop to the ground. It killed the occupants, smashing the car to the ground near the people in line for the ride. For *that* kind of death by carnival ride, I think the family members suing the amusement park is perfectly justified. If on the other hand the ride is advertised as "Warning, this ride in parts achieves as much as 4 times the force of gravity in the normal direction, and as much as 2 times the force of gravity in the negative direction. If you have any medical condition please consult a doctor before riding this ride, yadda, yadda.", and someone with a heart condition dies from the G's on the ride, then I don't think a lawsuit is warranted.

    So to those who say the riders should beware and accept that they are taking a risk, I say, hey, there is a big difference between dying because your body can't handle the ride's normal operation, and dying because the ride malfunctions.

    A lot of those 57 deaths cited are from malfunctions, not the fact that the rides have big G forces.

    --

    Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.

  218. A certain Island they'd better not touch by Eil · · Score: 2


    Long as they stay out of Ohio, they can do whatever the piss the want. But you dumbass legislators even *think* about regulating my rides at the greatest roller coaster park in the world, then I'll ensure that Goatsecx Man looks like an amateur compared to you.

    Thank you and have a pleseant day.

  219. Re:Great... by Eil · · Score: 2


    I sincerely hope you don't go on *any* roller coasters any more after your experience. To do otherwise would just be plain foolish and dangerous to your health. IANAD, but I would suspect you have a condition that is highly aggrevated by extreme G-forces. I say this because thousands of other people ride roller coasters every single day and come away with no ill side-effects at all except a slight adrenaline rush.

    All of the roller coaster parks that I've been to have big noticable signs at the entrance that say riding any ride in the park is done so at the customer's own risk. There are usually a list of policies and rules that you agree to abide by when you purchase your ticket and enter the park. Basically, anything that happens to you that isn't the fault of an equipment malfuntion is 100% your problem. This includes your headache. I've seen ride operators explictly forbid pregnant and elderly folks from riding. (And probably also to avoid potential lawsuits...) Generally, roller coaster park employees are very good at enforcing park and ride rules because their jobs depend on it.

    For example, the roller coaster capitol of the world has their policies and procedures online as well as having printed copies available in locations throughout the park. The online copy is here.

    Now on to the practical. The roller coaster park that I'm partial to has millions of visitors each year and I have not heard about a single death that occured due to the rides. (Yeah, you get a few morons who don't hydrate themselves and die of heatstroke in the hot summer sun or a few older folks that have heart attacks in the park itself, but nothing that can be attributed to maintenance or employee negligence.) For the record, I've never even heard of anyone dying of excess G-forces on a roller coaster prior to this slashdot article.

    Now the legal. If people like you feel they can't handle roller coasters, then they should simply not ride them. Quite a shocker there, huh? I mean, doesn't this ring just a bit of hipocracy[sp]? It seems a lot like trying to pass a law making all alcoholic beverages less potent because every morning after you've been drinking heavily you wind up with a splitting headache. Laws like this (and indeed the government itself) are far too extreme for what the problem really is: people who do not know or intentionally disregard their own limitations.

    If any action is really needed (which I do not think it is), then at most they should measure the G-forces of the coaster with some accelerometers (which most parks do already) and post a sign saying "The maximum G-Force of this ride x.x G's." If a patron has ridden coasters with a similar G-force rating and experienced ill side-effects, then they should not ride it.

    Nah, that's just too simple. Wouldn't make sense to anybody.

  220. roller coasters are dangers! space tourism ok! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so a law will ban roller coasters but relax regulations on space tourism. money talks!

  221. Re:Great... by neuroticia · · Score: 1

    And the government attempts to regulate car, train, plane, and street-crossing. Not to mention medical care, the food industry, drugs, the way we raise our children, our forms of entertainment, our working conditions, our miscellaneous forms of transportation, the amount of radiation put off from our monitors/microwaves, etc.

    No, I don't expect them to oversee everything. They don't oversee anything, they just put regulations in place and go after the groups who don't follow them--IF someone blows the whistle.

    Rollercoasters fall under the category of "gosh, it could be dangerous. Let's regulate".

    I like the insanity comment, though. That's another thing that the government tries to regulate. Sanity.

    -Sara

  222. ABOUT DAMN FUCKING TIME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The age old roller coaster rule of
    YOU MUST BE THIS FUCKING TALL TO RIDE THIS FUCKING COASTER
    is the dumbest thing ever.
    I don't want no midgets riding a rollercoaster pushin 3+ G's.

  223. Re:Great... by Beliskner · · Score: 2
    Oh man, you just don't get it. That's like saying RMS can put a back door into PGP because it's "his product, his creation, and not illegal". That's exactly what Enron is saying, "Our services, our prices, our profits/losses, our accountantcy company (private), our accounts are DMCA-protected (the way current laws are headed). The IRS may not audit me because viewing my personal accounts would violate the DMCA as it's stored in Quicken, a DMCA-protected app. LOL!

    I see it this way, as soon as they enter *your* park, they are *your* guest and you have to see to all of their needs, hotels have a concierge for this. If I had to join a 1 hour queue just to take a leak, or bottled water wasn't available free on every street corner, then you're not being a good host. If I came to your house, asked for a drink and you told me to wait an hour or queue for an hour outside a putrid toilet I'd walk out straight out the door.

    I've found a workaround for my problem - when the rollercoaster makes a turn I just tense my legs and the blood goes back into my brain and I feel great. I don't get scared nor do I get an adrenalin rush on rollercoasters for some reason, maybe I'm just crazy. Parachuting though *does* give me an adrenalin rush, either that or it scares the hell out of me, heh, even if I just watch it on HDTV (not on normal TV). The Nemesis ride that I went on is a vertical drop for 150 metres then a sudden jerk to 4G vertical as it pulls up, the remaining 250 metres brings the coaster back to the beginning. The sudden jerk from freefall (vertical drop) to 4G pull-up definitely catches you by surprise.

    I think the rule is the G-force just moves the blood around and that's the danger there. The body automatically compensates by tensing the neck muscles, etc. The jerk is different, if your support muscles are relaxed (freefall) or tensed (turning) then suddenly changing G-direction would cause a shearing force proportional to rate of G-change plus the force of your support muscles (because they are all of a sudden now pushing in the wrong direction) => whiplash

    --
    A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
  224. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indeed...

    But it is their job to insure that you can take care of yourself.

    An individual tolerance to high G-forces is not common knowledge. How do you determine what is your tolerance.

    G-Forces have serious effect, fighter pilots train and have exercices just to keep their blood to their brain in high-G maneuver...

    I doubt the common man is trained like that.
    Therefore, if you push the number of Gs witout taking any care, many people will get killed.
    Not that they should ban the costers or put a limit on it, but at least provide proper advice....

  225. Great by SeanAhern · · Score: 1

    Yes, they do have this power actually.

    Perfect. That determination is all I ask for.

  226. Re:Great... by Eil · · Score: 2


    I'm not sure I understand your analogies. I still maintain that roller coaster parks make it quite clear that their rides are not entirely risk-free and that you assume any unforseen dangers arising due to your actions or state of health as soon as you sit down in the car. (Barring empoyee negligence and equipment failure, of course.)

    I'm glad you found a workaround to your problem, (because I believe that riding a coaster is one of the more fun things that money can buy) but I still think any doctor would be telling you to cut out the roller coaster riding.

    As an aside about the G-forces, I read in a magazine that the Air Force has developed a new anti-G-force suit that has a bunch of water-filled bladders in it. The same G-forces that force blood down toward your legs will also force water down there as well, which will in effect push back and lessen the amont of blood that leaves your upper body.

  227. Re:Great... by Beliskner · · Score: 2
    As an aside about the G-forces, I read in a magazine that the Air Force has developed a new anti-G-force suit that has a bunch of water-filled bladders in it. The same G-forces that force blood down toward your legs will also force water down there as well, which will in effect push back and lessen the amont of blood that leaves your upper body
    <Krusty the Clown> Bwa ha ha, ha, ha, huh, huhhhhhhhhhhhh </Krusty the Clown>
    Oh man, great for pulling up, but how about pulling down, sudden descent, you'll get a haemorrage. You can't force blood out of the brain without fracturing your skull in some way.

    I don't get why the air force are researching G-forces. Everyone just uses missiles, phoenixes, exocets and the like. The US has so much money that US pilots should just be told to turn tail and eject over friendly territory if they run out of missiles. The Mig-29 has combined InfraRed+Radar automatically targetted guns, there is no way some US flyboy is going to be able to outmanouver that, no matter how many Top Gun movies they spew out. So what's the point teaching violent manouvers?

    Plus if you play Mig-29 you'll notice the targetting system locks immediately, whereas the F-14, , F-16 F/A-18 and friends go beep beep beep beep for like 10 minutes.

    --
    A caveman dreams of being us, the incalculable power and riches. We dream of being Q, then what?
  228. Re:Great... by packeteer · · Score: 1

    Its more than jsut not being able to tax it. Many jobs are created in the process of hunting down/charging/incarcerating(sp?) drug users. Its a huge business.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep