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?"
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What about the backyard roller coasters? What kind of regulations will be needed?
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?
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?
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));
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();
from the but-is-the-tilt-a-whirl-is-still-safe dept.
"... but the question still remains. Is our children learning"?
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.
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.
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.
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?
Look at me, mom! I'm going at three seconds a second! Wheeee!
Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
"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.
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
Benevolent and bullshit both start with B...
Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
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!
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
Well, after that description, I certainly believe you're at Oberlin...;-)
Come on, give it up, that's
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.
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
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.
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
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.
Two things:
Come on, give it up, that's
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!
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)
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!
... 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.
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
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--
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
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...
No, at least two.
Tech Public Policy stuff
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
No, that's not their job. But sometimes they think it is, and that is pretty god-damned unfortunate.
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!"
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.
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?
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
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.
;-), here or here if you are interested.
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
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: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
Get your Unix fortune now!
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?
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.
Get a free ipod.
Play the race card!!!! PLAY IT!!!!!! - Homer J Simpson
What?
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.
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.
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:
...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 ]
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)
Admittedly, the fields are small, but still...
Best Slashdot Co
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.
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.
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.
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.
Easy solution, just build your own coaster in your back yard. :-)
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
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.
No, the chance would remain the same, but the number of cases would go up
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.
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.
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.
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>
"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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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*
No sig for you!!
Please excuse my mis-type. It was 10:30.
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
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.
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.
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!"
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".
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.
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
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.
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.
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!
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.
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
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.
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?
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.
There are a bunch at Six Flags NE.. good coasters too, and new ones. Batman just opened this year.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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
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?
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.
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?