New Jersey Officially Limits G-Forces on Coasters
Well, NJ has (sadly) become the first state in the US at limiting G-Forces on roller coasters. The regulation calls for prohibition of forces greater than 5.6 that last longer than one second. NJ gave itself the right to regulate rides after an accident where two were killed from a malfunction, not excessive Gs. (A ride I rode once -- It's a kiddie-sized coaster, not what you'll find at Cedar Point, OH. The two killed were a seven year old and her mother.) This is also despite the lack of scientific evidence linking G forces to brain injury, and 320 million riders who turn out just fine every year. One brain-injury specialist interviewed said that you can exert 10 Gs just plopping into a chair, saying the state was "a little misguided."
Wow! 10G's for over a second just from plopping into a chair, really? No? Okay then I guess you can stop missing the fucking point, in that case.
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
I find it curious that chrisd is confident in stating that there no evidence linking G-force rollercosters to brain injury (appears to be accurate), but is equally confident in stating that 320 million riders have not experienced any particularly adverse effects, a fact that seems to be complete conjecture, without any of this highly regarded scientific evidence back it up. Who knows, could rollercosters be contributing to the degradation of cognitive capability in the world? Well, the only way to find out for sure would be to conduct research, I suppose.
A ride of a rollercoster lasts a lot longer than the fraction of a second it takes to flop into a chair. Perhaps duration and variability of the G-forces exerted should be taken into account?
Pete
The really sad part is that Six Flags Great Adventure (in Jackson NJ) will basically be out of rides. Medusa is gone. Viper is gone. Scream Machine is gone. Nitro Might be gone. Batman is gone. Batman And Robin: The Chiller is gone. basically they might as well close the entire park. there are more deaths based on idiot drivers leaving great adventure every year than from the G forces. I love Coasters... I have been on every coaster in great adventure atleast 10 times each (except nitro its too new) and its a shame that we NJ asshats have to make laws about this... but hey it was a good run...
How about known risk. I know when I go onto a roller coaster that despite all the past history, anything going that fast could in some way cause me injury. If you avoid everything just because of a possible risk, then life would really suck. Better to make the public aware than impose somewhat random or uninformed limitations.
If you know people who have died in auto accidents, does that mean you shouldn't drive?
Cars can cause accidents, TV can cause seizures. How many people were the 42 out of? If it's 42/100000000 that's lower than most things. I'd almost guarantee that there are a number of things you do every day that risk your life more than jumping in a roller coaster (despite the feeling that you're going to die every time).
Life is full of personal risks. We should be informed of the risks, and make our our decisions. Thus is the only way that we can lead a life of freedom - phorm
Do I think it's "American" to lecally prohibit someone from hurling themselves down a steel railing at Ludicrous Speed?
No, not particularly.
But at present, do I feel it's the sort of "right" which our efforts can be BEST spent protecting?
No. Let's worry about Joe-Bob's "Constitutional Right To Scary Carnival Rides" in a couple of months. For the moment, let's see whether we can allow a bunch of medical students to drive cross-country without closing down interstate highways and expelling them from school (all in 48 hours) on the word of some half-witted busybody.
crib
Please don't read my journal
The prevailing attitude from the 30 odd replies I've read so far, is something like this: They are sil;ly and stupid bureaucrats who are limiting our enjoyment in something totally harmeless.
My reply to this is, a 5.6 G turn will produce the same sensation as a 4.6 G turn. So the fun is still exactly the same. Besides, for those who have a hard time thinking beyond their own noses, G forces apply to machinery as well as to humans. Lower Gs results in less stress on the machinery, and thus becomes less likely to malfunction. Also, designing for less Gs reduces the cost of construction, which, theoretically, means more roller-coasters.
Learn just a tiny little bit about law before you go spouting your mouth off. They are banning high G force rides, which sounds like they are making it an offence (ie criminal law, public prosecutors). As it stands now, the rememdy is a civil one, (ie negligence law, ambulance chasers.) You don't need statutes to sue, tort law will do just fine, thankyou very much.
Chances are this law will result in less death and injury, which is a loss for the legal eagles.
The McDonalds coffee example is the most badly chosen one I can think of. There were literally dozens of people who got badly burnt by McDonalds coffee before the old lady got her genitalia burnt off. McDonalds calculated that it was cheaper to settle these cases individually than to reduce the temperature of the coffee to a safe level (hot coffee is supposed to keep longer). Any corporation that calculates their profits on a liability vs personal injury (or death) basis deserves to get hit HARD. Any jury that see evidence like that will. McDonalds got what they deserved, simple.
Better to be despised for too anxious apprehensions, than ruined by too confident a security. --Edmund Burke
Actually, people are more likely to die from complications of edema/brain laceration after high accelerations. Usually stroke or something similar is their ultimate end.
The fact is, it takes a very fit person to undergo those kind of accelerations over mere seconds, let alone longer. There are techniques to imporve response to high G loads, but if you have high blood pressure, all bets are off.
Any anti-government fiend will tell you that it's just "'the Man's' way of limiting your options for having a good time" (a-la Marijuana being illegal and alcohol regulations). But this isn't one of those posts, and I'm not one of those fiends.
Instead, I look at it this way. First of all, G-Forces are nowhere near the problem. Most rollercoaster accidents happen for one of a select few reasons:
1. Safety Devices, like seat belts, lap rails or shoulder harnesses, fail. Only after they fail do G-Forces become a remote issue, as they could easily throw the rider from the car. More commonly, the force of 1G becomes more dangerous in this case, as it's the main one pulling you to the center of the Earth (ie falling out while inverted).
2. Mechanical Failure. Either the car or track could be to blame here. This includes brakes as well. But then again, coasters are often designed nowadays with a few redundant systems, which all but eliminate (accidents do happen) these concerns.
3. Human stupidity. This covers both rider and operator. Failure to heed warning signs (heart condition, pregnancy, etc.) on the rider's part contribute a great deal. Let's face it. Some people are just plain stupid. Operator failure sometimes contributes to injuries and deaths, be it lack of training on operations or just plain idiocy.
The only possible way G-Forces could kill is if number 3 happens, and someone who is stroke (etc.) prone, has extremely weak nerves, or doesn't use safety devices properly gets on.
John Glenn returning to space proved that even older folks can handle G-Forces in excess of 5 Gs. Age limits are enough to prevent small children, still growing and pretty much fragile, from being exposed to high Gs. And most people are intelligent enough to know that if they have a pre-existing condition, getting on might not be such a good idea. Safety and mechanical failures are either pure chance or lack of proper coaster upkeep.
So where's the problem, New Jersey? It's not science, studies and statistics. It's just plain common sense.
Oh, wait. What am I doing talking about New Jersey and Common Sense in the first place? We all know how toxic the place is. The people are good and hard working, but their government severely lacks any stroke to pull this kind of stunt...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
Can you show me evidence, that meets the criterion of the doctrine of strong inference, that a 5.6G maximum is consistent with safety for roller coasters? I can sure as hell provide hundreds of thousands (probably tens of millions) of examples of poeple that have rode on any given coaster and suffered no ill effects.
On G-Forces, and how much the human body can safely endure.