Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#31

Post by HumanDrivenDev »

Analemma_ wrote: post #10
teraflop wrote: post #4

The full indictment [1] is well worth reading. The most relevant sections for HN, in my opinion: > 35. [Designer Jeffrey] HENRY compared the construction of Verrückt to an arms race against rival waterparks. > 37. HENRY admitted that he was ignoring established industry safety standards because he felt he could redefine those standards with his own achievements. While describing his vision of how Verrückt would chang…

Move fast and break things!

This is why most of us aren't real engineers. When real engineers are sloppy people die. When we are sloppy, our industry leaders defend it as being 'pragmatic'.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#32

Post by crazypyro »

teraflop wrote: post #4

The full indictment [1] is well worth reading. The most relevant sections for HN, in my opinion: > 35. [Designer Jeffrey] HENRY compared the construction of Verrückt to an arms race against rival waterparks. > 37. HENRY admitted that he was ignoring established industry safety standards because he felt he could redefine those standards with his own achievements. While describing his vision of how Verrückt would chang…

edit: The owner was arrested just today, so I had missed that.

Can someone explain why they are charging the 29 year old director of operations who started as a lifeguard and had no formal training or connection to engineering/design and not one of the designers or owners, both of which are mentioned in the indictment multiple times?

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me other than they needed to charge someone.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#33

Post by chiefgeek »

duskwuff wrote: post #24
teraflop wrote: post #4

The full indictment [1] is well worth reading. The most relevant sections for HN, in my opinion: > 35. [Designer Jeffrey] HENRY compared the construction of Verrückt to an arms race against rival waterparks. > 37. HENRY admitted that he was ignoring established industry safety standards because he felt he could redefine those standards with his own achievements. While describing his vision of how Verrückt would chang…

Holy shit. This is some Action Park [1] level irresponsibility here. A few other horrifying details: * Riders were restrained by Velcro straps. These frequently came loose. One rider broke several toes after his restraint came undone during a ride, forcing him to dig his feet into the corners of the raft. * The brake system on the ride was completely nonfunctional when the boy was killed, and had been that way for se…

aka "Traction Park". Went there a couple times in the 80's. That place rocked, but it was, uh, a little unsafe.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#34

Post by [deleted] »

teraflop wrote: post #4

The full indictment [1] is well worth reading. The most relevant sections for HN, in my opinion: > 35. [Designer Jeffrey] HENRY compared the construction of Verrückt to an arms race against rival waterparks. > 37. HENRY admitted that he was ignoring established industry safety standards because he felt he could redefine those standards with his own achievements. While describing his vision of how Verrückt would chang…

[deleted]

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#35

Post by crazypyro »

sparrish wrote: post #12
badloginagain wrote: post #2

Surprised the park hasn't gone totally bankrupt from the amount of class-action suits available here.

This is in Kansas, where most folks aren't as sue-happy as the coasts of our country. Out here, if you get a minor injury, rub some dirt on it and treat it like a hill - get over it.

What are you talking about? They already settled a civil lawsuit for ~20 million with the park and engineering firms very shortly after it happened. This is the criminal case.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#37

Post by empath75 »

crazypyro wrote: post #32
teraflop wrote: post #4

The full indictment [1] is well worth reading. The most relevant sections for HN, in my opinion: > 35. [Designer Jeffrey] HENRY compared the construction of Verrückt to an arms race against rival waterparks. > 37. HENRY admitted that he was ignoring established industry safety standards because he felt he could redefine those standards with his own achievements. While describing his vision of how Verrückt would chang…

edit: The owner was arrested just today, so I had missed that. Can someone explain why they are charging the 29 year old director of operations who started as a lifeguard and had no formal training or connection to engineering/design and not one of the designers or owners, both of which are mentioned in the indictment multiple times? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me other than they needed to charge someone.

The father of the kid that died is a state legislator and he got a huge settlement.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#38

Post by smitherfield »

vkou wrote: post #20

"I am afraid that this will have a chilling effect against innovation in this area" is the sort of way that software engineers respond to similar problems in their space. We need to hold ourselves to at least this good a standard.

With notable exceptions (e.g. Therac-25, or self-driving cars) most of us have the luxury of working in spaces where mistakes may be annoying or costly, but not deadly.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#39

Post by crazypyro »

HumanDrivenDev wrote: post #31
Analemma_ wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Move fast and break things!

This is why most of us aren't real engineers. When real engineers are sloppy people die. When we are sloppy, our industry leaders defend it as being 'pragmatic'.

Its almost like completely different problems have completely different design constraints... There are plenty of "real" engineers who design stuff that have very little safety implications, such as optimizing electrical boards or minimizing costs in manufacturing.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#40

Post by crazypyro »

empath75 wrote: post #37
crazypyro wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: The owner was arrested just today, so I had missed that. Can someone explain why they are charging the 29 year old director of operations who started as a lifeguard and had no formal training or connection to engineering/design and not one of the designers or owners, both of which are mentioned in the indictment multiple times? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me other than they needed to charge someone.

The father of the kid that died is a state legislator and he got a huge settlement.

Right. They settled for ~20 million shortly after it happened. The Kansas attorney general also took over the investigation.

Still not understanding why the criminal indictment isn't for the designer or owner who are mentioned several times...

Post reply on HN