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

111–120 of 145 posts

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#111

Post by FSharper »

walrus01 wrote: post #9

if you search "verruckt" on youtube there's a number of point-of-view camera recordings of people riding the thing, before it was shut down. reading the indictment, it seems like the general sort of design that could be implemented safely if they had just hired a ride-engineer with expertise in dynamic forces. the main problem looks like they were sending rafts with unspecified weights down the chute. overly light ra…

There were two plus sizes passengers in the back of the boy’s raft which kept the front in the air.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#112

Post by brrrrr »

wolfgke wrote: post #104
ams6110 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fond memories of childhood visits to a local "flume" ride, essentially a long concrete-lined ditch dug in a switchback pattern down a big hillside. Painted to make it slick, and they pumped a continuous stream of water all along it. You rode it by sitting or lying on foam mats, about 3x4 feet in size. A ton of fun, you could get going pretty fast and you definitely wanted to have your legs crossed when you hit the po…

> you definitely wanted to have your legs crossed when you hit the pool at the bottom. Why? This is a serious question, since I am not that experienced in crazy water slides.

Because ya don’ts wants ta do a belly flop with ya nuts.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#113

Post by PhasmaFelis »

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…

> we're gonna redefine many of the definables that have been defined in the industry

What?

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#114

Post by pimlottc »

txsh wrote: post #7

If I’m reading this correctly, the ride opened in 2014 but the kid was decapitated in 2016. So not only did they rush its construction but they had two years to fix it and chose not to. Incredible.

New features beats reducing technical debt every time.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#116

Post by Johnny555 »

gwbas1c wrote: post #103
eh78ssxv2f wrote: post #90

Does anybody know if there were any safety inspections of the park by the city, state or federal bodies? If so, how did it pass the inspections?

Usually city inspectors don't know enough to evaluate those kinds of things.

Which is why they require engineering signoff for things they can't evaluate themselves. Try to replace a beam in your basement to create a longer span and the building inspector isn't going to do load/span calculations himself, the building department is going to require a PE to sign off on the design.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#117

Post by mcguire »

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…

Whoa. That's disbarment-worthy.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#119

Post by donarb »

jessaustin wrote: post #94
smitherfield wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The owner was just arrested as well,[1] and I'd bet that more will follow. My guess is the director of operations will get a plea deal in exchange for testifying against the others. [1] http://www.kansascity.com/news/article206886324.html

Yeah typically the defendant they want to testify (often the lowest-level, least-responsible defendant) is charged first. In exchange for a deal, that person will provide as much evidence as possible against everyone else. It is interesting that this firm has an "owner" rather than a CEO and a board. It's my impression that executives and board members would be less likely to face criminal charges in this sort of sit…

Schlitterbahn is a private family-run business.

Re: Water Slide That Decapitated Boy Violated Basic Design Standards

#120

Post by pm90 »

chrisacky wrote: post #100

I'm a new father of two boys and couldn't imagine the torment I'd go through if something tragic would happen to them, pain like that cannot be "made right" by a simple settlement, however large. What irks me though in this instance, is that Caleb's father is state legislature in Kansas and because of laws he has voted for, (or rather against) his compensation should have been capped at $300k -- but instead through "…

If you haven't, I urge you to read this:https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/26/opinion/conservatism-hone...
Post reply on HN