Word of warning... the descriptions in this article are pretty horrifying.
Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
41–50 of 115 posts
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a steep slide in a german water park that women aren’t allowed to ride. The reason is that if ridden with legs spread, water can forcefully enter the vagina and cause injuries. So that’s a real possibility.
Wouldn't that hurt men even more? If they spread legs there are privates and men tend to be sensitive when those are hit.
More than the internal injuries that could be caused by water forcibly entering the vagina? Probably not.
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#43Maybe as a way to help compartmentalism from what the article is describing, I keep wondering: why do “long form” stories all seem to follow the same script? - Introduction to the subject - Introduction to the “characters” - “Dramatic thing began to happen, with seemingly innocuous steps taken towards the unforeseen conclusion, but then, as the thing begins to unfo—“ - “Back in 1823, when the ancestor of the grandfat…
It's cancer.
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've seen several water slides where you go down it on your back, with your arms and legs crossed (or rather supposed to be crossed). I went down one like that in "water world" which used to be in Houston. I don't remember the size, but at the end of the slide there is about 2-3 inches of standing water in the chute which I guess serves as the "water brake". I was wearing some long swimming shorts, but after hitting…
The same thing can happen water skiing.
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the insanity here is that there were no engineers involved in the design of the slide. It was largely designed by a co-owner of the park who possessed "no technical of engineering skills."
I read that too... I just don't believe it. That seems ridiculous to me. Would they have to hire an army of handymen to do the construction? It looks way too large and involved for that. Does the state really allow construction of something this large and involved without any engineers signing off? If this is true, I don't think I may ever let my child into a water park. Is this true of traditional amusement parks as…
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#46Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#47Struggling to read this as the original Schlitterbahn in New Braunfels was pretty much the happiest place on earth to me as a kiddo.
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#48Maybe as a way to help compartmentalism from what the article is describing, I keep wondering: why do “long form” stories all seem to follow the same script? - Introduction to the subject - Introduction to the “characters” - “Dramatic thing began to happen, with seemingly innocuous steps taken towards the unforeseen conclusion, but then, as the thing begins to unfo—“ - “Back in 1823, when the ancestor of the grandfat…
The answer, maybe the one you're looking for is that the schema you describe is suitable for blowing up into longform stories that could be equally well-suited to be treated in 400 words or less. The question would be, do we care for longform as a format (as opposed to having bite-sized stories with links between them if they're part of something bigger)? Or do we care about stories that have substantial background t…
But yeah, I agree it is not enjoyable to read.
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#49[1] https://www.kansascity.com/latest-news/article206611679.ece/...
[2] https://twitter.com/mattdpearce/status/977310924804579329
Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide
#50Somewhat alarming that the net and hoops which are presumably there as a safety mechanism to prevent leaving the track completely ended up causing fatal injury.
Indeed, they probably caught his head and then quite naturally, ripped it off. It seems almost common sense to use something smoother and softer, but as the saying goes, "common sense isn't common". You can see them in this video of the ride (start at 1:00) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZsK7zSCJ2w
The mind boggling part is that the netting system worked as designed, but the design was such that the riders of any airborne raft would be going into it head-first. That should have been obvious to anyone the moment it was even proposed as a solution to airborne rafts. They created a system where serious head/face/neck injuries were inevitable.