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

Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

texasmonthly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#91

Post by danepowell »

I'm frankly surprised that more people haven't died at Schlitterbahn. Although this article appears to reference negligence at a corporate level, you have to keep in mind that the staff is comprised largely of high school aged kids, and all it takes is a few moments of inattention for someone to drown on these rides.

Case in point, I could have easily drowned as a kid when one of the staff allowed too many riders in tubes to go down a chute at once, creating a log jam at the bottom that I got pulled underneath. The strong current held me underneath other riders' tubes for a good thirty seconds or so until the jam loosened. No one noticed or cared even as I came up coughing and sputtering.

Don't get me wrong, most of the staff seemed to take their job pretty seriously, but in a place as crowded and inherently dangerous as this it doesn't take much for someone to get hurt.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#92

Post by StillBored »

jey wrote: post #14
cmiles74 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that same company also noted that the rafts were leaving the track. That aside, while it's clear the person from the park that led the project was not any kind of engineer, I find it very unlikely that the slide was designed and built without the involvement of any licensed engineers. Everytime an article related to the Volkswagen emissions scandal is mentioned, a finger is always pointed towards the softwa…

The article claims that Jeff Henry designed it entirely through trial-and-error methods without the involvement of any engineers. That sounds preposterous to me too, but it seems to be true.

While this sounds good on the surface, much of engineering is pushing boundaries and just because an engineer has a formal education, a license and some simulation software doesn't mean they are going to build something that is safe.

I would trust physical models (aka trial and error) in this case just as much if not more than simulation models.

Turbulent water flow, varying weight/seating positions in a _rubber_ raft, varying friction as the raft bumps the walls, etc all are going to explode the model space. Combined with a general effort to push the envelope and create an exciting ride the basic seat of the pants (high-school) physics is going to set some boundaries on weight/angle/etc but the final details aren't necessarily going to be 100% accurate.

Worse, it wasn't the ride so much as the safety equipment which failed. Having a raft/etc come slightly off the track at the top of a hill like that is probably part of the design. I've been on other slides like that where you leave the surface for a bit only to be caught farther down (its pretty much guaranteed on roller coasters). I can see a PE making the same mistake, the ride is safe, but "just in case" lets throw some netting up to catch anyone so its absolutely impossible for them to be ejected. Hence my comment earlier about how master blaster still has the same kind of netting to this day, despite my own misgivings when I initially saw it years ago.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#93

Post by skookumchuck »

sokoloff wrote: post #75
skookumchuck wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why you always wear a wet suit when water skiing, even on a hot day.

I’ve done a lot of water skiing and have never seen any recreational skiers wearing anything like a wet suit.

Have fun crashing at high speed at the wrong angle and having water shoved up where it doesn't belong. Hasn't happened to me because I always wear a shortie, after listening to advice from those it did happen to.

I also always wear a vest, even though I can swim just fine, because the ski can hit you in the head and knock you out. Also, people sometimes pass out and drown from the CO coming off the engine.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#94

Post by steamer25 »

rossdavidh wrote: post #56

I think this article makes too much of the fact that they were not engineers (I say this as a person with two engineering degrees), and too little of the fact that this was by far not the first indication of problems. I can't find the HN link now, but the official government report was pretty damning. There were numerous incidents that lead to injuries, numerous reports that rafts had gone airborne when they shouldn'…

Yeah I could imagine an article coming from the opposite direction, deriding ivory tower calculations in favor of real world experimentalism in some case where the developers didn't do enough physical testing. There are definitely plenty of cases where design mistakes have been unaddressed to tragic consequences: poor modeling in the Hyatt Regency collapse (https://youtu.be/VnvGwFegbC8), underspecified gusset plates causing the Minneapolis bridge collapse and possibly the novel methods chosen for the recently collapsed Florida pedestrian bridge, etc. Ultimately, the methodology is probably less important than whether the business chose to recklessly defraud people about the risks and safety concerns or acted in good faith.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#95

Post by Digory »

cmiles74 wrote: post #5

I was surprised to discover the article didn't mention any engineers that had worked on the design or implementation being sued for damages. Nor did the article mention any engineers who refused to construct or otherwise work on the tallest and most dangerous waterslide in the world. Perhaps engineers in other fields are not so different from software engineers after all, published code of conduct aside.

“According to Schooley, owner Henry was at a trade show and simply decided he wanted to build the tallest, fastest water slide at one of his five Schlitterbahn water parks. He immediately shopped the idea to vendors, who declined, but he refused to be denied.”[0]

The guy couldn’t find reputable vendors willing to take on the project.

[0] http://www.cnn.com/travel/article/worlds-tallest-water-slide...

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#96

Post by wyldfire »

AdamM12 wrote: post #79
wyldfire wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did the family do with the settlement money? If my son had died I would feel so terribly conflicted. Survivor's guilt would be so much worse if I got to live a life of luxury in exchange for my son.

You do realize you could like not spend the money lavish manner right?

Indeed I do! 20 million dollars is a lot of money and I would feel tempted to spend it on things to make my family's life easier/better. Yet then again if it served as a reminder of my son's death, I might be persuaded to instead donate it to a scholarship or charity in my son's name.

Thus my question. Since I don't know how I'd handle it, I'm curious how this family did.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#97

Post by wyldfire »

GavinMcG wrote: post #81
wyldfire wrote: post #3

I love capitalism and the idea behind laissez faire. I still think it might be the least bad thing out there but I keep coming back to stuff like this where people just don't act in their own long-term (or even short-term sometimes) interest. Caleb's gone, many people who lived in Grenfell Tower are gone, and now I think many markets where safety is critical deserve some good regulation. > He never got a conventional…

This isn't a personal accusation, but had you never heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, or read The Jungle , or Silent Spring ? I'm asking because these are things I encountered in high school, and in a community that very much "love[s] capitalism and the idea behind laissez faire." I'd like to hope that everyone's education would be enough to instill an understanding of these things. The alternative is a Grenfell…

> had you never heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, or read The Jungle, or Silent Spring?

No, no, and no. I at least know of Sinclair and I'm familiar with the subject matter of The Jungle.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#98

Post by tacon »

linohh wrote: post #15

When I was a kid, we went to TX (I'm from Germany) and everyone recommended going to New Braunfels because it's so German. We were quite shocked to see how german it was. It seemed like a hideout for traditional german values (as in conquering Poland) - no pleasant memory.

German with a Texas accent?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_German

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#99

Post by mcphage »

watwut wrote: post #73
edmccard wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Wouldn't that hurt men even more? More than the internal injuries that could be caused by water forcibly entering the vagina? Probably not.

Vagína is pretty strong, it holds during childbirth. Males parts can be injured easily.

That’s the wrong direction, though.

Re: Schlitterbahn’s Tragic Slide

#100

Post by mcphage »

wyldfire wrote: post #97
GavinMcG wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a personal accusation, but had you never heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, or read The Jungle , or Silent Spring ? I'm asking because these are things I encountered in high school, and in a community that very much "love[s] capitalism and the idea behind laissez faire." I'd like to hope that everyone's education would be enough to instill an understanding of these things. The alternative is a Grenfell…

> had you never heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist Fire, or read The Jungle, or Silent Spring? No, no, and no. I at least know of Sinclair and I'm familiar with the subject matter of The Jungle .

Well, then, that’s probably why you still love the idea behind Laissez-Faire.
Post reply on HN