UK theme parks from another point of view!

 
User avatar
Lee
Fabulous
Fabulous
Posts: 1795
Joined: March 2013

Re: Chessington Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Fri Jan 30, 2015 9:14 pm

Benb wrote:
Out of interest, what happened to you then & at which park/attraction?

To me Alton Towers, Thorpe park and other merlin attractions I've visited recently seem better managed in respects to H&S than Chessington as of late. It'd be very interesting if it was one of the others, as that'd have the potential to show a more systematic failure of H&S across the entire company, rather than just within one attraction.


I'm not going to discuss that on a public forum :lol but it wasn't Chessington. It's a genuine lack of maintenance in general it seems.

TTheory wrote:
It's because Chessington is under-loved

Not so. H&S should be any businesses first priority (covered under the general umbrella term of safety). Not matter how loved or under loved an attraction is should have no bearing on the responsibilities of the company. They either failed to spot it, or failed to fix it - either is inexcusable.
 
User avatar
TheBeast
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 740
Joined: August 2014
Location: Newcastle
Contact:

Re: Chessington Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Fri Jan 30, 2015 11:27 pm

Lee wrote:
TTheory wrote:
It's because Chessington is under-loved

Not so. H&S should be any businesses first priority (covered under the general umbrella term of safety). Not matter how loved or under loved an attraction is should have no bearing on the responsibilities of the company. They either failed to spot it, or failed to fix it - either is inexcusable.


Sorry Lee but I do disagree with you on this one...I dont want to offend you though so im rly not trying to be offensive. I do think that Chessington is under-loved, hence the fact that Merlin have barely added any new things to the park (yes, there was Kobra, but that was part of an area refurb that was in diabolical need) because they were fixing its many faults. Its also a big park and this is a singular incident...accidents do happen. Id also point out that the parents do hold some blame- they should keep an eye on their child.
Image
Credit to NemesisRider for an amazing signature!
 
User avatar
Lee
Fabulous
Fabulous
Posts: 1795
Joined: March 2013

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Fri Jan 30, 2015 11:58 pm

I didn't disagree that Chessie is underloved :) as someone who deals with H&S legilation daily, I can assure you that it is entirely irrelevant.

I do agree that accidents happen, however prevatable accidents are not accidents but risks. That's the key thing in this case, it was entirely preventable and Merlin/Chessington gambled with a risk and a child suffered the awful consequences as result. Her parents are not to blame and that's a terrible thing to suggest as the HSE investigation lays blame entirely with the park. For me, the key quotation from the article is 'The fence had not been painted with a preservative and showed signs that it had been repeatedly fixed.' By repeatedly fixing it, the park and its acting maintenance teams were fully aware of the fault and did nothing to effectively resolve the issue. They didn't have a reporting system, and the staff failed to notice that the wooden piece had fallen out earlier in the morning.

It demonstrates several worrying factors that resulted in a young girl being severely injured.
 
User avatar
TheBeast
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 740
Joined: August 2014
Location: Newcastle
Contact:

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:17 am

Lee wrote:
I didn't disagree that Chessie is underloved :) as someone who deals with H&S legilation daily, I can assure you that it is entirely irrelevant.


Point taken- a H&S guy is gonna know more than a 15 yr old ;)

Im not fully blaming the parents- although I do think that if the girl is climbing and leaning on things there is a small but relevant chance that she may hurt herself. However, I am definitely not disputing the fact that the largest portion of the blame should be poonted at Merlin
Image
Credit to NemesisRider for an amazing signature!
 
User avatar
Lee
Fabulous
Fabulous
Posts: 1795
Joined: March 2013

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:21 am

I don't remember reading about her leaning over the fencing. Theoretically though, she should have been able to lean on the fencing safely AS that was its primary function.
 
User avatar
TheBeast
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 740
Joined: August 2014
Location: Newcastle
Contact:

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 10:54 am

That is true but iwould like to point out thbat if she was on the rocks and fell then that wouldnt have been the pars fault. However, as I said the majority of the blame is the park's
Image
Credit to NemesisRider for an amazing signature!
 
User avatar
Dan
Community Advocate
Community Advocate
Posts: 1928
Joined: June 2009

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:48 pm

TheBeast wrote:
That is true but iwould like to point out thbat if she was on the rocks and fell then that wouldnt have been the pars fault. However, as I said the majority of the blame is the park's


All of the blame lies with the park. The girl was in a queueline, leant against it and fell through a gap that hadn't been properly maintained by the park.

We all spend a fair amount of time in theme park queues, and the majority of that time is spent leant up against a fence. To suggest that she shouldn't have been leant on it is ludicrous.
Image
Image
Image
Image
 
User avatar
Lee
Fabulous
Fabulous
Posts: 1795
Joined: March 2013

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 7:05 pm

TheBeast wrote:
That is true but iwould like to point out thbat if she was on the rocks and fell then that wouldnt have been the pars fault. However, as I said the majority of the blame is the park's


I'm not sure you understand the absolute nature of H&S as if you did, you'd understand how absurd that statement is. The sole blame lies with the park and the park alone.

H&S works on risk, perceived risk and the necessary assessment. For example, when the rocks were laid there will have been an assessment that covered the height and nature of any fencing to stop falls from a height. That assessment would outline associated risks and assess how to prevent them, in this case it would most likely cover breakage, maintenance most certainly the necessary treatment to maintain the life of the fencing. As described by the HSE, Chessington didn't treat the wood, which led to rot, which coupled with bad maintenance and a lack of reporting system resulted in this entirely preventable incident. She didn't fall over the fencing, play with it or climb over it - the park just didn't do its duty which is to protect staff and guests whilst at their business.

To say the parents are even remotely at fault is against the decision and assessment of a whole internal investigation launched by the park and of an external legal investigation by highly trained independent HSE investigators.
 
User avatar
bensaund
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 1087
Joined: June 2012
Location: Berkshire

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 7:25 pm

With H&S you have to get the balance right. Too much and every one will moan, would we all want to wear safety glasses and neck braces on the Vampire?

Too little and accidents can and will happen.

It is very easy to point the finger of blame, but you would need the full facts and we don't know the full details of the maintenance which should or did not happen and what happened on the day. Plus the movements of the guests and what they did or what happened. If anything I wish the injured guest all the luck in the world with theirrecovery and this should kick start a cascade of additional maintenance across all parks.

With all the H&S in the world common sense has to play a part. For example if somebody loses a phone or hat on a ride and they choose to climb over the fence to retrieve it, who would be at fault? Fence not big enough/signs not clear enough/person who climbed the fence.
 
User avatar
TheBeast
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 740
Joined: August 2014
Location: Newcastle
Contact:

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sat Jan 31, 2015 8:32 pm

Lee wrote:
TheBeast wrote:
That is true but iwould like to point out thbat if she was on the rocks and fell then that wouldnt have been the pars fault. However, as I said the majority of the blame is the park's


I'm not sure you understand the absolute nature of H&S as if you did, you'd understand how absurd that statement is. The sole blame lies with the park and the park alone.

H&S works on risk, perceived risk and the necessary assessment. For example, when the rocks were laid there will have been an assessment that covered the height and nature of any fencing to stop falls from a height. That assessment would outline associated risks and assess how to prevent them, in this case it would most likely cover breakage, maintenance most certainly the necessary treatment to maintain the life of the fencing. As described by the HSE, Chessington didn't treat the wood, which led to rot, which coupled with bad maintenance and a lack of reporting system resulted in this entirely preventable incident. She didn't fall over the fencing, play with it or climb over it - the park just didn't do its duty which is to protect staff and guests whilst at their business.

To say the parents are even remotely at fault is against the decision and assessment of a whole internal investigation launched by the park and of an external legal investigation by highly trained independent HSE investigators.


Im just going to stop commenting as I can see im probably offending you...sorry
Image
Credit to NemesisRider for an amazing signature!
 
User avatar
Chris
Team Admin
Team Admin
Posts: 1887
Joined: March 2003
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:42 pm

Well put it this way.. when I worked for Merlin there was no procedures for checking the safety of a queue line. They completely relied on the ride ops checking the queue line each morning and pointing out any maintenance issues. Clearly that didn't work so I am guessing they would have actual maintenance people check these kind of things now.
Image
 
mark_h
TT Member
TT Member
Posts: 88
Joined: July 2014

Re: Tomb Blaster Incident - 07/05/12

Mon Feb 02, 2015 5:47 pm

They completely relied on the ride ops checking the queue line each morning and pointing out any maintenance issues.


The ride operators will not have been trained to assess the structural safety of fencing or other potential hazards. They are only likely to notice obvious issues.

The morning walkaround is likely to take place as quickly as possible as there will be a lot of other morning tasks needed to be done.

-----

It is worth pointing out that the HSE guidelines for outdoor events has, in its example checklist (p95) checking that the escape routes are clear as a daily task and checking that the escape routes are clear and safe as a weekly task.

This would suggest that the daily checks could be conducted by the ride operators but the weekly checks should be carried out in more detail by somebody with more knowledge.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests