Leaderboard

Got to be kidding. They literally have nowhere to hide. If they fired someone for a safety breech, evidently water levels are a very serious issue. If that wasnt drummed into their staff following dismissal of the employee, they need a huge kick up the arse. I was willing to give everyone the benefit of doubt and not point any blame at people, but it looks like both operations and maintenance department supervisors/heads/leaders have a lot to answer for. Its starting to look like their employees might even have a case to take the company to court for failing to provide adequate training and a safe working environment. Keeping everyone in the dark, withholding information, shit like that is the worst kind of micromanaging. It robs all employees the chance to learn from past mistakes and fails to acknowledge or address any issues that might save the company from repeating those same mistakes again. I literally cannot understand why you wouldnt use past incidences as a learning tool. Aside from it giving you a chance to update the control systems to close any loop holes in safety; You have everything at your disposal for personel training. A real incident to examine, the people, the ride it happened on. You could literally walk newly trained operators through and explain not only the events and proceedures to make sure that never happens again, but also drive home the importance of the safety aspect, right while they are standing there. It's just incredible.

Pretty much agree with your thoughts @Levithian i don’t blame the ride ops - it’s management. Not providing adequate training, or adequate safety systems/policies. The fact they haven’t had emergency response training SINCE 4 people died in the Park is utterly unbelievable. Back in my retail management days, I had a staff member break an ankle when an incorrectly stored pallet fell onto his leg. I used that opportunity to document and develop a new safety plan, and every single person in the business had to read documentation, show a physical understanding of it, and sign to say they understood and took accountability for it. This is commonplace in many industries - to think it isn’t in use in a theme park is borderline terrifying.

Looks like a couple of guys from guest services having a coffee break.

The families have made their mind on who is at fault: "We hold Dreamworld totally responsible for this tragic event that could have so easily been avoided."

Exactly the same here, I work in a basic fast food outlet and have to put up with insane amounts of safety procedures all the time. We even get regularly quizzed AND graded on our knowledge of safety procedures. Why hasn't this been the same at Dreamworld? Clearly from the developing stories we can make the conclusion that there has been negligence at Dreamworld and I do not believe that the park is in the right position to be safely operated even today. We've seen examples of this numerous times over the past months and year. I believe that the best course of action from here is to force some changes, so they can sort their shit out and restructure management to smaller levels of hierarchy, implement relevant safety procedures and training, fix up their maintenance team, andmost importantly fix up their rides using safety implementations which are actually useful and not a total waste of time, space and resources (shockwave, log ride)

I've edited this, as the bit missing is that the former operator shut down the pumps whilst people where still on the ride. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-22/dreamworld-coronial-inquest-incident-two-years-earlier/9897602 That article also states no warning light/buzzer was in place to indicate that a pump has stopped working. But still, my original comments below I still feel still stands. If it was serious enough to fire someone over, it was serious enough to: a) train/tool box talk with staff about b) investigate ways to avoid it reoccurring c) implement a solution. I think it just got really bad for Dreamworld, until now I still felt it was a 'freak accident' that only hindsight could have solved and was otherwise unforeseen.

It's all a moot point. They shouldn't have had to run to a button because appropriate automated controls should have been in place to stop the conveyor.

HAHAHA And you think i wasn't? LOL

Lots of talk, but it really comes down to a few things; Were proceedures in place that demonstrate when the ride cannot be operated / shut down and were the operators aware and practiced in their use. Were safety systems in place to limit risk to guests, and were those systems working/in place when the accident happened. Were operators sufficiently trained in the full operation of the ride, and were they confident in their abilities. Problems with the ride design, systems or operations in its previous and current state. Were any modifications made to the ride outside of its production and was supporting documentation of implementing any changes produced. With the ride previously experiencing faults, was anything missed or overlooked to allow the ride to continue operation. And if questions were raised on the day during previous faults, did anyone give the authority to reopen the ride rather than keep closed for repair or further investigation. They arent putting the operators on trial. The indepth questions directed at them are not just used to establish a timeline events, but to also establish what the work environment / culture was like at the park with regards to training and experience. The timeline of events and anything that previously happened during the day that should have seen the ride closed directs issue back to the supervisors and any managers that may have allowed the ride to continue to operate when it should have been closed. How people act, what they do and how confident they are directly reflects back on the operation of the park. Pointing the blame at one or even two operators is basically small fish, unless you can establish they were negligent (which is near impossible). What they are more interested in is training, safety, park operation and proceedures. Ultimately a combination of these are responsible for any incident that occurs, so they want to see the inner workings of the park and what is lacking at the top. The park would be committing suicide by trying to hang any blame on an operator. They are responsible for placing them in that work environment and also have a duty of care to the staff to make sure they are adequately trained and experienced to operate safely within that environment. So someone unsure of their role, responsibilities or actions only demonstrates the park let them down too.

Bullshit Razza. You waltz in, quote something from a decade ago in entirety, and ask a three word question like 'what's most annoying' expecting others to do essentially what you could have googled yourself without choking up the thread. In addition, you tend to reply to shit as you read it - so if you're reading a 25 page thread, we'll get posts from you with a question from page 7, and then an hour later another question from page 12, and then the following day, a question from page 22. Learn to use multiquote. Learn to reply to all in one post once you've finished reading the thread (because sometimes your question is already answered), try googling terms you don't understand before asking, and for gods sake learn how to edit quotes to remove text that isn't relevent to your reply. You're really starting to shit me. (I wager others are feeling the same) The statement was this event, with these contributing factors couldn't happen at VRTP because of the culture and procedures they have in place. If it's not the 'exact same event' then you can't really include it - are you going to suggest that a kid won't scrape his knee falling over on main street? no. As for referencing green lantern, that was a design problem from the manufacturer. No park is going to be able to prevent that from happening where the manufacturer has provided engineering clearances without performing NDT regularly (and expensively) which most industries would deem to be overkill. The issue wasn't caused by a homemade attraction, it wasn't caused by a litany of in-park modifications. It wasn't caused by failure to follow recommendations made out after previous incidents. Dude seriously - stop being so fucking argumentative. You're really acting like a tool, and you're not going to make friends here with that sort of attitude. Also, please try to improve your language and spelling, it just makes things easier to read.

@Brad2912 if @razza1987 is buying a car, a car joke is in order. Two blondes were driving to Disneyland. The sign said, "Disneyland Left". So they started crying and went home.

Could still happen with conitinuos load if load slow. Some removed planks from conveyor which may have also increased change of getting stuck. why could this not happen at vrtp? Maybe not the exact same event but incidents happen . Let’s not forget what happened in green lantern . People were lucky to not loose their life’s. I’m sure an external engineering firm also signs of new rides when auditing despite it being an initial design fault as per TRR. a better risk culture should have identified flipping as an issue after 2001 whether or not there was a raft moored after that incident. Lets not forget the probability of incident increased over time . Modifications to conveyor, unload station put in space closer to conveyor, rails put underneath to stabilise rafts after coming of conveyor all increased the chance .

Well it’s the Funhouse thread, of course.