Report on Boy Who Died on Mission: Space

[DisneyKidds]

Sure, it might be a fluke occurrence – but do you really want to take that chance with young children?

If there were a large percentage of thre population that ever knew that a child died on this ride, or even a significant percentage that cared to remember, much less follow up the way we do, this would be Disney's biggest concern, IMHO.

Bottom line is, while I think it's acceptable for Disney to build an attraction like M:S, and I think they did an adequate job of testing and covering the safety angles (from a legal standpoint at least), and they have all the requisite warnings, I'm not going to encourage my kids to ride M:S until they are older. How old I really don't know right now, but it will be at least a few more years before I let my now 7 year old daughter ride this attraction. That will give her body time to mature and give me more history on the ride and it's effects before I send my precious cargo off to Space. If there were a lot of people that thought like that it would be a huge problem, regardless of whether Disney did someting wrong or not.

 

[crusader]

Any ride is going to place a certain number of people at risk. I would like to find out how Disney determined the risks for this attraction, and how they judged those risks against its guests. The fact that Disney performed only a mechanical check and reopened the ride with only a terse statement that basically said “tough break kid” indicates they aren’t really interested.

Heck I'd love to know exactly what they did to determine the risks for this attraction myself and I'm glad to hear you admit you aren't privy to that either.

I don't believe they only did a mechanical check following this tragedy and given the fact that you aren't directly in the loop on this one, I'm going to conclude you can't attest unequivocably to that being "everything" that transpired in relation to this issue.

Does ‘Mission: Space’, in its normal, daily operating mode, place a number of people at undo risk?

Yes - those with certain health conditions who are adamently warned ahead of time.

Look, I still don't believe 4 yr olds belong on this attraction.

P.S. The article linked to in the post above is all about how Disney was going to prevent motion sickness on ‘Mission: Space’. Considering they had to put vomit bags in all the cabins and how clean-up of “protein spills” have caused significant operational issues on the attraction since opening day – you can only conclude that Disney failed miserably in this aspect of human engineering.

I believe it speaks about the ability to manage the parameters related to our sensory perceptions involving motion simulation - not prevent motion sickness. No attraction does that.

Most individuals know when they see a ride like the teacups or the gravitron whether or not they'll have an adverse reaction but it typically is driven by fear, or a prior bad experience. However, many of these same individuals still decided to try M:S because it was different, it was new, and innovative and they couldn't get a clear visual on it upfront.

 

[raidermatt]

Well this is the first time you're actually adhering to the possibility that enough assessment may have already been done in this case.

Please don't make me quote myself.

My points to you are exactly that - and given that scenario, then these findings would completely end the issue.

I don't believe it ends the issue, though certainly it doesn't escalate it. Let's assume they did a more than rudimentary review after the incident. Great. Now that they have some info on the specific condition, including the number of people who are entering Epcot every day with this condition undiagnosed, it would be worth the effort to look into the specifics of this condition and how the ride may trigger such a tragic reaction in some people.

They probably won't come up with any definitive answers, but the due diligence is warrented. They can probably get a better handle on the true level of risk.

Of course, it maybe that they already had the info on the specific condition before it was released publically, and maybe have already looked into it.


On the issue of whether or not they actually DID do this type of review, again, I won't get too deep into that as nobody has enough evidence to come close to "prove" it one way or the other.

I'll just say that its not ridiculous to have doubts. We're talking about business here, as so many repeatedly say, and you could certainly make a business case that shows it wouldn't be profitable to do a significant review after this incident. Either because you still believe the risk to be manageable, and/or you couldn't/wouldn't shut the ride down no matter what you found because the investment was too high.

Also, one of the effects of our sue-happy society is that companies are realizing more and more that sometimes, if they don't know something is at risk, they can escape punishment, or at least mitigate it. If you feel you've done enough due diligence to cover yourself legally, then stop, because anything you find out later, and fail to act on, will cost you.

Of course none of that proves that anyone did or didn't do anything they should have. Its just why these things can't be brushed of with "I'm sure they did", because sometimes they don't.

In Disney's case, I personally believe that some of their recent accidents, in particular the Columbia, Big Thunder (twice), and Screamin', are at least the indirect result of them feeling like they had done enough to cover themselves legally (settlements aside).

Did that happen with M:S? I don't know.

 

[SoCalKDG]

Meanwhile, a study released Tuesday at an American Heart Association conference in Dallas gave support to the notion that heart problems can be triggered or aggravated by roller coaster rides.

Researchers at the University Hospital of Mannheim in Germany put 55 healthy people on roller coaster rides and monitored their heart rates during the two-minute experience. Average heart rates rose from 89 beats per minute before the ride to 155 just afterward, with women's rates rising significantly more than men's. These rates are high enough to trigger rhythm problems, and two participants experienced different types of them.

"We strongly recommend to people with heart disease not to ride a roller coaster," said the study leader Dr. Jurgen Kuschyk, a cardiologist at University Hospital in Mannheim, Germany.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10057306



Considering that the number of people with heart problems dwarfs what this child had, what should be done about every roller coaster in the world? Are warning signs enough, or should RNR, Space, TOT, MS, etc. be removed or even toned down to the point that they aren't fun?

 

[disneyholic family]

according to the report, someone with the particular congenital defect that this boy had is at risk of sudden death, regardless of what they're doing....

 

[stemikger]

I dind't read all the replies so forgive me if I am repeating something that has been said. First let me say my prayers are for that little boy and his family.

Also, I have never been on MS because I have high blood pressure. I feel Disney is so good at what they do, which is "Creating Magic" that they could have done a Space Simulator without it excluding a large portion of the public. I think with all their creativity and technology the imagineers could have done something that would have given you a feeling of going to space that everyone could have enjoyed.

Soarin for example, is a great ride that gives you a cool exhilirarted feeling.

 

[kowalchicky]

I thought this ride was a nightmare. The minute I got off I said to my husband I will never ride that ride again....not even for a million a dollars. My chest felt like I had an elephant sitting on it....it was the scarest feeling.

 

[Another Voice]

I don't believe they only did a mechanical check following this tragedy and given the fact that you aren't directly in the loop on this one…

I'd like to see the list of experts that you say Disney consulted about the impact on long term elevated G stresses on a large segment of the population.

Or are you just going on blind faith that "Disney did the right thing"?

Yea, that's what I thought.

Disney has not produced any evidence they have tested, designed or evaluated the risk of this attraction to the population at large. Sure, there are many, many articles about all the ways they were going to prevent motion sickness (all those methods failed), but Disney has never said anything about hiring a single person to consult about the safety of the ride. And when the issue was brought up in court, Disney had that one charge thrown out on a technicality (the case was about a contract dispute, Disney argued that the case should be fought only on the legal terms of the contract, not the broader implications – the judged agreed)

Given that a child has died on this attraction, and obviously as the result of the stresses of this attraction, the burden is on Disney to show they've done everything they reasonable can to insure that it is safe. We're all waiting.

Yes - those with certain health conditions who are adamently warned ahead of time.

But the problem is for those people that do not know they are putting themselves at risk, it's not about the guy with the neck brace. Given the not-so-rare nature of this boy's condition, this is going to affect a lot of people at WDW every year. The moment Disney subjects a guest to risks outside the scope of everyday life, the company must assume the responsibility for that guest's health and safety.

Most individuals know when they see a ride like the teacups or the gravitron whether or not they'll have an adverse reaction but it typically is driven by fear, or a prior bad experience.

Yet the Internet is filled with posting by people who couldn't take 'Dumbo' having a great time on 'Mission: Space', and hard core coaster freaks spending the rest of the day nauseous.

Something is different about 'Mission: Space'. It subjects riders to forces for a prolonged period of time – forces that roller coasters and other thrill rides subject their riders to for a second or two. 'Mission: Space' draws a much wider audience than carnivals or Six Flags.

And while you many not put your four year old on the attraction – most guests to WDW don't hang all day on Internet discussion boards. They don't have an understanding of the risks involved – they too are putting their blind trust in Disney (which in this case even you wouldn't do).

Are warning signs enough, or should RNR, Space, TOT, MS, etc. be removed or even toned down to the point that they aren't fun?

Are you implying that the death of a four year old child is justified because preventing it may mean rollercoasters won't "be fun" anymore?

One would hope people think long and hard about the implication of their beliefs.

according to the report, someone with the particular congenital defect that this boy had is at risk of sudden death, regardless of what they're doing....

That's very true, but why did it happen on the ride. Why not of the plane ride to Orlando, why not in the taxi to WDW, why not on any of the other attractions the child rode? Simply as a matter of ethics, it should be Disney's stance that it is their burden to show that the attraction is safe for their guests – not that the attraction is assumed safe until more people die.

We have more than a hundred years of experience with roller coasters and decades with high speed steel coasters. 'Mission: Space' is the first time a large and varied number of the general public has been placed inside a powerful centrifuge. We simply don't know what the impact is going to be.

I wish Disney would err on the side of caution rather than move blindly in ignorance.

 

[peter11435]

Given that a child has died on this attraction, and obviously as the result of the stresses of this attraction,

But you see thats not the case, the forces of the attraction did not kill this boy. His condition killed him. Sure his condition was aggravated by the ride but it could have just as easily been aggravated if he has tripped on a curb on Main Street.

The moment Disney subjects a guest to risks outside the scope of everyday life, the company must assume the responsibility for that guest's health and safety.

Thats funny because I thought most thrill rides at WDW or otherwise subjected guests to risks outside the scope of everyday life.

There is no way that the company did not look into how these forces would affect people as you claim. Paying for the consulatation of an expert or experts is a small price to pay to avoid the bad policy and certain lawsuit that would come out of a situation like this.

 

[crusader]

Given that a child has died on this attraction, and obviously as the result of the stresses of this attraction, the burden is on Disney to show they've done everything they reasonable can to insure that it is safe. We're all waiting.

No, you're the only one waiting. More than 8.5 million visitors had ridden this attraction by that time. So all your demands for more research and analysis of past data on these stresses seems to be the wrong approach to answering the questions involving the risks to the mainstream public.

Disney now has an unprecedented volume of actual evidence to utilize in addition to everything they have previously compiled regarding M:S. This information is far more accurate, relevant and reliable than any past research and development data modeled by a bunch of consultants.

So, given all this, and the fact that the tragedy was the result of an undetected congenital defect, what exactly is it you feel should be done?

 

[crusader]

And while you many not put your four year old on the attraction – most guests to WDW don't hang all day on Internet discussion boards. They don't have an understanding of the risks involved – they too are putting their blind trust in Disney (which in this case even you wouldn't do).

Parents have an understanding of safety and risk when it comes to their children and they have a responsibility to take careful note and adequate precaution when encountered with an attraction with pretty sharp warning signs all over it. Heck there's even a video presentation to insure the guest has an understanding.

People just aren't as stupid as you'd like to imply here, Voice. Nobody blindly follows anybody anymore - not the church, not the medical community and certainly not a publicly traded corporation.

And just how much time do you think the population is spending on the internet?

 

[VSL]

So, given all this, and the fact that the tragedy was the result of an undetected congenital defect, what exactly is it you feel should be done?

Yeah, that^^^

 

[DancingBear]

Given that a child has died on this attraction, and obviously as the result of the stresses of this attraction, the burden is on Disney to show they've done everything they reasonable can to insure that it is safe.

Safe for whom? For those with rare undetected congenital heart defects? The answer to that is clearly no, it's not safe for such persons. So, assuming that is not your threshhold, what is? Is it okay if it's not safe for those persons with known conditions who ignore the warnings? What's the target for safety?

The moment Disney subjects a guest to risks outside the scope of everyday life, the company must assume the responsibility for that guest's health and safety.

As pointed out, this is too broad of a statement. Most people in their everyday lives don't take ferry boat rides, or walk around in 95-degree heat for hours on end either.

Something is different about 'Mission: Space'. It subjects riders to forces for a prolonged period of time – forces that roller coasters and other thrill rides subject their riders to for a second or two. 'Mission: Space' draws a much wider audience than carnivals or Six Flags.

This is true, and worthy of investigation (which we don't know has or has not been done); but I also wouldn't automatically let off the hook the rest of the thrill ride industry when they are pushing the envelope, even for a second or two.

Are you implying that the death of a four year old child is justified because preventing it may mean rollercoasters won't "be fun" anymore?

One would hope people think long and hard about the implication of their beliefs.

The honest answer to the question is yes. If it is true that this child had substantially the same likelihood of dying from his condition on Space Mountain, or Big Thunder, or in the wave pool at Typhoon Lagoon (or during any number of activities he may have engaged in back home), then, yes, the choice is made to bear this risk to preserve the "fun" for everyone else. Just as we make the choice to continue to have school football, soccer and basketball teams, although I'm sure that children have died from this condition while engaged in those activities.

I'm not sure what the implication of that is.

We have more than a hundred years of experience with roller coasters and decades with high speed steel coasters.

I don't think you said this for that purpose, but again, this statement too readily lets the coaster designers off the hook, as they are knowingly designing rides which push these envelopes further and further. We don't know the impact of those designs either.

I wish Disney would err on the side of caution rather than move blindly in ignorance.

Fair enough, but I don't know that we have evidence as to Disney's ignorance (or lack thereof).

 

[Another Voice]

If it is true that this child had substantially the same likelihood of dying from his condition on Space Mountain, or Big Thunder…]/quote
But do they. When was the last time a four year old dropped dead on ‘Big Thunder Mountain’. When was the last time a four year old dropped dead on ‘Dumbo’. How many of your classmates in kindergarten dropped dead at school? The “it could have happened anywhere” excuse is, frankly, wrong – because it doesn’t “just happen anywhere.

Even if “it’s one of those things” – why should Disney be in the position of causing a child’s death. Perhaps that child cold have live a couple more years, happy years for him and his family. How is it “okay” that those years we taken away because of an amusement park ride?

Fair enough, but I don't know that we have evidence as to Disney's ignorance (or lack thereof).

Disney needs to provide proof that they’ve adequately safeguarded the attraction for their guests. They have refused.

Thats funny because I thought most thrill rides at WDW or otherwise subjected guests to risks outside the scope of everyday life.

No, they don’t. They have been specifically designed to be safer than normal life.

What’s the fastest ride – ‘Test Track’. How fast does it go – ’55 mph’. Out here in Califorina we go faster than that on the freeway onramp.

More than 8.5 million visitors had ridden this attraction by that time. So, given all this, and the fact that the tragedy was the result of an undetected congenital defect, what exactly is it you feel should be done?

So that means you think the death of person out of every 8.5 million is fine? That wee now have the acceptable body count, everyone’s happy knowing that only one person every other year (on average) will die for their amusement?

And are you volunteering?

Yeah, that

Easy – provide safe guards against known risks and inform the public.

First – set the minimum age to ride to at least 12 years old. If Disney can figure out a child’s age to know how much to charge them for a ticket, they can damn well also figure their age to keep them safe. Height is not always the same thing physical development. The age restriction for the ride needs to set at a point where any pre-existing conditions most likely will have been diagnosed.

Second – show the ride in operation. Disney’s warning signs are meaningless. There are so many that they have become visual clutter. People judge if a roller coaster is too much for them by looking at it. Do the same thing with ‘Mission: Space’. Replace the wall with large windows so the guests can see what’s going on. Even people who have been on roller coasters don’t have an idea what this machine does. Show them and let them decide. The current graphic and signs don’t say anything other than “the lawyers made us put these here”.

Third – Figure out what’s going on. Work with ETC and other experts in aviation medicine to understand the forces involved. Maybe actually really consult with NASA for something other than photo ops. Work with the rest of the industry to see if this ride system can be made safe an effective for everyone.

 

[peter11435]

If it is true that this child had substantially the same likelihood of dying from his condition on Space Mountain, or Big Thunder…]/quote
But do they. When was the last time a four year old dropped dead on ‘Big Thunder Mountain’. When was the last time a four year old dropped dead on ‘Dumbo’. How many of your classmates in kindergarten dropped dead at school? The “it could have happened anywhere” excuse is, frankly, wrong – because it doesn’t “just happen anywhere.

Even if “it’s one of those things” – why should Disney be in the position of causing a child’s death. Perhaps that child cold have live a couple more years, happy years for him and his family. How is it “okay” that those years we taken away because of an amusement park ride?


Disney needs to provide proof that they’ve adequately safeguarded the attraction for their guests. They have refused.


No, they don’t. They have been specifically designed to be safer than normal life.

What’s the fastest ride – ‘Test Track’. How fast does it go – ’55 mph’. Out here in Califorina we go faster than that on the freeway onramp.


So that means you think the death of person out of every 8.5 million is fine? That wee now have the acceptable body count, everyone’s happy knowing that only one person every other year (on average) will die for their amusement?

And are you volunteering?


Easy – provide safe guards against known risks and inform the public.

First – set the minimum age to ride to at least 12 years old. If Disney can figure out a child’s age to know how much to charge them for a ticket, they can damn well also figure their age to keep them safe. Height is not always the same thing physical development. The age restriction for the ride needs to set at a point where any pre-existing conditions most likely will have been diagnosed.

Second – show the ride in operation. Disney’s warning signs are meaningless. There are so many that they have become visual clutter. People judge if a roller coaster is too much for them by looking at it. Do the same thing with ‘Mission: Space’. Replace the wall with large windows so the guests can see what’s going on. Even people who have been on roller coasters don’t have an idea what this machine does. Show them and let them decide. The current graphic and signs don’t say anything other than “the lawyers made us put these here”.

Third – Figure out what’s going on. Work with ETC and other experts in aviation medicine to understand the forces involved. Maybe actually really consult with NASA for something other than photo ops. Work with the rest of the industry to see if this ride system can be made safe an effective for everyone.

Your hopeless. Maybe one day you will wake up able to see clearly.

 

[VSL]

Oh my goodness, this is ridiculous!

Many many people have taken young children on M:S, and they've been fine BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY UNDERLYING CONDITION! It could just have easily have happened to a 12yr old, a 20yr old, a 30yr old, etc.!

In addition, people die on ALL THRILL RIDES from unknown and/or underlying conditions - so lets all take down those coasters, freefallers, etc.?

Also, Disney DO provide warnings - if it's an underlying condition then it's no ones fault. Just because no one has died of BTMRR, doesn't mean that they weren't at risk.

For goodness sake - you don't even have an argument!

And yes, it does just happen anywhere. There has been ONE fatality on M:S. Yes, it is tragic, and I feel for the family, I really do - but until it happens again and someone dies with having no underlying condition, you don't have a case.

 

[YoHo]

sigh...

 

[All Aboard]

Second – show the ride in operation.

They do. In the waiting area on monitors, you see the pods spinning. Also, the warning videos (not signs, but videos that are inescapable) show the attraction. Then, when boarding, nothing is hidden. You see these things attached to a central arm. I'd be very interested to know what % of riders gety through all of that and then board having no idea what the attraction does.

So that means you think the death of person out of every 8.5 million is fine? That wee now have the acceptable body count, everyone’s happy knowing that only one person every other year (on average) will die for their amusement?

AV, you sound like a politician. I don't believe anyone is advocating an acceptable body count. Is it safe to say that the risks to people who have the same hidden medical condition stretch well beyond Mission:Space? M:S just happened to be the culprit in this case. Using this logic, we've aparently set an acceptable body count on high school athletics and many other activities.

When you are dealing with statistics as small as one in 8.5 million, timing is a huge factor. It's not like flipping a coin where you have a pretty consistent show of heads or tails. Perhaps this fatality represents one in 200 million and it happened to happen during the third year of M:S's operation. This boy may be the only person to perish on M:S, EVER. We don't know.

Perhaps the drop on Splash Mountain could end the lives of one in every 150 million people, and that person just hasn't happened to board yet. Again, we don't know.

I'd be really interested to know just how much would have to be taken out of the parks to make absolutely sure that the motion, forces or even fright factors would not have any (0%) chance of being fatal to anyone, no matter how hidden, no matter how fragile the condition is.

As harsh as this may sound, you have to draw the line somewhere. There were fatalities on Dinosaur and Pirates of the Caribbean in the last couple of years as well. Where's the outcry?

 

[crusader]

And are you volunteering?

I believe we all did on this one.

 

[raidermatt]

Your hopeless. Maybe one day you will wake up able to see clearly.

That was constructive.

In addition, people die on ALL THRILL RIDES from unknown and/or underlying conditions - so lets all take down those coasters, freefallers, etc.?

Who advocated taking down anything?

There were fatalities on Dinosaur and Pirates of the Caribbean in the last couple of years as well. Where's the outcry?

AA, not you too! We don't all have to agree on what all of this ultimately means, but you do see the important differences between the Pirates situation, and even the Dinosaur situation, and what occured with M:S, right? You know, all the stuff about unique ride systems, physical forces, and undiagnosed conditions?

Not saying that those differences prove anything with regard to M:S, just that those differences invalidate the analogies made to those other situations.