Smiler rollercoaster at Alton Towers - carriage collision

itchy said:
^^^This but it does not explain why code zero allowed cars to collide?? :confused:

These are not cheap things to build and the last thing you want is cars smashing into each other. Computer glitch or bad design, I wont say it again I know am repeating myself! :rolleyes: :p
Click to expand...

A lot of machiney is designed to run in an engineer mode, like this because it's simply not possible to test items or components if the machine is not live. In any good business this is controlled very strictly through a permit to work or "lock out" system so that people aren't exposed to hazards whilst in a vulnerable state.

If the machine / ride was in "code zero" mode and someone told it to do something.. It will. It's a machine with the safety features disabled ultimately. A bit like giving average job admin rights on a PC.
 
Just seen the after video where its rolling.

Can see how far the gap is between most seats then the front of the carrage just the legs. :( no gap at all.some longer metal stoppers could have protected there legs meaning the metal stoppers would have hit the next carrage pushing it. And created a protection zone around getting legs crushed surely?

Like what train carrages use.

Seems such a simple concept
 
Last edited:
i watched these videos yesterday thinking that was one "kart" as such i.e all connected. now I see what you mean :(
 
DJMK4 said:
Just seen the after video where its rolling.

Can see how far the gap is between most seats then the front of the carrage just the legs. :( no gap at all.some longer metal stoppers could have protected there legs meaning the metal stoppers would have hit the next carrage pushing it. And created a protection zone around getting legs crushed surely?

Like what train carrages use.

Seems such a simple concept
Click to expand...

No not really. They are designed not to crash at all, unlike cars etc which are designed with a possible crash in mind. Completely different kettle of fish.
 
sprite1275 said:
I'm sure you'll see them in future
Click to expand...

I'm surprised they weren't in before. I'm also surprised none of these testing teams ever said, what if these do crash? Even though they weren't designed to.

Sadly somebody always has to drive off the cliff before there is change.
 
dbmzk1 said:
No not really. They are designed not to crash at all, unlike cars etc which are designed with a possible crash in mind. Completely different kettle of fish.
Click to expand...

Designed not to, but clearly did happen

Not cars, trains, if you google railway carrage coupling, but instead of coupling metal with rubber coating that stick out, if a carrage comes near another one they contact and push the carrage ahead, without going near any passangers

I wouldnt be surprised if they didnt put something on the front of them to protect, aswel as other computerised things

Imo it adds another layer of protection,which imo there is nothing wrong with
 
Last edited:
V F said:
I'm surprised they weren't in before. I'm also surprised none of these testing teams ever said, what if these do crash? Even though they weren't designed to.

Sadly somebody always has to drive off the cliff before there is change.
Click to expand...

I know mate I said it way back in the thread. Why they haven't got bumpers or crumple zones is beyond me. Seems Such an obvious thing.
 
Because it adds weight, complexity and cost to the whole thing. They should never come into contact with anything the way they did.
 
ZG002 said:
Because it adds weight, complexity and cost to the whole thing. They should never come into contact with anything the way they did.
Click to expand...

Weight? Cant really play that card. Its not going to add much, would add more creating a shell and crumple zone

How is it complex? Its very very simple

Woukd have cost them less if it had somrthing to protect the legs in the first place. I cant see it breaking their bank?

Now its cost them lawsuits,park closing whiilst investigations took place, tainted reputatation

Shouldnt is a strong word
 
Ok mate, let's see if your idea finds its way retro fitted onto coasters and built into new ones..

It adds all of what I said to the build and design.
 
The cost of putting buffers or whatever they're called on the Smiler will be pittance compared with how much in total Merlin are going to lose due to this accident.

I'm not up on the lastest news regarding the aftermath but I imagine it'll take some visible safeguards to coax people back on the ride.
 
More mass isn't really a big problem for a roller-coaster, it pays for itself in potential and kenetic energy. It's not going to be more than say 5% of the carriage weight, so the track wont need to grow. It only needs to be a single centrally mounted buffer, something to stop the front row's legs acting as a crumple zone.

I think we will see buffers appearing on these cars, even if it's mostly for show I suspect they'd do it.
 
I'm sure that doing nothing and just say "well the ride wasn't supposed to do that" will build bridges

As above more weight is more energy on drops

I'm sure they wont want to spend any more money now though after paying out lawsuits
 
Last edited:
DJMK4 said:
Designed not to, but clearly did happen

Not cars, trains, if you google railway carrage coupling, but instead of coupling metal with rubber coating that stick out, if a carrage comes near another one they contact and push the carrage ahead, without going near any passangers

I wouldnt be surprised if they didnt put something on the front of them to protect, aswel as other computerised things

Imo it adds another layer of protection,which imo there is nothing wrong with
Click to expand...

But train carriages still sometimes ride up onto the one infront in a crash and wipe our everyone in the car in front as the solid chassis of the one behind rips the top off thw one in front.
 
Tefal said:
But train carriages still sometimes ride up onto the one infront in a crash and wipe our everyone in the car in front as the solid chassis of the one behind rips the top off thw one in front.
Click to expand...

Bit different to trains as rollercoasters I thought were more locked in to their tracks, unlike trains which could derail given the chance
 
bainbridge said:
The cost of putting buffers or whatever they're called on the Smiler will be pittance compared with how much in total Merlin are going to lose due to this accident.

I'm not up on the lastest news regarding the aftermath but I imagine it'll take some visible safeguards to coax people back on the ride.
Click to expand...


Nah people will go regardless.
 
DJMK4 said:
Weight? Cant really play that card. Its not going to add much, would add more creating a shell and crumple zone

How is it complex? Its very very simple

Woukd have cost them less if it had somrthing to protect the legs in the first place. I cant see it breaking their bank?

Now its cost them lawsuits,park closing whiilst investigations took place, tainted reputatation

Shouldnt is a strong word
Click to expand...


It probably wasn't even thought of by the guys designing the car as as far as they know the track should not let them collide.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom