DOSH report for BTMRR is out

tabacco · Post by **tabacco** » Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:39 pm

The official report is out (using the MiceAge mirror, because the document was replaced on the DOSH homepage by a blank html document):
http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al112603a.htm

Looks like it all came down to a couple of bolts not being tightened enough by maintenence crews.

Weeble · Post by **Weeble** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 12:23 pm

I just started reading it, two paragraphs in and I notice this line:

during these cycles several cast members noticed a noise coming from train #2

OSHA calls them cast members? LOL! Talk about being brainwashed by the mouse.

BirdMom · Post by **BirdMom** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 4:56 pm

:? the thing that I find disturbing for current c.m.'s is the implication that the attractions c.m.'s either did nothing or were untrained to do anything about the situation, i.e. hearing funny sounds coming from the loco.

According to the newspaper, the loco had been tagged to be taken out of service. According to what I've seen on the t.v. news, they reported the above slant with c.m.'s doing nothing. The stations obviously don't realize or know about what it takes to get a conveyance out of service on an attraction...getting people out of rotation who are trained to get the vehicle onto the spur track, along with those in the tower knowing how to leave a space infront of and behind the tagged conveyance without causing a breakdown of the ride system. The newswriters seem to think that r.o.'s can just get trains in and out of the ride system the way valets can move cars in and out of a parking lot. I'm sure that the r.o.'s who were working when the accident happenned feel bad enough as it is - those who were aware of having to get the loco out of service probably feel somewhat responsible for that poor soul who lost his life. The dang t.v. writers are making things worse for the r.o.'s by not having/reporting all the details of what it takes to operate a roller coaster. The only good thing about this is that the budget cuts that led to maintenance cut backs are being exposed. As a publicly traded company in the business of operating heavy machinery that people ride on for a diversion from the ordinary, perhaps Disney needs to make the maintenance cycle more transparant for their stockholders and most importantly customers.

Quite frankly as a 30-something aged ride operator, I realized that I was responsible for people's lives especially in a position in the tower or where I had to keep a hand over an enable or e-stop. How many of the teens that the company hires at minimum wage are truly aware of that responsibility? I have too many memories of high school kids who were more interested in enhancing their social lives than following the proper protocol for minding the guests safety in the year or two before I quit. Maybe the standards for r.o.'s need to be raised to the level that they were at in the 50's through 80's. Maybe the pay rates for r.o.'s need to be raised back up so that the company retains people who are concientious and experienced and serious about doing a good job for the guest's sake. They definitely need to get rid of that penny pinching mentality that profits come before everything else because it's costing more lives. I still think there's more to come in this sad story.

BirdMom · Post by **BirdMom** » Thu Nov 27, 2003 5:00 pm

One other thing...

back in my day, the r.o.'s were not allowed to load a boat/car/whatever that was tagged for maintenance reasons, especially one to be taken out of service. If the loco was tagged, why didn't the crew deadhead the train (or was it one of those miserable high capacity days where the r.o.'s were being told to stuff all the guests in like sardines?)

Weeble · Post by **Weeble** » Fri Nov 28, 2003 1:24 pm

Yeah that seemed a little wierd to me too. From the report it's pretty obvious that the problem all boiled down to two bolts not tightened and no safety wire in them. It's a shame that the news is slanting it towards the RO's.

Freak · Post by **Freak** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 12:37 am

BirdMom wrote:...why didn't the crew deadhead the train...

Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term, is a deadhead just an empty maintenece cycle on an attraction or something??

CujoSR · Post by **CujoSR** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:07 am

pretty much. send out an empty train because they get pulled off the track at the end of the ride not the beginning. see you learn something new everyday.

Dante101 · Post by **Dante101** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:46 am

Freak wrote:
BirdMom wrote:...why didn't the crew deadhead the train...
Sorry, I'm not familiar with that term, is a deadhead just an empty maintenece cycle on an attraction or something??

Yes, basically that's it. It generally means the vehicle is being cycled empty and will be taken offline when it gets back, but not always. On Monorail, the train is called on a deadhead even though it has passengers on board (who will all be disembarking at the Downtown Disney station). On Subs it was called a deadhead if you cycled around the track without passengers.

Weeble · Post by **Weeble** » Sat Nov 29, 2003 11:27 am

Same thing on Jungle. Deadheads were also given if it was very slow so that you wouldn't have a bunch of boats backed up. It was fun deadheading a boat at night. You would stop at the backside of the falls and lay on the bow with the gun in your hand in an empty boat as if you were dead while another boat passed you by full of guests.