Discussion:
BIzarre quote from Sandor Kernacs of Intamin on the SROS accident
(too old to reply)
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
2004-05-06 06:13:37 UTC
Permalink
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=10263CE132965E88&p_docnum=1

KIN SEEK ANSWERS AT SIX FLAGS
Author(s): Connie Paige, Globe Correspondent Date: May 5, 2004 Page: B3
Section: Metro/Region
AGAWAM - The twin brother and niece of the 55-year-old disabled man who
spun off a mega-roller coaster to his death visited the scene yesterday,
hoping to find solace in learning more about how he died.

Instead, they emerged angry, condemning the manufacturer of the ride from
which Stanley J. Mordarsky fell to his death on Saturday afternoon. In an
emotional interview after Daniel Mordarsky and his daughter Jeannie Cierley
were shepherded through the Six Flags New England amusement park, the two
described the victim as shy but fun-loving and his life as troubled and
difficult.

"Sometimes I wish I had done a little more for him," Daniel Mordarsky said
of his brother, who was afflicted with cerebral palsy. "He was a tiger by
the tail - rough if you met him, at first, but he's kind of a likeable guy
once you get to know him."

Ron Sevart, the Six Flags New England general manager, took Daniel
Mordarsky and Cierley to the accident site at the Superman Ride of Steel
roller coaster where Stanley Mordarsky was flung to the ground.

"It is hard, because he was so close to the end of the ride," Mordarsky
said afterward. "It was the last turn. I guess what God wills is meant to
be."

Mordarsky praised Six Flags officials for their kindness, but both he and
Cierley blasted comments by a representative of the manufacturer of the
coaster, one of the world's tallest and fastest.

Sandor Kernacs, US president of the manufacturer, Intamin, told the
Hartford Courant that while accidents cannot be avoided, "the question is,
what is an acceptable number?"

"The number zero is the acceptable number for what should happen to
people," Cierley said. "If it was his family members, how would he feel?"
Daniel Mordarsky said.


There's more, but I cut it there. You can read the rest at the link above.

You can also read the original Hartford Courant article at:
http://www.ctnow.com/hc-coaster0504.artmay04,0,6928238.story

But, honestly, WHAT THE HELL WAS SANDOR THINKING when he said that?!?

Was he misquoted?

Is he THAT bad with PR?

Seriously, this is a horrific thing for him to say. I have to wonder if
other parks will take this quote into consideration when deciding on
whether to buy any new rides from Intamin, especially if they actually DO
question how many accidents is and "acceptable number" of accidents
(particularly fatal ones!)

I think it's a pretty easy bet that Intamin's going to be named in the
inevitable lawsuit.


David Hamburger, ***@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.

"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Locoboy
2004-05-06 06:35:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Is he THAT bad with PR?
I've sat in on some presentations done by him and I got the feeling that he doesn't exactly have
the world's greatest "people skills." He's just a typical engineer in that regard.

Speaking as an engineer, I realize that my kind aren't exactly the greatest with communication
skills.
Swervo
2004-05-06 07:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Is he THAT bad with PR?
I've sat in on some presentations done by him and I got the feeling
that he doesn't exactly have the world's greatest "people skills."
He's just a typical engineer in that regard.
Speaking as an engineer, I realize that my kind aren't exactly the
greatest with communication skills.
Almost reminds you of the bit in Fight Club where Edward Norton
describes the process that goes into deciding whether or not to issue a
recall...
David Burton
2004-05-06 13:51:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swervo
Almost reminds you of the bit in Fight Club where Edward Norton
describes the process that goes into deciding whether or not to issue a
recall...
You beat me to it, exactly the scene in the movie that was going through my mind!
David Burton
2004-05-06 16:23:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swervo
Almost reminds you of the bit in Fight Club where Edward Norton
describes the process that goes into deciding whether or not to issue a
recall...
You beat me to it, exactly the scene in the movie that was going through my mind!
Wolf
2004-05-08 20:30:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swervo
Post by Locoboy
I've sat in on some presentations done by him and I got the feeling
that he doesn't exactly have the world's greatest "people skills."
He's just a typical engineer in that regard.
Speaking as an engineer, I realize that my kind aren't exactly the
greatest with communication skills.
Almost reminds you of the bit in Fight Club where Edward Norton
describes the process that goes into deciding whether or not to issue a
recall...
It should. It's the same process.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
Charles Nungester
2004-05-06 10:45:01 UTC
Permalink
Both Ford and GM have been found not only thinking that very same way. It's
called risk assesment and is total bullshit if you ask me.

1 in 200,000 pintos might blow up or 1 in 300,000 GMC or chevy trucks due to
gas tank placement flaws which they new about beforehand and were proven to
have known.

While I woudln't think anyone would think One in a million will get seriously
hurt on our ride due to something we know about.

It makes you wonder.
Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
Dave Althoff Jr
2004-05-06 13:03:40 UTC
Permalink
Charles Nungester (***@aol.comnospam) wrote:
: Both Ford and GM have been found not only thinking that very same way. It's
: called risk assesment and is total bullshit if you ask me.

: 1 in 200,000 pintos might blow up or 1 in 300,000 GMC or chevy trucks due to
: gas tank placement flaws which they new about beforehand and were proven to
: have known.

: While I woudln't think anyone would think One in a million will get seriously
: hurt on our ride due to something we know about.

: It makes you wonder.

There is nothing wrong with risk assessment. Risk assessment is, in fact,
very important to assuring safety.

The problem is that risk assessment should be tied into risk management.
In a sense, Sandor is right: there will be incidents, and some number of
incidents has to be considered acceptable. The problem is that the
acceptable number of FATAL or SERIOUS incidents is ZERO.

Failure is not an option; failure is mandatory. Kernacs understands that.
But his comment makes it sound like he doesn't understand that the job of
the design engineers is to make sure that *when* a failure happens, it
doesn't kill anybody.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Not an engineer, but I like to think I think like one...
--
/X\ _ _ _*** Now Open Every Day!!! ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Charles Nungester
2004-05-06 14:32:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
There is nothing wrong with risk assessment. Risk assessment is, in fact,
very important to assuring safety.
I follow :)
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
The problem is that risk assessment should be tied into risk management.
In a sense, Sandor is right: there will be incidents, and some number of
incidents has to be considered acceptable. The problem is that the
acceptable number of FATAL or SERIOUS incidents is ZERO.
I see where he is comming from and what you mean here. Shit happens :)
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
Failure is not an option; failure is mandatory. Kernacs understands that.
But his comment makes it sound like he doesn't understand that the job of
the design engineers is to make sure that *when* a failure happens, it
doesn't kill anybody.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Not an engineer, but I like to think I think like one
I think he fully understands that but the way he stated it seemed like there
might be a chance that this might happen.

Also interesting to not is that California investigators found fault with
Perilous Plunge restraints while Intamin denyed it and blamed rider weight.
There is at least one incident of conflict here.

Chuck, not even close to being a engineer, but finds it interesting
Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
Raven Rider
2004-05-06 16:45:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
The problem is that risk assessment should be tied into risk management.
In a sense, Sandor is right: there will be incidents, and some number of
incidents has to be considered acceptable. The problem is that the
acceptable number of FATAL or SERIOUS incidents is ZERO.
Failure is not an option; failure is mandatory. Kernacs understands that.
But his comment makes it sound like he doesn't understand that the job of
the design engineers is to make sure that *when* a failure happens, it
doesn't kill anybody.
Exactly Dave. Yes as we all know there's always some idiot who does
something stupid on a ride and dies but there should be no fatalities
from restraint failure, faulty engineering or ride operator
negligence. With Sandor's comments I'm less than inclined to hop on
any of his rides and I'd hate to be selling for Intamin today because
he just sank any deals that may be in the works, especially that
coaster that's supposed to be "super" that a few birds from SFStL have
whispered in my ear about.

Have Fun!

Paul "Not going to SFDL this summer after all, guess I'll go to MFI or
Marineland Instead" Drabek
***@Negative-g.com
Negative-g: www.Negative-g.com
Read My Blog "It's All Downhill From Here" at www.negative-g.com/downhill/

Proud Poster On Rec,Roller-Coaster Since September 27, 1996
mforcemaniac
2004-05-06 17:39:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raven Rider
Paul "Not going to SFDL this summer after all, guess I'll go to MFI or
Marineland Instead" Drabek
Paul...
SFDL's version of S:RoS is really lackluster anyway and like I said
the other night, you're not missing much. MFI, Marineland, and
Seabreeze are (I hate to say) better choices.
Now, whether or not this will impact my decision to get on an Intamin
or not...probably not. Engineers are bad with PR on the whole, that's
why most companies have PR representatives. This is why I took 2
years of public speaking courses. Sometimes we can say things that
can be misconstrued as being vulgar or arrogant, but we mean well.
I've never had anything bad happen to me on an Intamin before (Other
than bruises from repeated rides on S:RoS at
SFNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE on my legs), and I hope
that it stays that way. While something could happen, I'm doubting it
will. If an Intamin comes up in my travels, I'm not going to
specifically go out of my way to ride it (Especially if it's at SFDL,
35 minutes away from me), but I won't avoid it either. Just some food
for thought. I'm off to go do my finite element analysis homework, so
hopefully some day I can design rides :).

-Nate "if you go to MFI or Seabreeze, I'll probably meet you there"
Mellenthien
Locoboy
2004-05-06 18:00:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by mforcemaniac
I'm off to go do my finite element analysis homework, so
hopefully some day I can design rides :).
I just finished doing some of that myself this morning! :-D I did the
lazy man's method and used ProM though.
Ted Ansley
2004-05-07 04:39:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by mforcemaniac
Post by Raven Rider
Paul "Not going to SFDL this summer after all, guess I'll go to MFI or
Marineland Instead" Drabek
Paul...
SFDL's version of S:RoS is really lackluster anyway and like I said
the other night, you're not missing much. MFI, Marineland, and
Seabreeze are (I hate to say) better choices.
Now, whether or not this will impact my decision to get on an Intamin
or not...probably not. Engineers are bad with PR on the whole, that's
why most companies have PR representatives. This is why I took 2
years of public speaking courses. Sometimes we can say things that
can be misconstrued as being vulgar or arrogant, but we mean well.
I've never had anything bad happen to me on an Intamin before (Other
than bruises from repeated rides on S:RoS at
SFNEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE on my legs), and I hope
that it stays that way. While something could happen, I'm doubting it
will. If an Intamin comes up in my travels, I'm not going to
specifically go out of my way to ride it (Especially if it's at SFDL,
35 minutes away from me), but I won't avoid it either. Just some food
for thought. I'm off to go do my finite element analysis homework, so
hopefully some day I can design rides :).
-Nate "if you go to MFI or Seabreeze, I'll probably meet you there"
Mellenthien
Lackluster? I 'll admit I've not ridden SFDL's SRos but I have ridden
SFA's, probably close to 200 times. It is hardly "lackluster" iMHO, it
is firmly my #2 steel coaster right after SRoS at SFNE. It has great
steep drops, tons of airtime, high speed turns with great positive
G;s and a great helix (the first one). Night rides are some of the
best steel coaster rides I've ever had!



--------------------------
Ted Ansley
***@usa.com
RollerCoaster Fan<atic>
mforcemaniac
2004-05-09 20:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Ansley
Lackluster? I 'll admit I've not ridden SFDL's SRos but I have ridden
SFA's, probably close to 200 times. It is hardly "lackluster" iMHO, it
is firmly my #2 steel coaster right after SRoS at SFNE. It has great
steep drops, tons of airtime, high speed turns with great positive
G;s and a great helix (the first one). Night rides are some of the
best steel coaster rides I've ever had!
SFDL's version used to be very good, but they really have tamed it
down over the years. The two bunny hills at the end gave so much
airtime it wasn't funny. There was also a substantial amount of air
during the hill after the first helix. I found the helices boring
myself, but that's a personal taste. Maybe the one at SFA is better,
but I don't know yet (I most likely will this summer). All I know is
that compared to the rest of the coasters I have been on, the one at
SFDL seems like just an average coaster, something that I never
imagined a hypercoaster could be.
Locoboy
2004-05-10 02:10:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by mforcemaniac
SFDL's version used to be very good, but they really have tamed it
down over the years. The two bunny hills at the end gave so much
airtime it wasn't funny. There was also a substantial amount of air
during the hill after the first helix. I found the helices boring
myself, but that's a personal taste. Maybe the one at SFA is better,
but I don't know yet (I most likely will this summer). All I know is
that compared to the rest of the coasters I have been on, the one at
SFDL seems like just an average coaster, something that I never
imagined a hypercoaster could be.
What was done to the Darien Lake version? This is the first I've heard that
the park tamed it down.
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
2004-05-10 16:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
Post by mforcemaniac
SFDL's version used to be very good, but they really have tamed it
down over the years. The two bunny hills at the end gave so much
airtime it wasn't funny. There was also a substantial amount of air
during the hill after the first helix. I found the helices boring
myself, but that's a personal taste. Maybe the one at SFA is better,
but I don't know yet (I most likely will this summer). All I know is
that compared to the rest of the coasters I have been on, the one at
SFDL seems like just an average coaster, something that I never
imagined a hypercoaster could be.
What was done to the Darien Lake version? This is the first I've heard that
the park tamed it down.
I'm not sure about all modifications (if there were any others), but I know
that they added a trim brake before the final bunny hops -- where the man
was ejected. They still give great airtime, but I imagine the air was even
better back then.


David Hamburger, ***@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.

"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
kipross
2004-05-09 22:11:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ted Ansley
Lackluster? I 'll admit I've not ridden SFDL's SRos but I have ridden
SFA's, probably close to 200 times. It is hardly "lackluster" iMHO, it
is firmly my #2 steel coaster right after SRoS at SFNE. It has great
steep drops, tons of airtime, high speed turns with great positive
G;s and a great helix (the first one). Night rides are some of the
best steel coaster rides I've ever had!
Ted -

I would definitely consider Darien's to be "lackluster". I only rode it
once or twice, but it just lacked the air that SFA's has. It simply crawled
over the hills. It was rather bland.

Although, perhaps I caught it on a bad day? I know SFA's can underperform
in certain weather conditions.


-kipross
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
2004-05-10 16:19:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by kipross
Post by Ted Ansley
Lackluster? I 'll admit I've not ridden SFDL's SRos but I have ridden
SFA's, probably close to 200 times. It is hardly "lackluster" iMHO, it
is firmly my #2 steel coaster right after SRoS at SFNE. It has great
steep drops, tons of airtime, high speed turns with great positive
G;s and a great helix (the first one). Night rides are some of the
best steel coaster rides I've ever had!
Ted -
I would definitely consider Darien's to be "lackluster". I only rode it
once or twice, but it just lacked the air that SFA's has. It simply crawled
over the hills. It was rather bland.
Although, perhaps I caught it on a bad day? I know SFA's can underperform
in certain weather conditions.
I think you may have. I'd say that they were both similar in my
experiences.


David Hamburger, ***@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.

"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Locoboy
2004-05-06 17:53:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Althoff Jr
There is nothing wrong with risk assessment. Risk assessment is, in fact,
very important to assuring safety.
The problem is that risk assessment should be tied into risk management.
In a sense, Sandor is right: there will be incidents, and some number of
incidents has to be considered acceptable. The problem is that the
acceptable number of FATAL or SERIOUS incidents is ZERO.
Failure is not an option; failure is mandatory. Kernacs understands that.
But his comment makes it sound like he doesn't understand that the job of
the design engineers is to make sure that *when* a failure happens, it
doesn't kill anybody.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Not an engineer, but I like to think I think like one...
--
/X\ _ _ _*** Now Open Every Day!!! ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ _/XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX
Bingo and very well stated Dave. At the company that I used to work for, both
engineering (us) and manufacturing (them) used to talk about shipping bad product
all the time, but the big difference was that it was discussed only amongst the
engineering and manufacturing staff. We hardly ever talked about it outside of the
four walls of the company. I was involved with a totally different industry though
and there were never any media people anywhere nearby. Kernacs seriously crossed
the line there by assuming that non engineers would interpret what he was talking
about and relate to it.

I think that I understood where he was coming from and could read between the lines
a bit, but he didn't choose his words very carefully. One thing that you learn very
quickly in an engineering environment is that once you leave that environment, it's
never ever safe to assume that other people will understand what you're saying and
will see things the same way that other engineers would. I'm sure that Kernacs
knows that, but he goofed up big time there.

Failure analysis is a *huge* part of the engineering field and yes, sometimes you
have to approach it in a way that people not involved with the field may perceive as
"cold" or "emotionless." It's all in the name of producing a better product for the
customer though and that is the main objective from the engineer's perspective.
Kernacs made a poor assumption that the readers of that article would understand
that concept.
Rastus O'Ginga
2004-05-06 14:28:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charles Nungester
Both Ford and GM have been found not only thinking that very same way. It's
called risk assesment and is total bullshit if you ask me.
Then you know nothing about business or life. EVERYTHING is risk
management. There are all sorts of flaws in a car design that make it
risky to ride in one. All the windows should be bulletproof. They
should have roll cages instead of a flimsy roof. The gas tanks should
be totally impervious, and pressurized. They should have spring
loaded bumpers, and should have reinforced sides so that during a
T-bone crash, the doors don't give.

Of course, cars would triple in price and get 5 MPG. But, with your
line of reasoning, it should all happen, becuase the auto
manufacturers KNOW that these improvements would save lifes. Not to
mention, everone should be weearing a HANS device in a car.

Don't even get me started on airplanes. THere is an exact number of
deaths that an airline is willing to take a year, on average. Sandor
was simply stating the truth. Not much tact, but it is the truth.
I've always said Sandor scares me. He looks to be a fairly no
bullshit kinda guy.
Post by Charles Nungester
It makes you wonder.
Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
No, it is a reality check. There ARE risks to riding any ride at an
amusement park. BUT, there are three causes for accidents:

1. Shit happens.
2. Negligence by the park
3. Negligence by the rider

Accidents caused by #2 should end up in a lawsuit. Accidents from #1
are the responsibility of the park because they carry insurance for
such things, but they should not be too extreme in the payments. Type
#3 is where the shit hits the fan and they get real messy.

This accident seems to be a combination of all 3, which will
undoubtedly cost Six Flags and/or Intamin a good chunk of money.
Hell, the guy in Buffalo got $4 million.

Rastus O'Ginga
Charles Nungester
2004-05-06 14:49:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rastus O'Ginga
Then you know nothing about business or life. EVERYTHING is risk
management. There are all sorts of flaws in a car design that make it
risky to ride in one. All the windows should be bulletproof. They
should have roll cages instead of a flimsy roof. The gas tanks should
be totally impervious, and pressurized. They should have spring
loaded bumpers, and should have reinforced sides so that during a
T-bone crash, the doors don't give.
Of course, cars would triple in price and get 5 MPG. But, with your
line of reasoning, it should all happen, becuase the auto
manufacturers KNOW that these improvements would save lifes. Not to
mention, everone should be weearing a HANS device in a car.
Don't even get me started on airplanes. THere is an exact number of
deaths that an airline is willing to take a year, on average. Sandor
was simply stating the truth. Not much tact, but it is the truth.
I've always said Sandor scares me. He looks to be a fairly no
bullshit kinda guy.
Post by Charles Nungester
It makes you wonder.
Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
No, it is a reality check. There ARE risks to riding any ride at an
1. Shit happens.
2. Negligence by the park
3. Negligence by the rider
Accidents caused by #2 should end up in a lawsuit. Accidents from #1
are the responsibility of the park because they carry insurance for
such things, but they should not be too extreme in the payments. Type
#3 is where the shit hits the fan and they get real messy.
This accident seems to be a combination of all 3, which will
undoubtedly cost Six Flags and/or Intamin a good chunk of money.
Hell, the guy in Buffalo got $4 million.
Rastus O'Ginga
Forgive me for using the wrong statement.
Perhaps I mean going ahead with a design that risk assessment finds flaws but
the manufacturer determines it worth while to take.

Chuck, who finds it interesting that California Investigators found the
restraints faulty on Perilous Plunge while intamin blamed weight. I wonder if
Oakwood knew of that finding?
http://www.ctnow.com/hc-coaster0504.artmay04,0,6928238.story


Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
bigbrian
2004-05-06 15:09:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charles Nungester
Chuck, who finds it interesting that California Investigators found the
restraints faulty on Perilous Plunge while intamin blamed weight. I wonder if
Oakwood knew of that finding?
Its inconceivable that they didn't.. The incident on PP was in summer
2001, and the ride was re-opened in April 2002 after the modifications
were made. Hydro at Oakwood didn't open until June 2002, so was
underconstruction at the time of the earlier incident, and still
underconstruction when the report findings were published and
implemented. They were only the second park in the world to install
this ride from Intamin, and they would certainly have known about the
incident and the recommendations resulting from it.

Brian
Charles Nungester
2004-05-06 15:39:06 UTC
Permalink
SROS accident
Post by Charles Nungester
Chuck, who finds it interesting that California Investigators found the
restraints faulty on Perilous Plunge while intamin blamed weight. I wonder
if
Post by Charles Nungester
Oakwood knew of that finding?
Its inconceivable that they didn't.. The incident on PP was in summer
2001, and the ride was re-opened in April 2002 after the modifications
were made. Hydro at Oakwood didn't open until June 2002, so was
underconstruction at the time of the earlier incident, and still
underconstruction when the report findings were published and
implemented. They were only the second park in the world to install
this ride from Intamin, and they would certainly have known about the
incident and the recommendations resulting from it.
Brian
Yes but it was widely noted that Hydro didn't have the modifications that PP
did. Now weather the restraints were the same as the original PP restraints,
I don't know
Charles Nungester
Coaster Count 215
Wolf
2004-05-08 20:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rastus O'Ginga
Then you know nothing about business or life. EVERYTHING is risk
management. There are all sorts of flaws in a car design that make it
risky to ride in one. All the windows should be bulletproof. They
should have roll cages instead of a flimsy roof. The gas tanks should
be totally impervious, and pressurized. They should have spring
loaded bumpers, and should have reinforced sides so that during a
T-bone crash, the doors don't give.
Incidentally, one of the things they've found w/ the cars with shattrproof
polycarbonate windows is that they are a bear to deal with after a serious
impact. They are hard to get a corner free to cut through, and they store
energy like a spring. Often they will explode out of their frame, taking
some roof with them, when they get freed sufficiently during a rescue.
Firefighters and paramedics hate them.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
DeadAndRestless
2004-05-09 14:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf
Post by Rastus O'Ginga
Then you know nothing about business or life. EVERYTHING is risk
management. There are all sorts of flaws in a car design that make it
risky to ride in one. All the windows should be bulletproof. They
should have roll cages instead of a flimsy roof. The gas tanks should
be totally impervious, and pressurized. They should have spring
loaded bumpers, and should have reinforced sides so that during a
T-bone crash, the doors don't give.
Incidentally, one of the things they've found w/ the cars with shattrproof
polycarbonate windows is that they are a bear to deal with after a serious
impact. They are hard to get a corner free to cut through, and they store
energy like a spring. Often they will explode out of their frame, taking
some roof with them, when they get freed sufficiently during a rescue.
Firefighters and paramedics hate them.
Not to mention gas tanks. If gas tanks "should be impervious" on street legal
automobiles, why then do racecars run foam filled fuel cells?

-
Alan
Wolf
2004-05-09 21:53:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by DeadAndRestless
Post by Wolf
Incidentally, one of the things they've found w/ the cars with shattrproof
polycarbonate windows is that they are a bear to deal with after a serious
impact. They are hard to get a corner free to cut through, and they store
energy like a spring. Often they will explode out of their frame, taking
some roof with them, when they get freed sufficiently during a rescue.
Firefighters and paramedics hate them.
Not to mention gas tanks. If gas tanks "should be impervious" on street legal
automobiles, why then do racecars run foam filled fuel cells?
Race cars are designed to essentially explode in an accident. The whole
system is designed to come apart and dissipate as much energy as possible.
As such, only the driver's cockpit resembles "impervious".
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
DeadAndRestless
2004-05-09 22:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf
Race cars are designed to essentially explode in an accident.
So are passenger cars, for the most part. European car manufacturers have been
touting their use of "crumple zones" for years.
Post by Wolf
The whole
system is designed to come apart and dissipate as much energy as possible.
As such, only the driver's cockpit resembles "impervious".
Which is the way it should be. Making a car or the majority of "impervious" or
as stiff as possible will cause the majority of force to be transmitted through
its occupants. Its a bad, bad idea. Well, except rollcages, which are necessary
to keep the occupants from being crushed in a rollover.

-
Alan
Locoboy
2004-05-10 02:13:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by DeadAndRestless
Which is the way it should be. Making a car or the majority of "impervious" or
as stiff as possible will cause the majority of force to be transmitted through
its occupants. Its a bad, bad idea. Well, except rollcages, which are necessary
to keep the occupants from being crushed in a rollover.
Actually it depends on the type of race car. Not all race cars are made the same
way and dissipate energy by crumpling or at least some do it more than others. I'm
always amazed at how stiff NASCAR cars are compared to other, different race cars.
DeadAndRestless
2004-05-10 02:39:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
I'm
always amazed at how stiff NASCAR cars are compared to other, different race cars.
They actually went backwards over the years because stiffer chassies performed
better on the track. Recently, of course, NASCAR approved things like carbon
fiber bumpers.

-
Alan
Wolf
2004-05-10 06:35:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
Post by DeadAndRestless
Which is the way it should be. Making a car or the majority of "impervious" or
as stiff as possible will cause the majority of force to be transmitted through
its occupants. Its a bad, bad idea. Well, except rollcages, which are necessary
to keep the occupants from being crushed in a rollover.
Actually it depends on the type of race car. Not all race cars are made the same
way and dissipate energy by crumpling or at least some do it more than others. I'm
always amazed at how stiff NASCAR cars are compared to other, different race cars.
To be fair, in NASCAR, rubbing wheels doesn't mean your day is done and your
car is now a lot of carbon-fibre fluff -- unlike the other racing series.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
Swervo
2004-05-10 15:01:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
Post by DeadAndRestless
Which is the way it should be. Making a car or the majority of
"impervious" or as stiff as possible will cause the majority of
force to be transmitted through its occupants. Its a bad, bad idea.
Well, except rollcages, which are necessary to keep the occupants
from being crushed in a rollover.
Actually it depends on the type of race car. Not all race cars are
made the same way and dissipate energy by crumpling or at least some
do it more than others. I'm always amazed at how stiff NASCAR cars
are compared to other, different race cars.
I remember hearing them discuss this on Speed after Earnhardt's death.
The consensus seemed to be that this was mostly due to the way points
work in NASCAR. In something like F1, it doesn't pay to try to
continue on after an incident, you won't earn any points. In NASCAR,
however, you can still earn points even if you're way back in the grid,
so it pays to try to keep the car in one piece and potentially driveable
after an incident.
Locoboy
2004-05-10 16:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swervo
I remember hearing them discuss this on Speed after Earnhardt's death.
The consensus seemed to be that this was mostly due to the way points
work in NASCAR. In something like F1, it doesn't pay to try to
continue on after an incident, you won't earn any points. In NASCAR,
however, you can still earn points even if you're way back in the grid,
so it pays to try to keep the car in one piece and potentially driveable
after an incident.
Wow, quite a different racing philosophy compared to what I'm used to
hearing/seeing.
Swervo
2004-05-11 07:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Locoboy
Post by Swervo
I remember hearing them discuss this on Speed after Earnhardt's
death. The consensus seemed to be that this was mostly due to the
way points work in NASCAR. In something like F1, it doesn't pay
to try to continue on after an incident, you won't earn any points.
In NASCAR, however, you can still earn points even if you're way
back in the grid, so it pays to try to keep the car in one piece
and potentially driveable after an incident.
Wow, quite a different racing philosophy compared to what I'm used to
hearing/seeing.
Not sure if you mean hearing/seeing as far as NASCAR or if you're
talking about another form or racing altogether.

This may well have changed in NASCAR, as I don't particularly follow it
(just not my thing), but if memory serves, didn't drivers at least get
points just for finishing laps, or finishing a certain amount of laps?
Excuse my ignorance, if you take me out of my road-racing environment,
I get all turned backwards.
Locoboy
2004-05-11 16:33:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swervo
Not sure if you mean hearing/seeing as far as NASCAR or if you're
talking about another form or racing altogether.
I was talking about other forms of racing that I'm more familiar with, in
particular Champ Car and F-1.

NASCAR also isn't really my thing.
Walt Breymier
2004-05-11 17:00:58 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 11 May 2004 00:57:00 -0700, Swervo
Post by Swervo
This may well have changed in NASCAR, as I don't particularly follow it
(just not my thing), but if memory serves, didn't drivers at least get
points just for finishing laps, or finishing a certain amount of laps?
Excuse my ignorance, if you take me out of my road-racing environment,
I get all turned backwards.
No. But points extend farther back through the field (maybe all the
way?) so if you wreck and another driver wrecks, say, 30 laps after
you . . . as long as you can get back out there and turn 31 more laps
before the race ends, you'll finish above him/her.

Walt Breymier
Swervo
2004-05-12 07:07:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Walt Breymier
On Tue, 11 May 2004 00:57:00 -0700, Swervo
Post by Swervo
This may well have changed in NASCAR, as I don't particularly
follow it (just not my thing), but if memory serves, didn't drivers
at least get points just for finishing laps, or finishing a certain
amount of laps? Excuse my ignorance, if you take me out of my
road-racing environment, I get all turned backwards.
No. But points extend farther back through the field (maybe all the
way?) so if you wreck and another driver wrecks, say, 30 laps after
you . . . as long as you can get back out there and turn 31 more laps
before the race ends, you'll finish above him/her.
Walt Breymier
Ahh, gotcha. That makes more sense then, and makes sense why NASCAR
cars are more likely to be able to handle an incident and continue
racing (albeit possibly after some major tweaking and sheet-metal
banging) vs. the carbon-fiber mess than an F1 car becomes...

Rastus O'Ginga
2004-05-09 21:02:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wolf
Post by Rastus O'Ginga
Then you know nothing about business or life. EVERYTHING is risk
management. There are all sorts of flaws in a car design that make it
risky to ride in one. All the windows should be bulletproof. They
should have roll cages instead of a flimsy roof. The gas tanks should
be totally impervious, and pressurized. They should have spring
loaded bumpers, and should have reinforced sides so that during a
T-bone crash, the doors don't give.
Incidentally, one of the things they've found w/ the cars with shattrproof
polycarbonate windows is that they are a bear to deal with after a serious
impact. They are hard to get a corner free to cut through, and they store
energy like a spring. Often they will explode out of their frame, taking
some roof with them, when they get freed sufficiently during a rescue.
Firefighters and paramedics hate them.
Oh, I'm sure many of these issues would have secondary repercushions.
But, that doesn't matter if we are putting the car user as the utmost
important person.


Rastus O'Ginga

Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.

"What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." - Bender

ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is 100%
opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it is
doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded to
this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should use
the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole, or
in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
Wolf
2004-05-08 20:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charles Nungester
Both Ford and GM have been found not only thinking that very same way.
It's
Post by Charles Nungester
called risk assesment and is total bullshit if you ask me.
1 in 200,000 pintos might blow up or 1 in 300,000 GMC or chevy trucks due to
gas tank placement flaws which they new about beforehand and were proven to
have known.
The Pinto case was interesting in that the flaw was known, the flaw was
correctable, and Ford already had a 10yr old patent on the fix -- a $15
part.

The Pinto also blew up much more quickly. Ford not only denied the problem
and refused to fix it for three years, they stonewalled legislation to get
an impact test done on new cars. The year the law allowed testing, Ford
fixed the design.


This aside, risk assessment is always done. No design is perfectly safe, for
that design involves and infinite amount of money and an infinite amoutn of
inconvenience.

Convenience and price are proportional to 1/risk. The goal is to find an
acceptable tradeoff. Most are acceptable. The Pinto was not.

It's a dirty little secret of engineering.
--
|\-/|
<0 0>
=(o)=
-Wolf
Raven Rider
2004-05-06 12:17:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=doc&p_docid=10263CE132965E88&p_docnum=1
Sandor Kernacs, US president of the manufacturer, Intamin, told the
Hartford Courant that while accidents cannot be avoided, "the question is,
what is an acceptable number?"
I'm tactless and even I know not to say anything like that.

I think Intamin needs to add a public relations person to their
payroll and keep Sandor away from the bright lights that might
distract him.

Have Fun!

Paul Drabek
***@Negative-g.com
Negative-g: www.Negative-g.com
Read My Blog "It's All Downhill From Here" at www.negative-g.com/downhill/

Proud Poster On Rec,Roller-Coaster Since September 27, 1996
William J. Buckley
2004-05-06 12:37:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Sandor Kernacs, US president of the manufacturer, Intamin, told the
Hartford Courant that while accidents cannot be avoided, "the question is,
what is an acceptable number?"
I'm tactless and even I know not to say anything like that.
No, *I'm* tactless! :-)

Honestly, I think it's a cultural thing. That is the way Europeans speak.
(which is one reason I love Europe - no BS!)

I believe Sandor was trying to make a point similar to riding a motorcycle.
As a longtime biker, it's all about "How much risk am *I* willing to take
when I climb aboard my cycle??"
It's just a fact of life that at some point, I will get into an accident.
The variant is what factors I may add into the equation to vary the time
factor.

Conversely, the Amusement Industry strives for safety, but an accident is
bound to happen sometime. So, in terms of the media, what is an "acceptable
number" of accident per year? It's a valid point when you look at the
number of car-related accidents/deaths. People aren't all up in arms about
folks buying cars and driving to work every day.

-b
Douglas Kell
2004-05-06 17:33:44 UTC
Permalink
The problem with risk assessment in this case is that you are dealing with
humans and they are the most unpredicatable things you can deal with as you
try and imagine every imaginable situation but someone will ALWAYS do
something stupid that cannot be factored into the assessment.


Douggie in UK
PS I teach risk assessment
Post by William J. Buckley
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Sandor Kernacs, US president of the manufacturer, Intamin, told the
Hartford Courant that while accidents cannot be avoided, "the question
is,
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
what is an acceptable number?"
I'm tactless and even I know not to say anything like that.
No, *I'm* tactless! :-)
Honestly, I think it's a cultural thing. That is the way Europeans speak.
(which is one reason I love Europe - no BS!)
I believe Sandor was trying to make a point similar to riding a motorcycle.
As a longtime biker, it's all about "How much risk am *I* willing to take
when I climb aboard my cycle??"
It's just a fact of life that at some point, I will get into an accident.
The variant is what factors I may add into the equation to vary the time
factor.
Conversely, the Amusement Industry strives for safety, but an accident is
bound to happen sometime. So, in terms of the media, what is an "acceptable
number" of accident per year? It's a valid point when you look at the
number of car-related accidents/deaths. People aren't all up in arms about
folks buying cars and driving to work every day.
-b
Locoboy
2004-05-06 17:56:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by William J. Buckley
Honestly, I think it's a cultural thing. That is the way Europeans speak.
(which is one reason I love Europe - no BS!)
Based on the few times I've heard him speak, that is a highly possible
explanation.
bigbrian
2004-05-06 18:38:03 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 06 May 2004 17:56:46 GMT, Locoboy
Post by Locoboy
Post by William J. Buckley
Honestly, I think it's a cultural thing. That is the way Europeans speak.
(which is one reason I love Europe - no BS!)
Based on the few times I've heard him speak, that is a highly possible
explanation.
(Speaking as a European) I saw the title of the thread, then read the
news article linked to in the post, without reading the part of the
post where the "bizarre quote" was quoted. Aftre reading the article,
including everything that he said, I had to go back to the post to
find out what quote was being referred to. It didn't strike me at all
in the way it seems to have been interpreted.

Brian
Marcus Sheen [UK]
2004-05-07 09:24:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by bigbrian
Aftre reading the article,
including everything that he said, I had to go back
to the post to find out what quote was being referred
to. It didn't strike me at all
in the way it seems to have been interpreted.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who had to do that.

Regards,
Marcus

€ø,žž,ø€º°`°º€ø,žž COASTER KINGDOM žž,ø€º°`°º€ø,žž,ø€
http://www.coasterkingdom.co.uk
David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
2004-05-06 20:41:40 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 06 May 2004 12:37:40 GMT, "William J. Buckley"
Post by William J. Buckley
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Sandor Kernacs, US president of the manufacturer, Intamin, told the
Hartford Courant that while accidents cannot be avoided, "the question
is,
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
what is an acceptable number?"
I'm tactless and even I know not to say anything like that.
No, *I'm* tactless! :-)
Honestly, I think it's a cultural thing. That is the way Europeans speak.
(which is one reason I love Europe - no BS!)
I believe Sandor was trying to make a point similar to riding a motorcycle.
As a longtime biker, it's all about "How much risk am *I* willing to take
when I climb aboard my cycle??"
It's just a fact of life that at some point, I will get into an accident.
The variant is what factors I may add into the equation to vary the time
factor.
Conversely, the Amusement Industry strives for safety, but an accident is
bound to happen sometime. So, in terms of the media, what is an "acceptable
number" of accident per year? It's a valid point when you look at the
number of car-related accidents/deaths. People aren't all up in arms about
folks buying cars and driving to work every day.
But you have to admit that it's pretty damn tactless to imply that
someone's death was within an acceptable number of accidents right after
the guy died and while the family's grief is at its strongest.

I'm sure it was in a longer conversation about risk and everything. And
the media always print the most controversial things someone says. But
that's why you try to limit your replies to them and speak in clear, easy
sound bytes. And this sound byte was a whopper.

It pissed off the family and pretty much ensured that they will end up
being a defendant in the inevitable lawsuit.

And it also sent a real bad message to both the public and the industry
about how they view ride safety, even if it was an unintended message.

Honestly, I wonder if this quote will be the nail in the coffin for
Intamin.

Which would be a shame, since they build such great rides.


David Hamburger, ***@STOPSPAMbellatlantic.net, Boston, MA
PLEASE remove "STOPSPAM" from my address when replying via e-mail.

"I think that gay marriage is something that
should be between a man and a woman,"
California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
Raven Rider
2004-05-06 23:03:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
It pissed off the family and pretty much ensured that they will end up
being a defendant in the inevitable lawsuit.
I'm certain lawyers are already chasing the ambulances on this one.
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
And it also sent a real bad message to both the public and the industry
about how they view ride safety, even if it was an unintended message.
Honestly, I wonder if this quote will be the nail in the coffin for
Intamin.
Well I'd hate to be their sales staff after a quote like that. They
might as well start sending out their resumes because what park wants
to have an "acceptable loss" coaster?

Have Fun!

Paul Drabek
***@Negative-g.com
Negative-g: www.Negative-g.com
Read My Blog "It's All Downhill From Here" at www.negative-g.com/downhill/

Proud Poster On Rec,Roller-Coaster Since September 27, 1996
Wolfhounde
2004-05-07 02:20:35 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 06 May 2004 23:03:27 GMT, Raven Rider
Post by Raven Rider
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
It pissed off the family and pretty much ensured that they will end up
being a defendant in the inevitable lawsuit.
I'm certain lawyers are already chasing the ambulances on this one.
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
And it also sent a real bad message to both the public and the industry
about how they view ride safety, even if it was an unintended message.
Honestly, I wonder if this quote will be the nail in the coffin for
Intamin.
Well I'd hate to be their sales staff after a quote like that. They
might as well start sending out their resumes because what park wants
to have an "acceptable loss" coaster?
Have Fun!
Paul Drabek
Negative-g: www.Negative-g.com
Read My Blog "It's All Downhill From Here" at www.negative-g.com/downhill/
Proud Poster On Rec,Roller-Coaster Since September 27, 1996
As far as I understood, he IS the sales staff for U.S. rides.

-Brian Ondrey
Send replies to: ***@NOSPAMcomcast.net

"It's kind of fun to do the impossible."
--Walt Disney
A&B=LFCI
Flare
2004-05-07 10:10:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
But you have to admit that it's pretty damn tactless to imply that
someone's death was within an acceptable number of accidents right after
the guy died and while the family's grief is at its strongest.
I'm sure it was in a longer conversation about risk and everything. And
the media always print the most controversial things someone says. But
that's why you try to limit your replies to them and speak in clear, easy
sound bytes. And this sound byte was a whopper.
You've GOT to be kidding me, David. You yourself admit that the article
had a very specific, particular quote from Kernacs. It's crucial to
consider context. I think it's unfair to be so presumptuous as to
believe he didn't have more to say about his regret for the tragic
event. Not to mention...Why can't people consider the fact that Sandy
Kernacs could have very well been referring to human error in his
assessment. Context...hello?
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
It pissed off the family and pretty much ensured that they will end up
being a defendant in the inevitable lawsuit.
Perhaps Intamin might be named in the suit, but given what's coming out,
they really have nothing to be defending at this point. Six Flags and
SFNE's ride operations management responsible for ensuring the execution
of documented procedures will be the culprits. Open, shut case the way I
see it...unless they find mechanical issues with the bar/belt.

That said, the only thing Intamin might possibly have to contend with is
the safety belt, but they'll have plenty of ammunition once the ability
for prosecution to say that the belt was securely fastened when it left
the station is destroyed.
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
And it also sent a real bad message to both the public and the industry
about how they view ride safety, even if it was an unintended message.
You're being overly dramatic, imho. Why infer that? It's crap. Again,
it's context. People can be outraged, but that's the whole idea behind
this sort of journalism.
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Honestly, I wonder if this quote will be the nail in the coffin for
Intamin.
Not considering several of the rides they have slated for the next
couple years.
Post by David H.--REMOVE "STOPSPAM" to reply
Which would be a shame, since they build such great rides.
On that I totally agree...them having great rides.

Davae
Shawn Mamros
2004-05-07 13:56:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Flare
Perhaps Intamin might be named in the suit, but given what's coming out,
they really have nothing to be defending at this point. Six Flags and
SFNE's ride operations management responsible for ensuring the execution
of documented procedures will be the culprits. Open, shut case the way I
see it...unless they find mechanical issues with the bar/belt.
I'm not so sure...

One typical test which is often performed on a ride that has experienced
a passenger ejection is to place a seated dummy in the seat, and send
it out on the circuit. Often, that test is performed twice - once with
the restraints closed, and once with them open.

Those tests were key in the one well-known incident that occurred
last year. Even with the restraints open, even with the airtime
we know that ride generates, the (seated) dummy still stayed with
the train.

I would certainly hope that the MA state inspectors would perform
similar tests on Superman, in light of the recent incident. I would
be very interested to know what the results were in the restraints-
open case. If the ride were to fail that test, I'm not so sure
that the manufacturer/designer should be considered blameless.

-Shawn Mamros
E-mail to: mamros -at- mit dot edu
Rastus O'Ginga
2004-05-09 21:07:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shawn Mamros
I would certainly hope that the MA state inspectors would perform
similar tests on Superman, in light of the recent incident. I would
be very interested to know what the results were in the restraints-
open case. If the ride were to fail that test, I'm not so sure
that the manufacturer/designer should be considered blameless.
REALLY???

So should Arrow be sued over the countless coasters they've built that
you would fall out of without restraints?

What about every ride ever made by S&S?


Rastus O'Ginga

Winner of the 2nd Annual C. Montgomery Burns Award for
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Excellence.

"What an awful dream, 1s and 0s everywhere... I thought I saw a 2." - Bender

ANTI-BED-WETTING-LIBELRAL DISCLAIMER:
The content of this post, and all previous posts made by this user, is 100%
opinion. Any similarity between this post and the truth is purely
coincidental. Anyone who reads this post and draws conclusions about it is
doing so by their choice. How they use those conclusions to direct their
own lives and opinions from that point forward is absolutely a result of
their own cognitive abilities and is in no way related or legally binded to
this poster. NO individual, business entity, or legal authority should use
the content of this post, or any other post by the originator, in whole, or
in part, to assist in making a decision that could affect the lives of any
of the inhabitants of planet Earth, since the content may not be true.
Loading...