Evolution of Safety in the Amusement Industry: Part I Fencing, Standards, and Signage

This topic will be an informative snapshot into how the amusement industry has evolved since its inception, and how safety plays into it:

Safety is always a paramount of the amusement industry, although back in the day some topics that are very stringent today were not as profound in decades prior. We take certain things for granted now that may not have even been a concern in yesteryears. We try as an industry to learn from the past, minimize future accidents, and make sure that incidents remain as low as possible. Oftentimes, all it takes is for one accident to happen to fully begin major reform in areas of the industry.

Rides and attractions have to be designed in a way to be "idiot proof." Any silly ways that one can think of in regards to a guest getting injured must be taken seriously. That one-in-a-million chance of something happening one day will happen if risks are not mitigated as much as possible. Does this mean that there are no inherent risks involved with amusement rides? No, because it is impossible to eliminate risk. The goal, however is to minimize risk as much as humanly possible. This is where the ASTM standards come into play.

ASTM

ASTM (formerly known as the American Society for Testing and Materials) was formed in 1898 as a voluntary committee aimed towards creating safety standards for industries. Committees would meet to form a consensus on safety standards, design criteria, testing methods, and much more as a guideline for industries to follow. While not mandatory, over the years, the ASTM standards have pretty much become customary for those to follow, and in some cases, required by governing bodies. Overseas, the TUV standards somewhat mirror and coincide with ASTM standards for industry compliance.

 For the amusement industry, the ASTM F24 committee was formed in 1978, expanding to over 1,000 members, and several sub-committees today. If there is a certain area of the amusement industry you are looking for (e.g. waterslides, inflatables, zip lines, etc.), chances are that there is already a sub-committee in place for that area, or one is currently in the works.

The F24 committee meets twice a year to discuss the standards and determine the development of new ones. One thing that I have seen in recent years is so-called "hot topics". Usually content of the meetings will reflect certain incidents that have happened in recent times. For example, whenever there is news of a guest either entering a restricted area or getting injured/killed trying to retrieve a lost personal item, fencing and restricted zones become a popular topic of debate, as to whether standards need to be made stricter in that area.

AIMS/NAARSO

In addition to ASTM, there are safety seminars held annually for those who work at the parks full-time to attend to receive certifications. Two that come to mind are AIMS and NAARSO. Both of these entities offer opportunities yearly for those in maintenance, operations, and other safety-critical park roles to test for certification. Many of your household names in the industry will send some of their key staff to receive these certifications. Not only does it look good to have individuals hold a standardized certification, but it also helps parks retain credibility from a legal and insurance perspective. The safety seminars are a good way for parks to network, share their experiences and knowledge, and allow for an open forum to discuss best practices in the industry.

Personally, I had good experiences at AIMS, as it allowed for me to reinforce certain areas of maintenance, especially ones that I was weaker on and had less exposure to. There are certain topics of debate that our park had done a certain way for years, and the seminar had helped me learn that some of these practices were not in the best interest of the industry (that is not to say that anything that differed from our usual way of doing business was inherently unsafe, it's just that some methods were outdated or surpassed by new ideas). I could write a whole piece on my experience at AIMS, because while I do believe that while it was a good experience, there are certainly ways that they could change to help benefit attendees and overall understanding of the topics. This is coming from someone who was one of very few to receive a Level I & II maintenance certification successfully on my first two tries at my property.

Signage

Now we get to the area of safety signage. Have you ever noticed that every ride, no matter the park you are at, has a standardized safety sign at the entrance? Shouldn't it be obvious that an expecting mother or a person with heart issues should not go on a major thrill ride? This wasn't always the case. Back then, rides were sort of a "ride at your own risk" type of venture. It wasn't until the lawsuit-happy nature of America came into play before parks had to begin listing out every requirement for ride admission at every location in the park.

Back in 1978, Kings Island had a roller coaster called the Bavarian Beetle. It was quite a simple "Wildcat" style coaster manufactured by SDC, usually portable in nature. A 91-year-old man filed a lawsuit, claiming that he had injured his neck on the ride, and "nobody had warned him about the nature of the ride." This led to a park-wide campaign of installing safety signage known as the "Fun and Safety Guide." Included on the signage was a description of each ride's motion, as well as all requirements to ride and any conditions that would disqualify a guest from riding. Operations staff also received more stringent training to look out for guests that may exhibit signs of these conditions while queueing. I'm not sure if this is a first for the industry as far as standardized signage goes, but warnings and descriptions beforehand were certainly much more vague.

Operators can lead to human error as well if certain policies are misunderstood. Rides have clear admission policies, barring guests of certain proportions from riding. It is the responsibility of the parks to fully understand each ride admission policy, and convey that to their operators. This goes for height restrictions, minimum appendages, and size of each rider. Misunderstandings can lead to fatal accidents. Darien Lake's Ride of Steel ejected an army veteran with a double amputation in 2011. After investigation, the ride was cleared of any mechanical deficiencies, and the accident was blamed on human error. Despite being clearly listed on safety signage, for whatever reason, the operators had allowed the veteran to ride despite his condition. After the accident, the park began to enforce more stringent training, as well as updating their signage to be clearer and add additional sign quantity.

Fencing

Fencing and restricted areas have also come under fire lately, causing not just the ASTM, but also park operators in general to require safer barriers. I'm sure that most people know of at least one ride accident relating to a guest entering a restricted area. In recent years, incidents on Raptor at Cedar Point and Batman: The Ride at Six Flags over Georgia come to mind. There are many others that do not get much publicity or attention as they have not resulted in as severe of an outcome.

Some guests believe that they are invincible, that they are faster than the train or that they can get in and out of a restricted zone before danger will occur. The fact of the matter is that they usually underestimate their odds, and rides do not stop for anyone. We have seen almost an increase in these incidents in recent years because of cell phones. In the past, some people have taken the risk of injury to retrieve some really stupid items, hats, glasses, basketballs, etc. However, in the age of phones and technology, certain individuals are completely helpless without their electronics. Especially with the ability to ping the exact location of certain devices, people are much more likely to try and find a way to get their items back if lost on a ride.

Keep in mind that while operators should remain vigilant of their restricted zones, that stopping a ride on a dime is impossible. Trains will only stop at control points or block sections. Free-running areas of track cannot stop trains. In addition, certain rides go far outside the view of operators, and not all sections of track are visible. Yes, cameras can be installed, but even then you run into the issue of where the next control point of the ride is.

Fencing can be impenetrable, however it comes at a cost. Taller fences inherently cost more, and as the old saying goes "build a 10 foot wall, and someone will find an 11 foot ladder." Barbed wire and other deterring features not only cost more as well, but may look unappealing in guest-facing areas. We found the most success with building fences out of "unclimbable" designs. Vertical posts are extremely useful in a theme park setting, because horizontal designs, even chain-link fencing provides a climbable surface for guests to easily go up and over barriers. 

Our corporate safety team has also began to require multiple barrier entry to get to danger zones. Restricted areas are areas where you typically do not want people inside of while an attraction is operating, but a danger zone is even more of a risk because it is typically denoted as an area where ride track goes below 10 feet. Whereas before, there may have been one fence blocking off a danger zone, it is safer now to enclose that danger zone by another restricted area. The more barriers there are, the less likely a guest is to reach an area. Now, this does not completely eliminate the risk, but a guest may think twice about what they are doing if they reach additional barriers and safety signage that deters them from entry.

Besides height, fencing also follows restrictions for gaps between posts or spindles. Typically speaking, a fence should reject a 4-inch ball in any gaps. This is to prevent people from sticking hands, arms legs, etc. through the fence, especially small children. I recall one time we had a spinning flat ride with a wooden fence around it. When our state inspectors came in, they flagged a single spindle that had warped in the weather. It had just moved enough to allow a 4-inch ball through it. We had to replace that spindle before being certified to open. Something that may have been that way for so long indeed came up during inspection and required attention.

Case Study: Banshee at Kings Island 2024

Just one of many examples, this one is quite recent. On June 19, 2024 a 38-year old man was struck by a train on Banshee at Kings Island. He had entered a restricted area during operation to retrieve a set of keys that he had lost on the ride. His cause of death was listed as a blunt force to the head, as well as several blunt impacts to the torso. 

After losing his keys, he had allegedly become quite distraught with employees, who had explained to him that the item could not be retrieved until the ride had ceased operation for the night. This is common practice for parks, as they do not want to shut the rides down for retrievals. Loose article policies are clearly laid out on ride signage, and most parks offer alternative means for guests to store loose items as opposed to bringing them on the rides. Parks typically obey their policies, only offering exceptions for medical items or those that are of utmost importance to a guest.

These policies are often a double-edged sword, as while most parks want to uphold their policies, denying a guest their lost items does increase the chances of them going to retrieve them by themselves, not wanting to wait for the end of the day.

There really isn't a failure when it comes to this incident, as the guest blatantly ignored park staff, restricted gates, and safety signage. Inverted coasters are more prone to this type of accident, because while ride tracks may seem quite high above the ground, guests often miscalculate the height of the ride vehicles, as well as the speed that they are traveling. 

Even if the guest was spotted sooner, and an immediate ride stop was called for, the fact of the matter is that the trains were not in a position to immediately stop, and would have continued until it reached the main brake at the end of the ride.

The investigation was performed by the Mason police and Ohio Department of Agriculture's Division of Amusement Ride Safety. No flaws were found in perimeter fencing, policy, or operations during the incident. Banshee shortly reopened on June 22, 2024.

Clearly evident by this incident, everything can be designed properly and go right for a park, but human nature still may find a way to circumvent all safety protocol that is in place, causing an unfortunate incident. Therefore, it is important for parks to remain vigilant and follow all safety standards to the best of their ability.