Attraction Stardust Racers

[Bring Back Questor 87]

It will take a pointed PR campaign to ensure this ride reopens without the real-life crash stigma that guests got in RCT after your coaster had a station brakes failure and exploded upon collision.

Jokes aside, this is a tough time for a great ride.

 

[GASM]

Not to mention from I have seen in Florida, 3 out of every 5 billboards you see is for an accident attorney, and that is about 80% of the ads on local TV too.

Could be worse, we measured distance in units of Alexander Shunnarah billboards in Tuscaloosa. I lived 7 down from work (it was a 9 minute drive).

 

[homeboyroy]

I wanna see Mack rides file a countersuit against the ambulance chaser

 

[Tacky3663]

This email allegedly just went out to team members from Resort President Karen Irwin stating Stardust Racers will reopen tomorrow.

 

[CoasterAuditor]

Great news as I’m hoping to get to Epic 11/5.

 

[GAcoaster]

I'm glad to see it re-open. This was a case of a rider who could ride but probably should not have ridden. The coaster and crew worked as they were supposed to, it was a case of someone choosing to do something that they should not have. People need to know their limits and understand not every ride is for every person. I know I have a heart murmur and I probably shouldn't ride coasters, but I choose to and if something happens to me because I choose to do it, it's my fault, not the coaster's.

By all accounts this man was a park and coaster enthusiast. He died doing what he loved doing. He made a choice to ride when he most likely knew it wasn't a good idea with his condition. I know it must be hard for his family, and knowing what I know about the incident it was even harder on that ride crew and the other riders. I also think his family and their attorney see a payday in all this...

 

[themeparktribune]

I know it must be hard for his family, and knowing what I know about the incident it was even harder on that ride crew and the other riders. I also think his family and their attorney see a payday in all this...

I think it's going way too far to suggest the incident was harder on ride operators than on the man's own family.

I know we're all coaster fans here, but someone died and the fact that his family will likely see a large financial settlement doesn't make up for a life. Bringing that up in the way you did in your post, I think your priorities are in the wrong place.

 

[GAcoaster]

This is why I say it may have been harder on other riders and crew:


I have heard the person in the seat next to him tried everything they could to hold his body up while the ride was in motion. I can’t imagine the guilt and PTSD.

Yes the family is grieving, but having been there sounds horrific and something that may be harder to get over.

 

[netdvn]

I rode Stardust on Monday. Attempted to lean forward after the lapbar was lowered. Its pretty tough for someone of average height and full control of their upper body to lean far enough forward to hit your head against anything let alone the lapbar or the metal bar on the front rows of any of the cars. The lapbar is designed so that you can't really lean too far forward

The second kick on the first launch does fling your head back a bit but its more like the dip into the second launch on Verbolten than anything too crazy.

 

[Zachary]

Does anyone know why unload gates weren't installed opposite of the load gates in the station to enable Stardust to switch to single-platform operations when it goes down to two trains per track?

Watching all of the wasted time caused by parking an occupied train at unload, unloading the train, waiting for the platform to clear, and advancing the train to load before the load gates can open and guests can board is just downright painful on what is otherwise such a beautifully capacity-optimized attraction. SO much time could be saved by parking the train directly at load and unloading and loading all at once. Really feels like a major station design/ride programming oversight. That tiny change could have offered a lot more operational flexibility staffing-wise AND increased throughput substantially during reduced train operations.

 

[jscll]

I am glad I am not the only one that was bothered by this. Given Mack's has previous examples that can switch between separate and combined unload/load stations (Examples: Manta SWSD and Time Traveler), I assume someone made a conscious decision not to add unload gates in the load station. I hypothesize that they left out the gates to discourage operations from ever running the ride with only two trains per track.
Another miss, in my opinion, is that the ride cannot early dispatch. The addition of a holding brake before the launch tracks could have facilitated this, which would remove the minor delay of the two operating crews from having to coordinate with each other.
After thinking about this for a while, I got distracted by trying to determine if the ride could run four trains per track, as the station dwell time in the station is quite long. I figured not since if the third train stacks, it holds it well behind the station (plenty of room for another set of block brakes before the unload station). Plus, without a hold point after dispach, either in the tunnel or just in front of the station (like Fury 325) to enable early dispatches, there would be little sense in running four trains per track. I find it interesting that Wikipedia states:

Stardust Racers runs with up to four trains on each track, given that the maintenance bays can hold eight sets.

I assume this is an mistake by the author, as I assume the fourth train is to allow the fourth train to be a running spare when one is not in rebuild. [Does anyone on here know if they will be refurbishing it in the maintenance bay, or move it to a remote shop?]
If the ride was built to run four trains a track, it could have put it in contension for the highest capacity roller coaster ever built, assuming you count both tracks as one ride. (I think that title belongs to Gemini back when it ran three trains per track.)

 

[Seaworld History]

I am glad I am not the only one that was bothered by this. Given Mack's has previous examples that can switch between separate and combined unload/load stations (Examples: Manta SWSD and Time Traveler), I assume someone made a conscious decision not to add unload gates in the load station. I hypothesize that they left out the gates to discourage operations from ever running the ride with only two trains per track.
Another miss, in my opinion, is that the ride cannot early dispatch. The addition of a holding brake before the launch tracks could have facilitated this, which would remove the minor delay of the two operating crews from having to coordinate with each other.
After thinking about this for a while, I got distracted by trying to determine if the ride could run four trains per track, as the station dwell time in the station is quite long. I figured not since if the third train stacks, it holds it well behind the station (plenty of room for another set of block brakes before the unload station). Plus, without a hold point after dispach, either in the tunnel or just in front of the station (like Fury 325) to enable early dispatches, there would be little sense in running four trains per track. I find it interesting that Wikipedia states:

I assume this is an mistake by the author, as I assume the fourth train is to allow the fourth train to be a running spare when one is not in rebuild. [Does anyone on here know if they will be refurbishing it in the maintenance bay, or move it to a remote shop?]
If the ride was built to run four trains a track, it could have put it in contension for the highest capacity roller coaster ever built, assuming you count both tracks as one ride. (I think that title belongs to Gemini back when it ran three trains per track.)

I can confirm they do the rebuild off site, the ride can run 3 per side (usually does now). Towards the beginning stardust was having a lot of issues with running 3. Like hiccups was struggling with 5 (and still does). While stardust can operate with 2 track and 2 trains. It’s an operational nightmare. I’m not saying where I work but we have at minimum run 3 or management makes us go down.

 

[Coasternerd]

I assume this is a mistake by the author, as I assume the fourth train is to allow the fourth train to be a running spare when one is not in rebuild.

I can actually confirm that stardust can run 4 trains on each track. I had the pleasure of attending during previews when they were ironing out th kinks and witnessed this myself. If you’re curious on the stacking positions:
Load, Unload, directly behind Unload on that slope, after the final brakes (that straightaway before turning to line up with the stations) and I presume also on the final brakes. In addition to the launches. Rough diagram showing where it can hold:

 

[Zachary]

I just want to go on record and say that I actually, personally, 100% hate these people and I hope their "pain and suffering" not only manifests, but lingers.

5 lawsuits filed against Universal and Mack Rides over Stardust Racers injuries

New lawsuits have been filed against Universal and Mack Rides by individuals who claim they suffered injuries while riding Stardust Racers at Epic Universe.

www.wesh.com

I will happily retract this statement for any case that may pan out and show an actual injury was sustained on Stardust Racers, but until that point, I am very comfortable assuming malice.

Related:

New lawsuit alleges Epic Universe visitor injured on Stardust Racers roller coaster

A North Carolina woman filed a lawsuit Thursday claiming she sustained “severe and permanent injuries” after riding the Stardust Racers roller coaster at Epic Universe.

www.clickorlando.com

 

[themeparktribune]

Mark my words - this ride will be SBNO due to political pressure spurred by media hysteria by 1st Quarter 2026.

This is how we lose rides in the new "landscape" we live in now. Reading that "attorneys expect more lawsuits in the future" is concerning.

Mark my words: No, it won't.

Attorneys are *always* going to say more lawsuits are coming because that's their business model. Disney and Universal get sued all the time for alleged injuries -- but the cases where the park is actually at fault are the ones you never hear about, because they get settled before they get close to filing a suit, much less get in a courtroom.

What would actually shut the ride down is another death like Mr. Zavala's or some inspection that actually finds a safety problem. Not a lawsuit.

 

[Bring Back Questor 87]

I should clarify my earlier post, which was not articulated as well as I would have liked, apologies.

I am concerned that this ride could face another temporary or longer-term closure due to some of the litigation that is causing a lot of media-circus attention on this ride. I agree another incident like the first would lend itself to a more indefinite closure of some period, and I am hoping that if people have legitimate bodily injuries from riding this ride, it would be handled appropriately for all parties involved.

I have nightmare visions that people out of touch with the theme-park environment will influence decisions with this ride in an adverse manner. Things are fraught these days with a strangely "oh no way they'll do that" kind of feeling to them, and things like coasters and park operations could be no exception.

Hoping for good outcomes, and to ride this thing next year!

 

[themeparktribune]

I have nightmare visions that people out of touch with the theme-park environment will influence decisions with this ride in an adverse manner. Things are fraught these days with a strangely "oh no way they'll do that" kind of feeling to them, and things like coasters and park operations could be no exception.

I would spare yourself from hypotheticals like that, it doesn't do any good.

If any change is ever needed to Stardust Racers, I trust it would be due to having uncovered an actual safety problem. Ride safety regulations need to exist and too often theme park fans act like the parks are always in the right and anyone suing them is wrong or lying. That should really not be anyone's immediate reaction.

 

[DE_Creative]

I would spare yourself from hypotheticals like that, it doesn't do any good.

If any change is ever needed to Stardust Racers, I trust it would be due to having uncovered an actual safety problem. Ride safety regulations need to exist and too often theme park fans act like the parks are always in the right and anyone suing them is wrong or lying. That should really not be anyone's immediate reaction.

This is definitely all true, and I do think thoosies are generally too immature to be trusted to look at parks objectively, but I will say that the general public is far too confident and comfortable declaring parks and rides they know nothing about “unsafe” so I do get the knee-jerk reaction.

That said this is pretty clearly a bunch of BS lawsuits and I’m completely in favor of everyone calling them out on it.

 

[themeparktribune]

I will say that the general public is far too confident and comfortable declaring parks and rides they know nothing about “unsafe” so I do get the knee-jerk reaction.

I'm not so sure about take. It broadly assigns blame for a perceived issue to the general public when really, it's up to the parks and manufacturers to demonstrate their rides are indeed safe, not for the public to just accept that they are.

And when there is a major safety incident, as happened on Stardust Racers, why shouldn't the general public question its safety -- at least until they hear details about what happened, if there was some human or mechanical error, and how any procedures have been changed to reduce the risk of a repeat incident?

To me, that's not overconfidence or ignorance, that's perfectly reasonable vigilance.

That said this is pretty clearly a bunch of BS lawsuits and I’m completely in favor of everyone calling them out on it.

Sure, they might be. At least a few of them feel like the flimsier Disney World lawsuits I've seen in the past and having so many filed at once right after the settlement with Zavala's family does not inspire confidence in their claims.

 

[MrBradferd]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Direct Link to Embedded Media Source

Well this is intresting