Back to the Trip Report Archive
Back to Dave's Adventures
Back to Dave's page.
"Isn't that what it said before we changed it?"
As you are probably aware, when I visit an amusement park, I make an effort to observe how it operates as a complete system, and how each component of the system operates. I like to notice unusual touches, or things that are done particularly well, or places where decisions are made that I still can't understand. Who else is going to point out to you that when you open your car door at a Disney park it will not bump into the vehicle next to you? Or notice that Camden Park gives you a place to store your candy floss while you ride the roller coaster? Or try to understand why Cedar Point removes the lids from the garbage cans along the midway across from Iron Dragon before the laser show starts? So it should stand to reason that I would give the same kind of attention to other types of operations.
The unfortunate thing is that many other types of operations are much more difficult to understand, because unlike amusement parks, they are not largely self-contained. Take an airline, for example. That was to be my target this time around. An airline exists for the purpose of loading people into airplanes and moving them around the country. Airline operations are designed to do this in the most efficient way possible. One airline in particular has taken some novel approaches to doing this. They have dispensed with the common hub-and-spoke system common in modern air travel and instead use a point-to-point system where aircraft are circulated through the entire route system. To simplify their operations, all of their aircraft are the same make and model, and are set up with identical configurations. This is important because it means every aircraft in the fleet is functionally interchangeable with every other aircraft in the fleet. The air crews may fly back and forth across defined routes, but the aircraft can circulate through the whole system so that they can get to the airline's maintenance facilities on a regular basis. It's an interesting operational idea, but the day I decided to leave Columbus and head for my meeting in Tampa, it demonstrated that it can be an unexpectedly fragile system. On this particular Thursday, I was scheduled to travel directly from Columbus to Tampa at about 5:00 pm. The first thing I noticed at the airport was that there was a very large number of people trying to get to Chicago who were supposed to leave several hours ago who hadn't left yet. Apparently the Chicago airport was running in what computer people call "yo-yo mode" [Footnote 1], so several flights were running very late. The next thing I noticed was the airline's apparent incompetence at a very basic, very important point. Recall that I noted that all of their aircraft are functionally identical? That means that each aircraft has exactly 137 seats. Apparently they sold 143 tickets for my flight. They made a generous offer to compensate volunteers who would give up their seats on the direct flight to Tampa in favor of a trip through Chicago, arriving in Tampa about four hours later.
Right. I'm going to give up my seat so that I can go through an airport that has been opening and closing like Top Thrill Dragster on opening weekend. Sure, FMH, please [Footnote 2]. No, thanks! But then the offer changed. Instead of going through Chicago, one could go through Memphis, where it had not been storming, and where the airport had been open all day. Once I determined that I would not be routed through the Stormy City, I decided to take them up on the offer. I knew I was already missing the one Thursday meeting of the ASTM F-24 committee, and didn't need to be anywhere until the next morning. I took the deal and went through Memphis. Of course, no good deed goes unpunished. Care to guess where the aircraft that was supposed to take me from Memphis to Tampa was [Footnote 3]? It was after Midnight before I got out of Memphis, and I arrived in Tampa at 2:00 AM. I collected my rental car, a Ford 500 which seemed like it might be the first rental car I've had in years that wasn't engineered specifically to annoy me. By 3:00 AM I was checking into my inexpensive motel room, and by 6:30 AM I was heading out again to go to the hotel housing the ASTM meeting.
When I got to the conference hotel, I immediately started encountering people I already knew and could recognize. This was useful, as it meant I could follow them to find the room I wanted. Once I found the right room, I set about trying to get my bearings. It was a new setting for me, and I wasn't sure how to insure that I didn't upset the pecking order or anything. The day began with introductions around the room, and I learned that the committee now includes TWO representatives of the general public: myself, and Kathy Fackler of saferparks.org. As she pointed out, that means we now have representation for the "mommies" and for the "enthusiasts", so now we just need someone to represent the other 80% of the customer base.
The first item of business was to introduce the business of the ASTM F-24 committee, and for Kevin Russell and Steve Elliott to explain the standards realignment process now underway. I suppose now is as good a time as any to explain what the ASTM F-24 committee is, and why I am a part of it.
ASTM International is an international standards-setting organization (see also: ANSI, ISO) which establishes voluntary, consensus standards for various industries. Consensus, in this case, means that all participants in the committee have a voice in the creation and adoption of the standards, and all negative votes must be dealt with in a satisfactory manner before the standard is adopted and published by ASTM. 'Voluntary' in this case means that the standards are published by and for the industry, and represent best practices; they do not carry any legal mandate by themselves. In a practical sense, though, the standards handled by Committee F-24 are 'voluntary' in much the same way that the broadcasters in your area have developed the Emergency Alert System in 'voluntary' cooperation with Federal, State and Local authorities. Across the nation, many Authorities Having Jurisdiction have incorporated the ASTM standards, in whole, in part, or by oblique reference into their amusement ride safety laws. ASTM standards apply to almost any industry...ASTM publishes more than 12,000 standards, which are developed by over 130 technical committees. Committee F-24 happens to be the Committee on Amusement Rides and Devices. Formed in 1978, the committee manages the standards relating to the design, construction, testing and operation of amusement rides.
At the moment, there is a whole pile of standards for amusement rides, and many of them contain overlapping items. The major project right now is to take the existing fourteen standards and collapse them into a more manageable collection, eliminating the duplication of language in similar standards. That's the big project, the one Kevin and Steve were on about in their presentation. There are also smaller projects, including re-writes of sections of the standards involving operations and maintenance, and the ongoing revision of F 2291, which is the monstrous design standard. Meanwhile, additional subcommittees and task groups are developing new standards for special ride systems, such as inflatables, climbing walls, and concession Go-Karts.
The work of the committee is to develop the standards which govern the amusement industry. To sit in on a committee meeting is at once enlightening and in some ways mind-numbing. The first problem is that of remembering that any standard must be developed to apply to ANY ride, and that the unintended consequences of a poorly chosen phrase can be disasterous. The level of abstraction can be a little difficult to wrap your mind around. After all, for every case you can think of on a particular ride, there is probably an exception somewhere; remember the old saying, "all generalizations are false." Well, for the purposes of ASTM, everything is out of necessity a generalization. And of course there is the inevitable impression that you're watching sausage being made. Ultimately, though, it's extremely smart people making very careful consideration of every word, every phrase, and every paragraph of the standards they're going to have to live by. Ultimately, I think this is what makes the system of industry-led consensus standards work: these people writing the standards have to live with these standards when they come out of the meeting. That's why the standards should be written in this way, and not by elected officials: ASTM committee members have to 'eat their own dogfood' so they take the process very seriously. In the afternoon, I sat with the F770 committee discussing operations, and it took all afternoon to develop some kind of workable practice for starting up or adding passenger carrying units to a ride.
Friday evening, I spent some time chatting with some of the committee members, but ultimately decided to go over to the Florida State Fair for dinner (and to take some photographs, of course).
Saturday's meeting was a little harder to follow. On Friday, it was all subcommittee meetings and discussion. On Saturday, the subcommittee chairmen presented their reports to the full committee for what amounted to a rubber-stamp approval so that they could send their ballots to the full committee membership for arguments (ballots apparently usually fail the first few times until all the negative comments are dealt with). Finally, after the full committee meeting, one last subcommittee met to argue over some proposed acceleration standards. I don't want to go into too much detail, but if the proposed standard had been in place 20 years ago, the term "headbanging" might never have entered into the coaster enthusiast's lexicon. It will be interesting to see what becomes of it.
I didn't quite know what kind of a schedule to expect when I booked my flights, so after Saturday's meetings, I had quite a lot of time, since I wasn't leaving for Portland until Sunday afternoon. So I took advantage of it and cruised up to Orlando for the afternoon. There is a new ride up there that I want to try out (no, not Expedition Everest; I'm not even sure it's officially open yet, so I didn't count on it being open). I wonder if it conforms to F 2291... 8-)
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Footnote 1: Consult The Jargon File. [Return to text]
Footnote 2: That one is also in the Jargon File, but you can look it up yourself. [Return to text]
Footnote 3: (for the clueless) Chicago, of course! [Return to text]
--DCAjr
Concurrent to this trip: Florida State Fair
Next: Magical Midway and other Orlando-area attractions
Back to Trip Reports 2006
Back to the Trip Report Archive
Back to Dave's Adventures
Back to Dave's page.
