Posted on 02/12/2010 3:02:32 PM PST by Yossarian
Today, Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili luge athlete died while practicing on the Vancouver Olympic's "Whistler Sliding Centre". For those that have seen the video of the horrible crash, the first thing that stands out it the proximity of a series of steel I-beam supports a mere 2 to 3 feet away from the core of the track:
One has to wonder just how such a design - for a facility meant for unprotected humans to fly down it at almost a hundred miles an hour - could have been built. What could have been considered to be a higher priority than participant safety?
Alas, we may have a clue: Over-prioritized Environmentalism.
The Vancouver 2010 Games - as have all major events in the past decade - have made a major push towards "sustainability". Indeed, there is nothing wrong in theory with such an effort - the facilities are meant to take place in the great outdoors, and needless waste, energy consumption, and pollution are not good for anyone. However, one would be remiss to not take note of how environmental concerns can quickly become the tail that wags the dog, influencing design more than the core requirements of the event itself.
So, with this in mind, I will quote from the Vancouver 2010 Olympic website's "Whistler Sliding Center Fact Sheet" (PDF):
Sustainable attributes
- Smart site selection — adjacent to previously developed areas within a major ski area (such as ski trails, parking lots)
- Site designed to minimize required vegetation clearing and to reduce facility footprint (such as soft edging and tree islands)
- Long-term operations and revenue generation opportunities through athlete training facility and visitor use
- First construction contract (2005) awarded to local Whistler business
- Energy efficiency initiatives to minimize refrigeration plant energy use include:
- ammonia refrigeration system — ammonia is one of the most energy-efficient refrigerants producing no chlorofluorocarbons (which contribute to ozone-layer depletion and global climate change)
- track shading and weather protection system
- tree retention to cast shade – track painted white to minimize heat absorption
- capture and reuse of waste heat from refrigeration plant
After looking at the crash footage, that "minimize required vegetation clearing and to reduce facility footprint" really jumps out at you, doesn't it?
I will be the first to say that we should not immediately jump to conclusions and blame environmental design philosophy without first comparing the Whistler Sliding Centre to the other such facilities around the world. However, thoroughly and earnestly performing this comparison must be a high priority for accident investigators.
What happened today was a tragedy, and maybe even a crime. To protect future athletes and pay proper respect to the deceased, we must get to the bottom of why this crash happened. With the decades of experience available in sliding facility design, and all the computer modeling techniques available to engineers, there is no good reason the Whistler Sliding Cente should have been designed this manner.
Those of us with a love for sports must hold both investigator and sports official's feet to the fire to determine just why this horrible design was built. The investigation must be done without regard for the fashionable political concern of über-environmentalism.
Nobody wants to degrade the beauty of the wilderness, but if creating a minimized footprint caused the death of an athlete, then environmental concerns obviously went too far.
And this one, too.
How hard would it be to put some padding on those poles? Or do like Nascar does with a “safer barrier”?
“After looking at the crash footage, that “minimize required vegetation clearing and to reduce facility footprint” really jumps out at you, doesn’t it?”
No.
BTW, do the heads-first skeleton athletes use the same track?
And why the name skeleton? Morbid humor?
Seems extremely dangerous -- surely somebody must have noticed and said something?
Or was this just a freak accident?
Poor design coming out of the curve, both sides should have
been clear of obstructions until entering the next curve.
I don't think cushioning the support beams would do a darn thing, given the angle of approach and speed (80 to 95 MPH) the lugers are going.
I think the goal of any barrier would be to put the athlete back on the track, where they can lose their energy gradually, like over the course of 10 seconds or more.
Two weeks of human trials coming up to determine if it is “freak.”
They should raid the local CFL team of blocking dummies and duct tape them around the poles.
Yes, they use the same track. As to the name, I suppose it seems more "technical" than just calling it a "sled".
("Flexible Flyer" is probably covered by trademark issues....)
Something should have been done. It seems so obviously dangerous!
I have to ask... this can’t be the first time that someone has been on that luge track.
Wasn’t it used prior to today, for training, or something?
RS
I think luge is inherently pretty dangerous. There’s no way to build a barrier-free track. See these examples of luge accidents on other luge runs. Barriers are par for the course, if you will. But in most accidents, the rider ends up staying in the track itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG99ULoWXHU&feature=related
I was watching the ESPN crawler reporting the accident and it said that 12 lugers have been injured there. That sounds pretty high even for a sport this dangerous.
It looks like they have a lot of "J-Beams" that hold a fabric cover close to the course, but from what I can tell, they are positioned so that if you fly off the course, you're going to rebound off the fabric first.
Yes, luge is a dangerous sport, but it can be made less dangerous by making smart choices regarding the track design. Those choices should never be infringed upon by environmental concerns, which might have happened here.
The details will all come out eventually.
This is the third crash today on the same track. The others were women. A Romanian and an American.
Video of the crash. It’s pretty apparent the course isn’t safe.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6202459n
You know it’s bad when someone hits a large steel piling and it goes “clang.”
The Vancouver Olympic Committee and the IOC have some serious “lawyering up” to do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.