Post by Some GuyYour observation that he "had to steer" or that he "over-did" his
steering is too generous.
Luges and bobsleighs have some steering capabilities.
The fact that the rider was able to go from the leftmost portion of the
track and hit the rightmost portion of the track in a curve shows that
there is some ability to control the direction of travel.
Had this been "ballistic" as you say, the person would have continued to
be on the curve in the leftmost (highest) portion of the track and the
accident would have happened when the banked portion of the track ended
and he would still have been on the banked portion.
Post by Some GuyHe was barely riding the sled properly when we first see him emerging
from the last turn.
I am not in a position to judge his riding style and position on the
luge. And unless you are an experienced luge athlete, you probably also
cannot judge.
Post by Some GuyHe was in no position to be in control or to control anything when we
first see him during the last scene of his crash.
The fact that he over steered and hit the right wall (from his
perspective) shows that he was not ballistic. Had his steering been just
a bit less agressive, he would have entered succesfully the straight
away portion.
Post by Some Guy1) what gov't body or agency allows or is responsible for certifying the
construction, design and safety of these sporting facilities?
International luge federation has strict standards. Same thing for most
olympic events. For instance, the Montreal Velodrome (RIP 1989) had been
built according to standards and regulations, and they had had to get a
waiver because it was a shorter track than "standards". The standard
called for 333.33 metre track (3 laps to a kilometre), but the Montreal
one, being indoors, got a waiver for 285.7m distance per lap (3.5 laps
to the kilometre). It was within the limits (but at the high end) for
the angle of the curves (48° requiring you go at least 30km/h to stay on
track in the curves).
Local authorities do not have the competence to judge the safety of the
track itself. But they will get involved with the overall site design,
the site safety (for instance, ability to get an ambulance to the site)
etc. But they will defer to the international body for the actual track
safety (how tight curves have to be etc etc).
Post by Some GuyFrom a
municipal or standards or public-safety point of view, are they not
treated the same as an amusement park ride?
amusement park ride have less regulations than olympic sporting
facilities. Any facility to be used during olympics goes through years
of paperwork and politics where national sporting federations have a say
in what the international sporting federation will say to the IOC and
what the IOC will say to the organising committee.
Post by Some Guy2) no piece of infrastructure can usually be built or operated without
having liability insurance in place, be it a bridge, ski lift, elevator,
etc. What about these olympic sled courses?
Outside of the olympics, these facilities are commercial entities which
would have all the insurance etc. And yes, when you use those facilties
as a customer, you sign a waiver, just as you do when you go bungee
jumping or parachuting. If you goto Calgary, you can have a "thrill"
ride on their bobsleigh run. The waiver is standard practice, but if you
can prove negligence you can still sue the operator.
During the olympics, I am not sure who is responsible. It is likely that
the commercial owner leases the facility to the local olympic organising
comittee (VANOC in this case) and is not responsible.
Post by Some Guy3) are olympic participants (and their next of kin) forced to sign away
their rights to sue for damages caused by injury or death as a result of
their participation and usage of these various sporting facilities and
pieces of infrastructure?
I would say "YES", but I am not certain. There are a lot of dangerous
sports in the olympics, especially the winter ones. However, such
waivers become worthless if you can show that the owner/operator had
negligence.
In this particular case, the luge run had been in operation for 2 years
already, the canadian team had trained extensively on it. The deceased
rider had apparently already done 22 runs on it before his fatal one.
Personally, I think that at the end of a curve, the track should
naturally morph into the straight away. The fact that the banked
portion ends abruptly is a failure mode where if you are out of control
on a portion of the track that does not continue, you would have a bad
accident once the track runs out and you are flying. (this is not what
happened, he did steer back towards the middle, but overdid it)
Post by Some Guy4) these sled courses (bobsled, luge, etc) are nothing more than
amusement or thrill rides. There is no athletic achievement involved or
being excercised during the ride, apart from the physical ability to
hold your body horizontally ridgid as you experience the ride.
as a cyclist, I can understand your point of view. I would agree with it
for games such as golf. However, for luge and bobsleigh, I think you
really underestimate what happens during such a descent. There is a
large portion of control under extreme stress. When you are going at
140km/h in a curve, experiencing 3-4Gs of force, holding your head and
legs horizontal without a cushion under it is extremely physically
demanding. And while this is happening, you need to be extremely sharp
with the control and steering to not only avoid an accident, but also
get the best times possible. This is a high precision control.
This is no "water slide" at an amusement park. These people train for
years to be able to learn to read a course and plot paths and fine tune
how their control their descent to not only avoid accidents, but also go
fast, very fast.
This is similar with skiing. A beginner will go down a hill as slow as
he can to always remain in control. But as you gain experience, you
relax the brakes a bit because you are confident that you can remain in
control at a faster speed.
At the olympic level, they need to have enough control to go down the
hill without braking at all, because any braking will cause tghem to
lose the race. To get to that level, you need some extreme skills and be
a top physical condition.
These may not be endurance sports, but they still require extreme
physical fitness because of the extreme loads imposed on the body during
a short time.
On my bike, I have only exceeded 80km/h a couple times in my life. Once
in vermont, once in québec and once in newfoundland. (that last one was
really unexpected). All 3 times were on freshly paved roads.
When I go down Covey Hill (near USA border south of montreal), I don't
let myself exceed much above 70km/h because I don't feel safe due to the
road surface. I am fully aware that at that speed, it won't take much of
a crack, pothole or bump on the road to kill me. And I know that I that
speed, not only do I have little time to see an obstacle ahead, I also
can't steer quickly enough to avoid it. I only do that hill once a year.
But if I were to do this hill once a day, I woudl get to know every
bump, crack hole on the road that exist that year and know how to plot
my descent to slowly aim between each obstacle, and I would then have
much more confidence and allow myself to go faster going down.
Luge and bobsleigh are similar. A beginner will control his speed and
try to go comfortably slow. With experience, he will allow the speed to
go up. At the olympic level, they have to shed their fear and focus on
going as fast as possible and that means aiming for the fastest
entry/exit in curves, having most aerodynamic position while still
having enough forward visibility to know where you are. The skills and
experience levels needed to get such performances are definitely olympic
material in my opinion.
Post by Some GuyIn general, competitive events that rely mainly on gravity or the use of
(or the conservation of) gravitational energy are largely bogus from an
athletic point of view. This includes ski jumping, and to a lesser
extent downhill skiing.
I think you underestimate the "jumping" portion of ski jumping. Don't
think for a minute that athletes just go down the hill and let
themselves fly. At the very last moment, they will JUMP in order to get
the maximum possible altitude. And they need skills to control their
body and skis to get the perfect attitude during flight to maximize the
flight duration and minimise drag. Just because it is not an endurance
sport doesn't mean that it isn't a sport.
Oh, here is another example: synchronised swimming. Often viewed
as a girlie "sport" that is cute but not a sport. I had a girlfriend who
had dabbed into it and she challenged me to try to keep my legs straight
up above water like they do. One quickly changes opinion on that
activity after you try it. It requires a lot of force and very good lungs.