Zipline Braking Systems

06/07/2026

"If your child's roller coaster, zipline, or trampoline park was inspected annually (and it should be), would you know whether the inspector specializes in amusement rides—or in oil wells, elevators, highways, or boilers?"

Every state needs a pay-for-play Amusement Ride and Attraction Division (AR/AD) with inspectors dedicated to its industry standards and regulations.

Expert Witness Stories: "After 100+ ride and attraction case studies, I've come to one conclusion: amusement ride safety deserves its own AR/AD division—not a desk inside Transportation, Oil & Gas, Elevator, Boiler, or Insurance departments. Public safety is too important to be a side job."

05/22/2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Utah Safety Expert Calls for Licensed Engineering Review of Trampoline Park and Zipline Attractions Nationwide

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah — Michael Troy Richardson, a Utah-based amusement ride and attraction expert, is calling national attention to a safety gap in U.S. trampoline court and zipline designs: outdoor ziplines and indoor attractions such as foam pits, jump platforms, trampoline matrices, ball pits, ziplines, and related play systems may be designed or modified without a clear requirement for sealed Professional Engineer drawings.

“Parents see foam, pads, and bright colors,” Richardson said. “Engineers see fall height, impact energy, hidden hard surfaces, anchorage, rebound forces, and foreseeable misuse. These are not just playrooms. They are high-energy amusement environments.”

Richardson notes that ASTM F2970 addresses trampoline courts and related attractions, but the standard does not clearly require a licensed Professional Engineer stamp for all indoor attraction drawings. In his view, that leaves a dangerous gap between entertainment design and engineering accountability.

“A foam pit is not safe because it contains foam,” Richardson said. “A trampoline court is not safe because it has padding. Safety must be designed, calculated, documented, inspected, and verified.”

Richardson is available for interviews regarding trampoline park design defects, foam-pit injuries, standards compliance, inspection failures, and the need for stronger engineering accountability in indoor amusement attractions.

Media Contact:
Michael Troy Richardson
MIT Experts / Safer Designs
[email protected]

05/19/2026

We're Hiring! MIT Experts Expands Its Investigative Team.

MIT Experts is proud to announce the addition of six new investigators supporting our work in amusement ride, trampoline park, zipline, ropes-course, and recreational-attraction cases.

Our mission remains clear: move cases away from conjecture and into the facts.

MIT Experts provides accident investigation, litigation support, expert-witness matching, safety-standard review, ride-design analysis, inspection and maintenance evaluation, operational-procedure review, and accident reconstruction for amusement and recreational facility matters.

These new investigators strengthen our national reach and help the industry answer the questions that matter:

Were standards followed?
Were inspections documented?
Were staff properly trained?
Were manufacturer guidelines followed?
Were preventable safety failures ignored?

At MIT Experts, our goal is not simply litigation. It is safer engineering, better operational accountability, and fewer preventable injuries across the amusement ride and attraction industry.

Facts. Standards. Accountability. Safer Designs.

05/14/2026

Zipline builders, guides, inspectors, and owners should all be asking the same question:

Why are we still relying on patrons to help stop themselves?

Patron handbraking is not a universal standard requirement—and human entropy is not reliable engineering.

People panic.
They freeze.
They forget instructions.
They weigh more or less than expected.
They arrive faster in changing temperatures and environmental conditions.

Yet some systems still depend on guests lifting feet, dragging gloves, or performing handbraking correctly at the exact moment needed.

That is not fail-safe engineering.

A properly engineered emergency brake system—including staged spring-array E-brakes—helps eliminate the #1 accident-causing factor: uncontrolled arrivals into the landing zone.

And this matters to everyone:
• Fewer injuries
• Fewer catastrophic claims
• Lower liability exposure
• Better inspections
• Stronger defenses for operators
• Better outcomes for guides and builders

Because every lawsuit eventually becomes a foreseeable-risk question:
“What safer design could have reduced the incident?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21aq3bpEEaw

Mechanical systems are predictable.
Human entropy is not.

05/09/2026

One amusement system averages about 1 serious injury per 15.5 million rides.

Another sees roughly 6.5 accidents per 100,000 participants.

And trampoline courts? Thousands of children are injured every year.

The difference is not luck.

It’s engineering culture.

Roller coasters are typically developed under PE-level rigor, layered redundancy, structural analysis, braking analysis, independent review, and disciplined safety engineering.

Yet many ziplines and trampoline courts continue operating under standards where “designer” may substitute for Professional Engineer oversight.
That gap matters.

Because when a system stores kinetic energy, controls falls, relies on braking systems, impact attenuation, netting, restraints, structural load paths, or patron containment—it stops being “just recreation.”

It becomes engineering with human consequences.

The amusement industry already proved what rigorous engineering can accomplish.

Roller coasters are Exhibit A.

So why are lesser engineering expectations still tolerated where children and patrons are exposed to foreseeable impact, fall, and collision hazards?

Standards should not create loopholes.

They should close them.

04/29/2026

What if roller coasters had braking failures for 15 years… and we called it “acceptable risk”?

In the zipline industry, most serious incidents trace back to one issue: braking.

Not rider behavior. Not “bad landings.” Energy mismanagement.
That’s why I developed a dual spring array braking system with a fail-safe friction trolley—now U.S. patent allowed. https://youtu.be/RXWWFvN4BN8

Here’s the shift:

Not speed-based (“>6 mph”)

Not assumption-based

Energy-based and adaptive

Two staged spring arrays progressively absorb energy across real-world variables—80 lb to 250 lb riders, changing cable conditions, temperature shifts.

And if that’s not enough?

A mechanical friction-braking trolley engages automatically—no electronics, no guesswork, no second chances.

No bottom-out.
No spike in g-forces.
No reliance on perfect conditions.

Because safety shouldn’t depend on being lucky—it should be engineered to be inevitable.

2026 US Patent Dual Spring Array Emergency Brake with Fail-Safe Trolley

04/28/2026

Allowed: Another U.S. Patent for Zipline Emergency Braking

see testing video (https://youtu.be/yWG4H9VRr4U).

I’m excited to share that the USPTO issued a Notice of Allowance for my newest zipline braking-system patent: “Zipline Braking System with Passive Braking Trolley.”

This design adds another emergency braking approach to the industry’s safety toolbox—using multiple spring arrays and a passive braking trolley concept to help reduce the most common category of zipline accidents: braking-related incidents.

For years, I’ve argued that zipline safety cannot depend on hope, rider weight assumptions, or perfect operator timing. Braking systems must account for real-world energy, speed, mass, and failure modes.

The patent drawings show the braking trolley engaging spring-array energy absorption along the zipline path—another step toward engineered redundancy instead of reactionary rescue.

At Safer Designs, the mission remains simple:
Design the stop before the accident writes the report.

04/24/2026

Case closed.

In this zipline matter, the outcome came down to braking system performance and documented inspections—not assumptions. The operator maintained daily inspection records before and after the incident, confirming brake setup, line condition, and system readiness.

Those records mattered.

Because when braking forces, rider weight, and arrival speed are understood, the physics tells the story.

My reports can focus on what actually occurred at the moment of braking—how the system responded under load—not just what could have been prevented; when documentation aligns with engineering, the result follows:

Defense prevailed.

04/19/2026

Inside Edition This Week! In a 20-minute interview: I'll share Safety Insights and Existing Problems (from over 100 settled accident investigations).

Safer Designs can protect Amusement Ride & Attraction participants. Our 2002 project (6-month ROI) for the Safer Amusement Parks-Training with the Standards Giant Zipline at Park City Mountain Resort.

Park City Mountain Resort’s zipline braking record, is still breaking records (Safest Participant Delivery) following Kansai International Airport’s patron baggage record.

Both companies make the same point: the most impressive safety achievements are not spectacular because something dramatic happened, but because nothing did.

Kansai International Airport in Osaka has publicly been credited with no lost baggage since opening in September 1994, and Kansai Airports says that zero-loss record is the result of daily, coordinated work by airport staff, airlines, and ground handlers.

It also won Skytrax’s 2024 award for World’s Best Airport for Baggage Delivery.

This link will take you to a page that’s not on LinkedIn

04/10/2026

Ever notice how something can feel super safe… until you really think about it?

Ziplines are one of those things. They’re fun, beautiful, and honestly one of my favorite ways to experience the outdoors.

But there’s something most people don’t realize:

Not every ride down the same zipline is the same.

Because variables like a lighter person sees sooner stops than heavier one; now add a windy day, a head wind vs. tail wind… a hot cable vs. a cold one… all of those variables can change how fast or slow a zipliner arrives at the end.

And that “end” is where every braking system matters.

Most folks assume the industry standards will protect you when the zipline owner or guide doesn't.

NOPE. The standards think 6-mph can be dialed in perfectly every time--without addressing all the above variables—but in reality, those little variables can stack up in ways people don’t see.

I’m not saying don’t go ziplining—go enjoy it. Just be aware of the variables: The fun part is the ride… the important part is how you are stopping.

Stay curious. Stay aware. And always ask questions when something feels “inherently safe.”