1. Early on, we see a hotel room. Subsequently, however, as the crisis unfolds, we see multiple incidents of thousands of guests held in the hot sun on an outdoor concourse, even as the park director, dinosaur expert, and others scream about getting inside. Additionally, the dinosaur expert lives in an airstream trailer. Conclusion: Jurassic World has only one hotel room, substantially too few for an island resort that is at least a full day’s journey from the mainland.
2. Despite several employees possessing two-way radios, management primarily communicates with park staff via cell phone, an inherently less stable and reliable platform. Additionally, when radios are used, the signal often breaks up, suggesting a) insufficient repeater range/capacity, and b) poor battery charging discipline.
3. Front-line staff are untrained in emergency preparedness, and are not helpful in either evacuation or shelter-in-place scenarios.
4. Self-piloted, two-person vehicles are described as being able to withstand the terminal ballistic force of a .50 caliber round. This seems to be an incorrect safety standard in an environment in which the principle physical danger to vehicle occupants will be not be high-velocity impact, but rather sustained, high-pressure stress and/or repeated striking. Additionally, it is inadvisable to permit un-trained/non-licensed guests/vehicles to self-operate non-tracked, fully autonomous vehicles. Finally, the same technology that locks grocery cart wheels upon transition over a magnetic strip at the edge of a parking lot might be advisable where conditions otherwise amenable to driving such vehicles beyond their designated zone of operation exist.
5. Executive direction and daily operational control should be separated. While marketing/finance and operational duties may overlap, some separation of responsibilities is advisable, especially in a high-physical-liability environment. Suggest creating two senior positions, reporting to a General Manager.
6. In fact, reporting relationships are generally unclear, leading to significant and persistent confusion among front-line employees and management staff.
7. While it is never wise to carelessly damage or destroy capital assets, the stated cost of park attractions is substantially less than the potential tort exposure in the event of an attraction-guest consumption event. In fact, the stated cost of the park’s most troublesome attraction is only $26 million.
8. Broadly speaking, despite claims that the park has employed “the best structural engineers,” capital building assets are woefully inadequate and easily damaged by the regular and routine operations of the attractions. This suggests either a) these systems are, despite claims to the contrary, under-engineered, or b) despite good engineering, construction does not follow industry best practices. Given that our observations indicate the park ownership acts as its own general contractor/construction service, the latter seems more likely.
9. Technology is a complement to, but never a replacement of, good physical/visual inspection of safety and security components. Everything, everything has a limited useful life!
10. Although it appears to operate in a foreign jurisdiction, there appears to be substantial exposure to significant workers comp risk.
11. The public address systems, where they do exist, are not very loud.
12. I did not observe a responsible waste diversion program with clearly marked receptacles.