Height Requirements

[Tuskin]

Agreed, safety is the meaning of this, not to save a buck. Think about this, look at the Son of Beast and how badly people got hurt on that. The same thing could happen with another one of the rides at the park and im sure CF does NOT want another incident like SOB while under their management. I also definatly agree that they just want all their parks to have the same rating, which if you think about it is smart. Why have one ride that is similar to another ride at another park with different ratings. Put 2 and 2 together and it doesnt make sense, therefore the ride height limit needed to be changed.

[ragerunner]

So are you saying that CF is more concerned about safety than other parks?

Busch Gardens

Universal

Disney

Sea World

Hersheypark

All have height limits for their Spillwater rides and White Water Rapids rides of 42" or less. That includes Escape from Pompeii, Splash Mountain, Kali River Rapids, Jurassic Park, Journey to Atlantis, Popeye, etc... I think it clearly has nothing to do with safety, it has to do with saving a few bucks on insurance at the expense of the family experience. If those types of heights were need to ensure safety then you would not have almost EVERY park in the US with lower height limits for the same types of rides.

I can accept that they want all their parks to have the same height requirements. But, the point I was trying to make is those requirement are SIGNIFICANTLY higher than almost everyone else in the industry. WHY IS THEIR HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS MORE THAN EVERYONE ELSE? Is it because Cedar Fair is the only chain that is running safe ride heights and all the others are functioning in an unsafe manner, or is it to save a few bucks in insurance?

[boricuabud]

when i have read about the incidents that involve ALL of the rides that got the height increase, then i will join you on that side of the fence.

until then, i think CF is taking pleasure in making kids wait LONGER to ride their favorite rides.

[Browntggrr]

when i have read about the incidents that involve ALL of the rides that got the height increase, then i will join you on that side of the fence.

until then, i think CF is taking pleasure in making kids wait LONGER to ride their favorite rides.

You hit the nail on the head. CF hates kids.

I am now a believer.

[ragerunner]

I don't think CF hates anyone, well except maybe Kennywood, Busch, etc... HAHA!!!

But, I still say these actions by them are to save a few dollars on insurance at the expense of the family experience. If Disney, Busch, Hersheypark, etc... can operate these rides and even more extreme rides (Spiderman, Jurrasic Park, etc...) with lower, safe, height limits then so can Cedar Fair, they just want to save a buck.

[Browntggrr]

I cannot imagine that the cost of insurance would be that drastically affected just because one park's height standards are different than another's. The difference to save a few bucks for having a higher height standard would have to be in the tens of thousands to actually make a difference on the books.

Also, most (if not all) of the height restrictions have been handed down from the ride manufacturor themselves.

And just for conversation sake: Even if CF's decisions for higher standards for height restrictions were being driven by the cost of insurance, their safety record is one of the best. Who in their right mind would argue that record? I have never heard of a park, employer, airline, etc. as being too safe just to save money on insurance.

Just some info:

Inverted coasters:

Raptor, Alpengeist, Great Bear, WT, Volcano all have a 54" restriction

Arrow loopers: The ones that I looked at are all 48"

Arrow suspended: Big Bad Wolf 42", Ninja 42", TG 48", ID 46"- Why there are differences, I have no idea.

[PKIVortex]

Speed or Height, the forces of the ride? I have no idea.

The interesting thing is, Racer and Adventure Express both used to be 42 inches to ride, then they changed both to 44 at the the same time, Racer went to 48 last year or year before? And now Adventure Express is also 48 inches. Either these were manufacturer recommendations or management.

[ragerunner]

I guess we probably will never find out why Cedar Fair has extreme height requirements compared to the rest of the industry. I doubt its from the manufacturers, since they do the same type of rides at the other parks.

When all is said and done, a family can go to another park and ride more rides together for the same dollar value as they are allowed to ride at Cedar Fair parks. Its just a shame KI is now part of Cedar Fairs height system.

[The Interpreter]

In Ohio, amusement parks MUST follow manufacturer's ride recommendations in the safety, height restrictions and rider conduct arenas.

This is not the case in some states. Last I checked, Busch, Hershey, Kennywood, etc., do not operate in Ohio.

You do not know, and will never know whether these height changes would have occurred this year under Paramount Parks, CBS and/or Viacom.

[Browntggrr]

I doubt its from the manufacturers, since they do the same type of rides at the other parks.

That is exactly what happened on MF some years ago. A guest was ejected on Superman at SFNE. Intamin made the suggestion that the seatbelts needed to be shortened. So that is exactly what CP did. This has caused the "guest is too big" issue at CP on MF as well as TTD.

Now what would have happened if CP did not follow what Intamin told them to do, and a guest was then injured?

[The Interpreter]

If CP had not followed Intamin's, the ride manufacturer's recommendation, the guest could not have been injured, if the State did what it is supposed to. Why? Because the ride could not pass inspection and be open to the public.

Intamin has recommended shortenening seat belts on its coasters and drop rides several times. Another notable instance of its doing so followed the Perilous Plunge incident in California.

[ragerunner]

In Ohio, amusement parks MUST follow manufacturer's ride recommendations in the safety, height restrictions and rider conduct arenas.

This is not the case in some states. Last I checked, Busch, Hershey, Kennywood, etc., do not operate in Ohio.

You do not know, and will never know whether these height changes would have occurred this year under Paramount Parks, CBS and/or Viacom.

So are you saying that the ride manufacturer's within the last year changed their height requirements on all these attractions, and that is why CF raised them so that they would comply with Ohio Law?

[Browntggrr]

^ This should answer your question.

http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/901%3A9-1

Pay specific attention to 901:9-1-03 Prohibitions (F) & 901:9-1-12.

[Reclaimer]

At SOAR, Maureen mentioned a couple rides were changed to bring them in line with the other CF parks while the others were manufacturer recommended changes.

As for the argument that CF is just doing this to save a few bucks on insurance...Wouldn't you try to save a few dollars if you just dropped over a billion dollars on something? Especially if you are able to ensure and even safer ride. It's only logical CF would want to do both...save some money and make a safer park.

[PKIMaureen]

Friends,

Please relax. The height requirements in Boomerang Bay will stay the same in 2007. There were concerns that they would go up when we had the map printed, so we changed them to error on the side of caution. Turns out they will not be changing.

Get your suits ready. BB will open May 26.

[BoddaH1994]

In Ohio, amusement parks MUST follow manufacturer's ride recommendations in the safety, height restrictions and rider conduct arenas.

This is not the case in some states. Last I checked, Busch, Hershey, Kennywood, etc., do not operate in Ohio.

You do not know, and will never know whether these height changes would have occurred this year under Paramount Parks, CBS and/or Viacom.

So are you saying that the ride manufacturer's within the last year changed their height requirements on all these attractions, and that is why CF raised them so that they would comply with Ohio Law?

I'd guess that it has more to do with consistency with the rest of the Cedar Fair parks. Let's say that a family goes to Kings Island and rides Congo Falls and their 5 year old child is tall enough to ride. A week later they go to another Cedar Fair park and ride a clone of it and are told that their child is too short. When questioning it, the ride op tells them that it's for safety. Not only does it make the family mad, but it implies that KI isn't safe, which of course is not the case.

[TheKlockster]

I for one am glad they raised the height requirement for Shake, Rattle and Roll. Not that it was unsafe before - but there were just some parent-child combos who didn't need to ride. Most parents are good parents it seems, and hold their child while riding - but there were some who were just asking for trouble. Two inches difference will make a huge difference.

[Jasper]

I am 6 Feet and i sometimes feel uncomfortable riding Shake Rattle N' Roll. Haha!

[ragerunner]

Friends,

Please relax. The height requirements in Boomerang Bay will stay the same in 2007. There were concerns that they would go up when we had the map printed, so we changed them to error on the side of caution. Turns out they will not be changing.

Get your suits ready. BB will open May 26.

Are they looking at the height requirements for White Water Canyon or Congo Falls?

[The Interpreter]

I for one am glad they raised the height requirement for Shake, Rattle and Roll. Not that it was unsafe before - but there were just some parent-child combos who didn't need to ride. Most parents are good parents it seems, and hold their child while riding - but there were some who were just asking for trouble. Two inches difference will make a huge difference.

Rides should, for the most part, be safe without another rider holding someone in. In most cases, that isn't possible anyway.

[Browntggrr]

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/articles/2...ront/259689.txt

Intresting timing.

[The Interpreter]

And a VERY interesting quote in that article:

Cedar Fair officials met with the rides' manufacturers and the company's insurance companies during the winter and agreed to make the three rides "consistent with other parks like Paramount Parks," Edwards said.

So, does Edwards still consider the FORMER Paramount Parks as different than the original Cedar Fair parks? Is this a quote taken out of context? Is it a misquote? What is it?

[Browntggrr]

^ He is just probably trying to distinguish between the "new" parks to the CF family and the "old" CF parks.

... if he was quoted correctly.

[The Interpreter]

....or is he just evidencing the attitude that there is Cedar Point, there are other "original" Cedar Fair parks, then there are the still other, somewhat lesser "Paramount Parks?"

In which case, this was a Freudian slip.

In any event, if it were me and I were in public relations and marketing at Cedar Fair, I'd banish the words Paramount Parks from my, and my subordinates', vocabulary. Nothing good can come from still using that name. And soon enough, apparently, they won't even have the rights to use it. Better to get used to that, and get the public used to that, now than later.

So much better had he said "to make things consistent with both our and others' parks."

[Browntggrr]

....or is he just evidencing the attitude that there is Cedar Point, there are other "original" Cedar Fair parks, then there are the still other, somewhat lesser "Paramount Parks?"

In which case, this was a Freudian slip.

I would hope that is not the case.

There is at least one individual that definitely does not seem to have that frame of mind- Dick Kinzel.

After hearing he was at the park, picking up small pieces of trash & conversing with the guests; I take that as he is very interested it what is happening at the new CF parks.

Attitude starts from the top.

EDIT- Does anyone know if Kinzel was at the opening for KD?