NEW Policy with MF seatbelts?

Regardless of a new seatbelt policy, it's disturbing to hear certain ride ops being tactless and mean in announcing someone can't ride.

In my opinion, the excuse of being new is just BS. If you have any compasion at all for people, it's instinctive to act with a little bit of tact during a potentially embarrasing situation.

They need to either get rid of these people or do some intense reeducation in their behavior.

---

I'd rather be in my boat with a drink on the rocks,
than in the drink with a boat on the rocks.

I never suggested that the ride has been unsafe for the past four years. I have the opinion that the lapbars leave too much room for error when it comes to larger guests. With any ride there is always room for safety improvments. Accidents hapen in the industry and the parks are obligated to respond.

Blue Streak got new lapbars, seatbelt, and headrests. Nobody ever flew out of it with the old bars.

Mantis got belts, even thought there was never an incident.

Snake River got the huge fins on the lapbars.

Witches Wheel raised the height restriction to 60".

Now the park tries to make things safer at the rides with the Intamin lapbars and folks get their panties in a bunch.

I think it is unfortunate that many more guests will be turned away from coasters, and the way the ride operator handled the situation with MFJedi is unexcuseable. The new seatbelt policy may not be the best answer to the problem, but it is still better than nothing.

---

Richie Anderson
Millennuim Force TL '01
Ride Maintenance '02 & '03
Party Decor

MFJedi says no one has ever come out of an Intamin ride. Huh? You been under a rock Jedi?

---

Richie Anderson
Millennuim Force TL '01
Ride Maintenance '02 & '03
Party Decor

On Saturday night I was waiting in line for TTD and I somewhat larger guy was in the back seat. I'm 6'3 250 with about a 38-40 waist, and this guy was larger than I. He got in the seat, and not only did the ride op let him ride, he buckled it for him and pulled it tight.
I think there might be a difference between rookie ride ops for both these rides and second, third, fourth year ops. I don't think I saw a single person asked to get up on TTD that night. (Although I did see several asked to leave MF earlier in the day)

If the belt is tight when it buckles, how is requiring it to have an inch of slack making it safer? Isn't the whole point to make sure the belt is tight? It's unfortunate when someone dies in a coaster accident, but 9/10 times it is due to that rider being a moron and, as was said before, violating the ride rules. From what I've heard, the accident could have been prevented if SF actually followed safety procedures. Every time I have ridden at CP, even if you can do everything yourself, they come down and give the belt a quick tug and push the lapbar a bit to make sure its down tight. Apparently this didn't happen at SF and that's what caused the accident, they let the train go without properly checking all the riders.

I've never understood why people like to have slack between them and the belt or bar. You feel the weighlessness no matter what, some people must just love being thrown violently upward into their lapbar.

Jedi, there is no reason to be understanding about a ride op being a dick. And there is no reason for management at CP to expect you to be. It's unfortunate you weren't allowed to ride, but there is no excuse what-so-ever for the way you were treated. Of course if what Peggy says is true, and they've been receiving a lot of complaints about this new policy, I would imagine that something will change.

That's my 1.65 euro's for now.
John

Yeah I think this whole new policy is ridiculously lame and a sad attempt at band-aiding a safety problem that really isn't a problem. I feel bad for those folks and their families that have been involved in those accidents, but this band-aide hurts CP and its relationships with its guests and doesn't fix anything. If you can fasten the belt and it is tight, what is the big deal? I mean you aren't obviously trying to ride the ride with your belt all the way open with 10 inches of slack here. I agree with MFJedi, if you have some slack when the belt is fastened and the belt is tight to begin with, most a lot of slack will come out during the course of the ride. Was I lucky to make it back to the station alive? No. My belt was still fastened and the lapbar was still tightly doing it's job. I was stupidly under the assumption that the seatbelts were a secondary restraint system. If the lapbar is not doing its job the belt will be useless. I can cram that bar way down and get it very tight and I can fit very snugly in the ride and in the seat, but with the "new belt monitoring system" even a belt that I can cram to fasten and I don't have much slack in - this secondary restraint system will keep me from being allowed to ride. That is ludicrous. I have ridden these rides countless amounts of times in the years past, but I think this season I may be done. I was lucky to get on both TTD and MF on opening day and it was a little bit of a struggle, but with the crack-down this will just get harder and harder as the season goes on. I can even forsee me trying to ride 2 times in a row and getting a ride one time, but not being allowed the next.

---

cyberdman

---

Rihard 2000 said:
I never suggested that the ride has been unsafe for the past four years. I have the opinion that the lapbars leave too much room for error when it comes to larger guests. With any ride there is always room for safety improvments. Accidents hapen in the industry and the parks are obligated to respond.

Blue Streak got new lapbars, seatbelt, and headrests. Nobody ever flew out of it with the old bars.

---

...not only that, the new configuration is arguably less safe than the original setup, both in terms of keeping the rider uninjured and in terms of rider containment. I still don't understand that one

---

Mantis got belts, even thought there was never an incident.

---

I'm not entirely convinced that there wasn't an incident. Perhaps not any lost rider or injury, but an incident similar to what happened during testing on an early Vekoma SLC would be enough to demand installation of a safety belt.

---

Snake River got the huge fins on the lapbars.

---

You mean the huge lap bars on Snake River? Those were the direct result of incidents that happened when that ride was new.

---

Witches Wheel raised the height restriction to 60".

---

That's based on the manufacturer's recommendation. The manufacturer provides an age requirement for that ride, and if you translate age to height using generally accepted development charts, you get the 60"/48" restriction. I think it's actually a maturity thing more than a safety issue...if you can sit upright you can ride that thing safely. Anyway, didn't they bump that down to 54" last season?

---

Now the park tries to make things safer at the rides with the Intamin lapbars and folks get their panties in a bunch.

I think it is unfortunate that many more guests will be turned away from coasters, and the way the ride operator handled the situation with MFJedi is unexcuseable. The new seatbelt policy may not be the best answer to the problem, but it is still better than nothing.

---

No, it's a policy that accomplishes nothing, will have no effect on ride safety, will make a lot of people very angry, and reeks of an ill-thought-out knee-jerk reaction to the wrong problem. Combine that with the other things that were going on with that ride on the first couple of days, and you've got the potential for real trouble.

On a related note, keeping people safe, by definition, means not hurting them. Therefore, what the attendant on Millennium Force did to me on Sunday was by definition *not safe*. I should have filed a complaint. Hell, I should have filed charges.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Dave, I agree that the policy is a knee-jerk reaction and that it will make a lot of guests angry. But I'm not convinced that it accomplishes nothing and that it will have no effect on ride safety.

I'm sure that I will get blasted for saying this, but I don't think using the seatbelt as a measuring device is such a bad idea. It's not the best solution, but it is quick and cheap for the park.

(Here's the statement I'll really get flamed for. And I mean no offence to anyone.) Fewer large guests riding will mean less of a chance for something to go wrong. That in itself would be making the ride safer. *** Edited 5/14/2004 2:23:32 PM UTC by Rihard 2000***

---

Richie Anderson
Millennuim Force TL '01
Ride Maintenance '02 & '03
Party Decor

I have a question and this goes for TTD as well as MF, why can't/aren't the seatbelts routed under that seat stabilizer bar? They used to be and I don't see what the difference is other that giving us folks about 2 inches back to the length of the belts. I think there would be a lot more happier folks around if they did that? It doesn't make the ride any safer.

---

cyberdman

If large guests ever caused a problem,then it would be a good fix. But there is no problem. Can you tell us when the last time someone coming out of a ride was caused by their size? This latest accident had nothing at all to do with weight. Neither have any of the other coaster accidents in the past few years.

If the belt has 6 inches of slack and is tight when you leave the station,you know damn well it loosens during the ride so are you saying that is safe? That 6 inches of slack is 2 inches by the time a dynamic ride life MF is over so that person might as well not have the belt on because it is so loose it is useless. At least someone who is bigger will keep the belt tight on their abdomen the entire ride.

You are the same type of idiot like the guy last week who blamed Dragster's down time last year on overweight people riding it.

This is just nothing more than a bunch of people who think the ideal human form is anorexic being biased against people who don't fit their standard.

MFJedi---this statement

---

latest accident had nothing at all to do with weight

---

is simply not true. Read the Massachusetts report on S:ROS. Look at page six. At the bottom of the page, you will see a list of contributing factors. Factor #1 is:

---

Girth of the victim: The girth of the victim's lower torso was incompatible with the T-bar restraint.

---

It's hard for me to see how girth has "nothing at all to do with weight."

Edit: the report goes on to say that longer belts enable people incompatible with the T-bar to ride "unaware of the potential hazard." in factor #3.

*** Edited 5/14/2004 3:18:48 PM UTC by Brian Noble***

You seem to forget the line that says 'The seat belts were not pulled tight enough or the T restraints did not get pushed against the patrons firm enough.

Had the guy been buckled in properly and the bar down,chances are he would not have been ejected from the ride. The report also says the t bar must be on the persons upper thighs and the belt fastened to work properly. The people asked to leave MF over the weekend as well as the ones in my group all had the belt tight and buckled and the bar on their upper thighs. Yes,someone with a 2 foot long belly that keeps the bar from barely going over their knees should not be allowed to ride.But this new policy is clearly hurting normal sized people's chance to ride.

There is no way of knowing whether he would have been ejected from the ride if the restraints were properly used. But based on the 3 or 4 million rides MF has given in it's 5 years at CP,I think it is safe to say that weight does not cause accidents,improper use of the restraints does.CP's excellent staff that checks each bar also assures that everyone is safe. *** Edited 5/14/2004 3:29:25 PM UTC by MFJedi2***

Thank-you Brian

MFJedi made this statement "Can you tell us when the last time someone coming out of a ride was caused by their size?"

Sure I can.

SFDL - Intamin t-bar incident #1 - guest was ejected because the restraint did not fit properly because of his weight. (this incident happend before seatbelts were added)

Knott's - Intamin t-bar incident #2 - guest was ejected because the restraint did not fit properly because of her weight. (this ride had seatbelts.)

Oakwood - Intamin t-bar incident #3 - guest was ejected. Why? I don't it is still under investgation. (it seems that this incident didn't happen because of weight though)

SFNE - Intamin t-bar incident #4 - guest was ejected because "The girth of the victim's lower torso was incompatible with the T-bar restraint."

Is that enough for you MFJedi? And you say I'm an idiot.

---

Richie Anderson
Millennuim Force TL '01
Ride Maintenance '02 & '03
Party Decor

---

Rihard 2000 said:
I'm sure that I will get blasted for saying this, but I don't think using the seatbelt as a measuring device is such a bad idea.

---

I don't think anyone disagrees with you in that respect, especially seeing as how the bar can be infinitely positioned between open and closed. Where the problem comes is this arbitrary "slack" that is a judgement call for the ride op. That's stupid, and introduces another variable, not eliminate one. It clicks or it doesn't... that should be the measurement.

If people with a 38" waist can't ride, that's pretty screwed up.

And certainly the behaviour of the crew is not acceptable. Why don't they start getting on the PA and saying, "Hey! The fatty in row three doesn't fit and can't ride! Everyone point and stare as they shamefully make their way off the platform!"

---

Jeff - Advocate of Great Great Tunnels™ - Co-Publisher - PointBuzz - CoasterBuzz - My Blog - Video

Well the park could abolish the new "slack rule" and just make the seatbelts 1" shorter.

What I can't believe is that Peggy was making excuses for the ride ops behavior. Isn't that what training is for? Did they stop training employees to be tackful this season?

---

Richie Anderson
Millennuim Force TL '01
Ride Maintenance '02 & '03
Party Decor

Thanks Jeff, great statement. I couldn't have said it better myself. I still wonder about the belt routing issue though that I mentioned earlier.

---

cyberdman

I also received the canned reply from the park and I sent this reply, which I have not received a reply to.

Peggy,
Thank you for your prompt, though canned, reply. Kudos to the your attorneys and public relations department. I understand completely that guest safety is paramount to Cedar Point and I am glad to hear that. Is it safe to assume that Cedar Point put me in danger by allowing me to ride Millennium Force over the previous two seasons? No it is not a safe assumption. Is it a safe assumption that a guest who rode a ride the previous year could still ride it after losing 20 pounds? Yes, that is a safe assumption to make and on that basis I bought a season pass.
Thank you

The policy is dumb, but I could live with it had I known about it before buying a season pass or if they offered refunds. Yes, I know, there are 1,200 other rides, live shows and plenty of skinny people for us "fatties" to watch, but I bought that pass to ride MF, not the Mine Ride.

First timer here.

My understanding of the SMRS incident was that the guy was kinda heavy for his height. Something like 5-2 and 230. I guess I could see where, depending on the distribution of that weight (especially if it was in the middle of his body), that his size might of prevented the lapbar from securing him properly. But should the ride operators there have noticed something? No wonder the Mass. state report takes issue with them.

Also, could someone explain what they mean about how the belts on MF are "routed" as opposed to how they were routed in the past.

Thanks

Again,if the person has no problem getting the bar on their upper thighs and the belt is buckled,they should be allowed to ride. It is the bar that is the main restraint,the belt is there if the bar fails. The fault in the end lies with the ops,because i bet if you look at the reports on those other Intamin coasters,you will find that the bar was not on properly in the first place. The ops are the ones who give the thumbs up saying that the ride is clear to go,if they see a lap bar not high enough then they need to stop the ride.

All of the guests I saw asked to leave the ride had the belt buckled and the lap bar was over the belt,thus being correct according to the report.

Yes,Peggy was quite poor in her response. I sent a snail mail to Mr Kinzel ,I want to see what he says about me 'being able to understand the humiliation since it was their first week' Literally if they measure peoples height and base admission prices and ride restrictions on that,they need to start measuring peoples waistlines and determien ride restrictions on that too.

The parks are opening up a big can of worms with a policy like this. If they are saying you can't ride a good portion of the main coasters,they need to make a ticket price adjustment like they do for height.

---

You seem to forget the line that says 'The seat belts were not pulled tight enough or the T restraints did not get pushed against the patrons firm enough.

---

No, I'm not forgetting it. If you read the report carefully, that's in reference to *other* patrons on the train. It's also placed in contrast to the sentence immediately before it, where several witnesses say the restraints *were* re-checked.

The report clearly says that, no matter what, the T-bar would not fit the deceased. That's what "incompatible" means. Should the ops have let him ride? No. But, that's not the same as the accident having "nothing to do with weight."

There are two separate points you are trying to make. One is "weight is not an issue." Clearly, however, it is. The other is "the current policies on MF are either unreasonable or unnecessary." I can't answer that one, as I'm employed by neither Intamin nor Cedar Fair.

Hey Guys and Gals,

This same thing happenend to a girl in our group yesterday. She rode MF under the new policy on May 9 and earlier in the day on Thursday. When we returned for our freeway, the ops said, "She has well over 3/4 of an inch, but not yet an inch!"

Before we even entered the car, they're appeared to be some concern from the ride op about her. They went directly towards her and tried to fasten the belt, but in the end they did ask her to leave. I did go to park operations. Dana leader for Zone 2 suggested she come along with us to see what was going on out there. The young lady was just too upset to go back and try again. Dana did suggest the next time we are there to stop in and she would escort us to the ride and try the belt herself.

It seems from our conversation, this new policy was not Cedar Point's idea. My major concern is they need to have some way of testing you before entering the ride and marking you able to ride. In her case, she already has been able to ride this season, and then again denied. This is not a good business policy.

It seems 38' waist will in fact be too large under the policy to ride MF. I wear a 36' and sometimes a 38' -- I just fit under the new policy. She was able to ride Dragster later in the day with out incident. Cedar Point must decide the actual policy on this -- I suggest marking the belts with a line, plus making sure the belts are all the same length.

Finally after my long statement, She has never ever been turned away from a ride due to size. We have season passes to WDW, Busch Gardens, and Universal Studio's -- As of now I have passes for the Point, but this may be the last year for them.

Best,

Chris *** Edited 5/14/2004 10:04:37 PM UTC by Meanstreak69***