CP - Force Seat Belts & T Bar Restraints

I keep reading all this about too fat or too thin but when I was at school we did some anthropometric work and were taught about percentiles. There is a readily available graph for adults and one for children that looks like a big 'bunny hill' for want of a better term with the highest point in the centre being the '50th percentile', from what I can remember anyway, feel free to corrct me if you know about this stuff. Anyway, you then go either side of this central point until the curve starts levelling off in either direction, these are the extremes and in most cases only account for 5% of the chart, that is why most companies, car manufacturers etc use a '95th percentile' dummy and drawings to accomodate this 95% of people. If it is true that on average 2 people off every train were turned away then I'd love to know what percentile figures were used in the design of the restraints because it sure as hell wasn't the 95th!!

Like I said, a lot of this is from memory as it was a long time ago so if you know more, please expand, but I am sure this is the way that things like this should be designed.

Willster thats the bell curve, and yes the human population confirms to this with regards to weight and height. One standard deviation away from the normal includes about 2/3 of the population, two standard deviations includes 95% of the population, three standard deviations of 99.5% of the population

That sounds about right, Willister. Where is the '1 out of 15 turned away from MF' stat coming from, by the way?

Sigh... I guess I will weigh in again on this topic... (dodges the bricks headed his way).

Interesting to note that B&M have taken some steps to address the "big kids" issue. On their floorless coasters, there are a couple of seats that have two belts rather than one. This allows those of us who are slightly too big for the normal seats to ride safely and comfortablly.

Also, on Titan and Goliath (The closest thing to B&M Hypers that I have ridden) their are NO seatbelts, or at least there haven't been... I bet THAT's going to change (grumble) and yet, and YET... my wife and I have ridden these rides multiple times and NEVER felt unsecured or unsafe. We've even managed a bit of airtime on them despite making sure we were "stapled"... but then on those speed hills who DOESN'T? :-)

I suppose what I am trying to say is, here is yet another area where B&M exceeds Intamin. They have managed to make rides that a larger percentage of park goers can enjoy - while not compromising safety. I've seen smaller riders use the "big kid" seats on the floorless coasters and they have been just as snug as they would be in a regular seat. My only regret is that B&M hasn't adopted this double belt on the side design for their Inverted / Stand Up coasters as well.

It is possible to accomodate larger riders without compromising safety. B&M and Vekoma have done it. It couldn't be that hard for Intamin. And I am not interested in wheather they SHOULD do it... I'm trying to get down to a normal weight for my height because it is a good HEALTH thing to do... just that it HAS been done and there hasn't been any harm. I am truly worried that once modifications are made to make it ever harder for larger guests to ride some rides, that the preasure will be on to make it harder on EVERY ride, and that just doesn't seem warrented...

-Escher

---

thecoasterguy said:

After someone who was standing in the back of Raven with no harness on flew out, there was a change in the operation of wooden coasters. This is no different.

-----------------------------------------------

yes, coasterguy. you are correct about the new operating procedures for woodies...

BUT what you failed to notice is that those new procedures DID NOT prevent anyone from riding due to their size!! the new woodie procedures just made sure that there were no one-click rides anymore.

THIS policy (or big bit of bull-puckey, take your pick) is preventing people from riding who have ridden countless times before. i bet theres is no one getting turned away from Raven because they are "too big" or "look like they moght stand up".

there IS a difference, my friend.

---

Exactly... and I feel that the investigation at SFNE made it pretty clear that the restraint was not properly closed, and that the belt was too long. Someone on PointBuzz even compared that the belt at SFDL allowed for a ton of slack, yet the same guy found MF snug. That means that the MF belt was shorter to begin with.

Brian: BMI is a fairly pointless measurement. By that calculation, I was obese in high school, and I was the skinny kid at risk for getting stuffed in lockers. It does not account for bone or muscle mass. (I had a standing vertical leap of 30" back in the day. :))

I'm glad I mixed things up a bit. Some replies:

Joey said:

And you confuse me too...at first you say they (the parks) do need to look at reconfiguring the restraints, then you say they don't need to redesign the ride to accomodate larger riders, then you say you'd like to see extra-wide seats. Which is it? And just for a bit of clarification, according to trip reports, not just large people are getting tossed from the ride. It's average folks that may have larger thigh muscles and can't get that extra slack in the seatbelt.

My reply:

No, what I meant here is that the park does need to look at reconfiguring the restraints because they do not regulate that they have been lowered far enough in the system automatically. B&M rides do this, and if you are going to make trains in such a way that it would be possible for someone to slide out if it was not low enough, that is unexcusable.

The park should not reconfigure the seats so they are bigger. The park should reconfigure the system so that they ensure they are low enough.

Joey said:

Like I said above, if the park gets enough pressure, and it probably will, then they'll put the squeeze in Intamin to either do deeper seats (ala TTD) or rescend the seatbelt "law", or something. (and since the most inexpensive way to deal with it would be to relax the new rule, I'd bet on that one) You may even see something as drastic as a redesign of the lapbar/seat combo in the off season who knows?

My reply:

I don't think that the park will relax a safety rule because of general public pressure. I think that the ride's trains will be redesigned in the off-season, but Cedar Point wants to keep it open for time being so that everyone that comes to the park between now and the end of the year isn't mad it isn't running. How many people are mad about the S:ROS's not running? Read the other threads and you'll know what I mean!

The 95% thing that was written about above sounds like a good idea, but how can you compare a car to a roller coaster? How many people have ever actually gotten "ejector air" in a car without being in a crash? Cars have seat belts that people are supposed to wear. A seat belt adjusts itself to the driver very easily and can be made to fit all different types of people, but is not reliable enough to put it and it alone on a roller coaster. You need to make a harness that fits the smallest person safely without falling out.

Roller coaster manufacturers have to take into account what is the smallest 54" person that could ride, and then make a harness that will hold them in and keep them in while expanding enough to fit the largest guests possible. You can't start from a large guest and work backwards. Like I said:

"On top of that, can you tell me how you could make it so that the operators could sense that someone was too small to ride the ride? How would that conversation even go? "Excuse me ma'am, but I'm going to have to ask you to get off the Screaming Dragster because you simply don't weigh enough for the harness to properly restrain you?" That's insane!"

---

BMI is a fairly pointless measurement.

---

I agree with you. which is why I included the whole muscle mass disclaimer.

It also happens to be the pointless measurement that your physician will use to tell you whether you are obese or not. So it goes.

---

thecoasterguy said:
I'm glad I mixed things up a bit. Some replies:

I don't think that the park will relax a safety rule because of general public pressure. I think that the ride's trains will be redesigned in the off-season, but Cedar Point wants to keep it open for time being so that everyone that comes to the park between now and the end of the year isn't mad it isn't running. How many people are mad about the S:ROS's not running? Read the other threads and you'll know what I mean!

!

---

honsetly, i would rather have MF NOT running and at least know that no one else is riding it either. same with Dragster. when it was down during our trip last year, it was like "oh well, we're not the only ones not riding"...

but to have MF running for SOME and not for ALL?? that, my friend, stinks.

so what...if youre not one of the anointed, chosen few, too bad??

sorry, i think they should close the ride until they get this figured out. the GP would understand a "temporarily unavailable" sign at the entrance better than THIS crap thats going on.

this is like Ticket To Ride, but worse. TTR was just a good idea, poorly implemented. this is beyond description.

It's possible that this is as good as it will ever get, unless Intamin changes their recommendation.

So LadyLegolasGreenleaf, what you are saying is that because you and I can't ride the ride, Cedar Point should waste their investment and let them sit dormant while the trains are redesigned and reintroduced? This isn't like changing a tire on your car. The train redesign could take months.

And you know what, every coaster has some people that aren't part of the "chosen few" that can ride. B&M Inverts tend to disallow people that are too built in the chest area to ride. Intamin Inverts like the V2's have a maximum height requirement.

All coasters have a minimum height requirement. So what if you don't quite make it? Should you be allowed to ride?

The park is doing what it needs to do for safety while keeping it's two marquee attractions open. That doesn't stink. That's good business.

First of all coasters should not be for a "chosen few" of the pool of potential riders. Ideally all riders who want to ride should be able to. If the ideal is not possible the park needs to choose what is best for all of their guests.

Basically, the park needs to decide if they want to close MF for "mechanical reasons" and midly upset everyone or severly piss off part of the population. If the lines of people at Guest Relations get longer and longer and more people start vowing never to go to never return I bet the ride will eventually close.

thecoasterguy said:
The park is doing what it needs to do for safety

Do you honestly think the people that were allowed on MF last year were in any danger, or are you just grandstanding for the park? Please give me a break. This has nothing to do with safety. If anything, it is BS regulations. More than likely it is irrational fear. *** Edited 5/19/2004 3:58:00 AM UTC by RavenTTD***

If that is true, that is just silly. Any taller man can easily hit 230 without being significantly overweight.

According to BMI statistics, anyone under 6'2" is obese at 230 pounds. In order for you to weigh 230 and be in the non-overweight category, you'd have to be taller than 6'8". That's just the way it is. Certainly BMI isn't the end all measurement, but generally it does a good job of measuring obesity.

-Nate *** Edited 5/19/2004 5:45:27 AM UTC by coasterdude318***

Having to be not overweight at all is a ridiculous standard for a coaster. Forget BMI because it is unrealistic with too many exceptions. There are just a lot of people over 230 that are not that fat. They are part of the market, MF and other Intamin rides were built for this market, and they were stupid to design it that way if 230 is indeed the limit.

1) I didn't say "overweight", I said "obese." People who are overweight can ride Intamin rides. People who are obese generally can not.

2) Obviously those who weigh 230 pounds or more are not part of the market Intamin builds their rides for.

-Nate

---

RavenTTD said:
If that is true, that is just silly. Any taller man can easily hit 230 without being significantly overweight.

---

Eh, I'm 6'2" and hover between 155 and 160lbs. On that same scale, the taller guy would need to be over 8ft, and someone that big isn't going to fit in anything with OTSRs.
-R

You're not an American. :)

-Nate

---

ThePhantomLives said:
Anyone know that Intamin seats and restraints are designed to accomidate NO MORE THAN 230 LBS? Thats it people, anyone above that is in violation of the manufacturers rules, whether the parks enforce it or not.

---

You're talking out of your ass. You have no idea what you're talking about.

---

thecoasterguy said:
The park is doing what it needs to do for safety while keeping it's two marquee attractions open.

---

Wow... and people think I'm a fan boy...