Millennium Force Seatbelts

^^ I was not 100% sure on my "guess" about those belts if you could move them. I just know it is not that easy to do as they get more rigid at the bottom.

My guess is CP re-routed the belts from opening day... I wish somebody had pictures of the trains from that weekend so we could see how the belts were routed. Maybe I will scan google now :)

The belts are definitly more rigid at the bottom.

...And some years ago I personally re-routed the belt on one of the test seats (I forget whether it was Millennium Force or Dragster) because as I pointed out to the entrance attendant, it didn't match the configuration on the train. The belt is flexible enough to do that. Just.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

http://rollercoasterfreak.com/Cedar_Point/IMGP0438.JPG

This past week I wrote to CP via the comment page on the website about the seat belt issue opening weekend and today I got a personal letter in the mail signed by Peggy Bertsch, the Director of Training and Development in Park Operations.

The letter itself is a full page long... In which they mention "Our maintenance department is addressing the situation" along with the reasoning for the belt length (Intamin and State of Ohio requirements). At the closing of the letter they say "Let me assure you that we are not happy with the seat belt lengths either. However, it is imperative that we enforce all the rules and regulations required by the manufacturer".

In the end, it was nice of them to write me a personalized letter. That is something I really did not expect! I thought my comments would just fall on deaf ears...

Kudos, Cedar Fair! :)

Hmm, didn't know that the rules and regulations required by the manufacturer varied BY SEAT let alone by train.

And it was nice that you got a personalized letter from Peggy.

Peggy always seemed to me to really value the guests at the park, and the employees who work there too. She was the one person who works there who seemed to be genuinely concerned with any issues that came up.

I think the park should just stop buying the Intamin crap already. And Intamin should quit being paranoid about those restraints. The reason the man fell out of the Superman coaster at SFNE was because he wasn't able to hold on, and also because the staff didn't lower and check his lap bar. Those restraints work, when used correctly, well enough to not even require a seat belt.

Peggy is definitely one of the nicest people working at that park. I'm not surprised at all that she took the time to write a personalized letter back to you.

As for the routing of the belts, I'm inclined to say that they were routed over the bar, at least for opening weekend. I remember it seemed like something was unusual when I grabbed the buckle, and I'm pretty sure now that it was because the buckle was on the outside of the bar instead of inside.

"Let me assure you that we are not happy with the seat belt lengths either."

I think it's always been assumed that the park wasn't happy, but it's nice to actually hear it.

LostKause said:
The reason the man fell out of the Superman coaster at SFNE was because he wasn't able to hold on, and also because the staff didn't lower and check his lap bar. Those restraints work, when used correctly, well enough to not even require a seat belt.

Unfortunately, that's not even close to being true. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been three other ejections from the same restraint system.

-Nate

I do give them credit for at least acknowledging the issue. I do think some sort of change needs to be made either in the restraint system altogether or in the belts. But hey, I do give Cedar Fair kudos for saying something about it. My husband and I are debating going back later in the year to see if we still have the same problem that we did opening weekend. We shall see.

coasterdude318 said:

LostKause said:
The reason the man fell out of the Superman coaster at SFNE was because he wasn't able to hold on, and also because the staff didn't lower and check his lap bar. Those restraints work, when used correctly, well enough to not even require a seat belt.

Unfortunately, that's not even close to being true. Otherwise, there wouldn't have been three other ejections from the same restraint system.

-Nate

Three? I only know of one. And it is of questionable relevance here because Millennium Force has a different restraint system than either of the Supermen. That said, Travis's comment appears somewhat ignorant* in that the first ejection was the reason Intamin started installing seat belts in the first place.

Now I know what you are thinking, so I had better explain myself. Nate, you used a very important phrase: "restraint system". I contend that the "restraint systems" used on the three Supermen, on the two giant flume rides, and on Millennium Force are all very different even though they all use the same lap bar and similar seats. The floor configurations between Superman and Millennium Force, for example, are very different, and the difference has a significant effect on the function of the restraint.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

* Look it up before you get offended... :)

Why did I think there was an ejection on the Darien Lake on too?

Because there was. That's the "one" I was referring to.

It was in the first few weeks of operation, and the "fix" was to install seat belts.

The other two ejections that Nate was referring to were Perilous Plunge and Hydro. That's three, in addition to the one in New England.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Oh, okay. I misread your post. I thought you were saying that you only knew of one TOTAL ejection, but you were saying you only knew of one OTHER ejection (Two Total).

I haven't ridden Hydro or PP, so I can't comment on how that may or may not differ from what's on MF and the S:ROS coasters. I have ridden both S:ROS coasters and MF, though not back to back. I don't specifically remember any major differences, but if you say they're there, I trust that's true. I would question whether those differences are really significant enough in this case.

Obviously floor configuration matters (after all, it's why SFNE put those "shin guards" on S:ROS after the incident). However, the fact that all of those rides still managed to eject someone - three of the four times in a strikingly similar situation - suggests to me that the differences in the trains/boats doesn't matter all that much. The flaws were with the lapbar/seat combination and the lack of a go/no go system.

The lapbar and "flat seat" is poorly designed to be sure. That's why it was corrected by the time TTD was built. I still think the major problem with at least three of the four rides was that Intamin set limits on the size/weight of passengers, but offered no feasable way to measure that. That's a huge design oversight, and in this case cost a few people their lives.

Either way you look at it, I think it's quite apparent that those restraints do *not* work in their original configuration.

-Nate

As I recall, PP's Seat and restraint seemed similiar, but of course, there was more room on the floor (IIRC). Granted, by the time I rode, there was a 27 point restraint system you had to wear (rolls eyes).

Like I said before, I like Premier's restraint system. They manage to put lap bar/shin guards even on their loopers. Intamin, sadly, does not.

Ironically, I too got a letter from Peggy Bertsch today. It sounds like the same exact letter other readers have gotten. While I appreciate their communication efforts, I do not appreciate the part of the letter that emphasses, over and over again, the weight restrictions on the website, guide, etc.

I am particularly amused with the part where she explains "our operators may not force seatbelts, lap bars, or shoulder harnesses closed on our guests to prevent discomfort or injury". Yet I have seen that happen a hundred times over.

Oh Cedar Point. You take two steps forward with me, and then five back. Boo-urns.

I do not appreciate the part of the letter that emphasses{sic}, over and over again, the weight restrictions on the website, guide, etc.

Why do you not appreciate it? She should be doing that every time. The company is going to do what it must in order to lessen their liability, as well they should. The information is available, and if there is a question or concern, the first thing they would do is refer to their park policy. I do that every day in my job when someone questions or raises a concern, I refer them to policy.

Yet I have seen that happen a hundred times over.

So you're complaining that a few people break the rules and don't follow park procedure? The first time that employee steps down on a lap bar to get it closed and someone gets hurt, people would complain that the employee was in the wrong (and they were).

Yeah, I'm not sure I understand the anger towards the park (or even Intamin) on this one. (Been kinda biting my tongue from the start)

It's not their responsibility to make sure you can fit onto their ride. It's their responsibility to make the ride hold you safely.

I mean, if they wanted to create a system that only accomodated people who weighed less than 120 pounds and were less than 5 feet 6 inches, then they could. It probably wouldn't be good business, but there's no precedent for getting angry that a ride wasn't designed with you in mind - otherwise I'd have a vendetta against every kiddie ride manufacturer out there. :)