Disapointed with Raptor

This is a safty issue here.  Harness were only designed to hold a certain amount of force, and when it takes 2 ride ops to get a person in then oviously the person in the seat is too big.  By making the person do it themselves it takes all of the liability off the comapny, and the designer of the ride.  Restraint devices are only ment to hold so much, no mater who builds the ride, and too bad someone had to die before we realized that cramming people in is unsafe.  I think that people should quit whinning about not being able to fit into a ride, like its the most important thing on Earth, and do something about it, like LOSE WEIGHT.  America is the fattest nation on the planet. 

Let's be honest everyone. It is all about avoidance of legal liability for the park. Anyone who says differently is insane. Sure safety for the rider is another way of saying we (the park) do not want to be sued if an incident or accident occurs. CF should just be honest about what its liability insurance carriers are telling it regarding riders and rides at their parks. Its simply a matter of avoiding a lawsuit for the park. Yes, I am sure no one wants to die Jeff, but CF is more concerned with avoiding legal liability.

I think some are missing the point.

Its a mater of inconstant policy's. The rule was for 6 years people were allowed to be pushed in. Now they are not because off an accident on a dissimilar ride. Did B&M just suddenly say, "hold on this might not work now because of a problem with an Intamin sitdown?"(Thats what I'm asking) We don't even know yet if weight was the real cause of that accident at Knotts. If this rule was set in 1994 I would have no problem.

Regardless, this means that Intamin and/or cedar Fair were at fault! They should have corrected this problem from the onset or we would not be having this debate. The problem needs to be addressed and corrected.

If B&M, or Intamin dose not test and give advice the parks for such things from the beginning, then are at great fault.

(Note, I personally have no problem fitting in these contraptions now. )

Joe I think you are missing an important point. You seem to believe that reality and logic are involved, they are not. You don't have do do anything to be sued and loose a lot of money - you just have to be accused. The question may not be "hold on this might not work now because of a problem with an Intamin sit down?" but "is there anything anywhere in our park that could provide fodder for legal arguments, no matter how improbable or impossible?" If there is it only makes sense to try and head it off.

In a world without lawyers, liability and greed this would not be a issue.
-------------
New World Order - Get behind us, or feel the wrath!

I completely understand and agree with the policy, regardless of the who's and what's for the past 6 years.  It's *all* about liability.  Where I work, if a customer, or even another coworker is hurt... I can go get them a first aid kit, but that's it.  Anything from that kit going on that person, must be done by the person in question.  Why?  Liability.  And I agree with it.  I don't want to be responsible for anything that may go wrong, nor does my company.  I'm sure Cedar Point, and the manufacturers of these rides, are looking at it the same way.  Getting aboard these rides is a priveledge, not a right.  You follow the rules Cedar Point sets forth, from line jumping, to that little sign at the station that reads "Do Not Disturb Operators".  This is another rule you're going to have to follow.  Live with it. ;)

Let me just say, I totally agree with the saftey thing.  But let me put it to you in more of my perspective.  I'm a big guy, but not huge. My problem isn't with a beer belly sticking out and keeping the seat from locking, it's my shoulders, they're too broad.  I see many people much larger than myself ride Raptor with no problem, because they have skinnier shoulders.  I have to sit a certain way in the seat to be able to fit my shoulders in, and when I do, I can't get the extra push down on the buckle to fasten the seatbelt.  Therefore, I need someone to pull up that belt about a 1/2 an inch to get it to snap shut.  Like Bill said, the pad is too thick.  It only takes on op about 5 seconds to help me, and I can ride no problem.  Now if the belt went down, and locked into the bottom of the seat, I could easily do it myself.  But because of the flawed (in my opinion) engineering on the seat, I can no longer ride Raptor.  Oh and as a side note, whomever mentioned that all the belts aren't the same length is correct, the sample seat has the smallest belt of all of them. 

P.S.  I've never had a problem locking my own belt on MF. 

 

---

You seem to believe that reality and logic are involved, they are not

---

 
Yeah, I guess logic went out the door soon as the law suit was invented :).

---

Oh and as a side note, whomever mentioned that all the belts aren't the same length is correct, the sample seat has the smallest belt of all of them.

---

 
Thank you for pointing this out again. I am going to buy Cedar Point a tape measure for Christmas. It is not just on Raptor, it is all the rides.

A quick question, not that I have any huge opinion on the issue as I always buckle my belt myself anyway.  Does this policy apply to Mantis too?  I mean goodness - on Mantis, a lot of very thin people have trouble buckling his/her seatbelt.  Common sense should definitely prevail here and the ops should still buckle the belts for people who are obviously not too big.  Lets face it - judging by what I saw this summer, there are plenty of people that have a lot of trouble buckling/unbuckling a seatbelt.  Are they going to be buckled by ops, or are the ops going to stand there and give them step by step instructions on how to do it themselves, thus lowering capacity.  With some of the shadiness in CP's decisions of late (no re-rides for MM, this year's gates, etc), who knows.  I'm not liking the trend of late that if one person complains, or one little thing goes wrong, they change something that ends up hurting a lot more people.  Cedar Fair has brilliant management, but in this case, I think they might be overmanaging.  An incident on an Intamin sit-down type ride should not affect a B&M inverted.

-----------------
-Matt
2001 Magnum Crew

*** This post was edited by MDOmnis on 10/1/2001. ***

I was just wondering...with the exception of Knotts and Cedar Point, are other parks implementing the same procedures on their rides? It's not very fair to rip on CP if other parks are taking the same precautions.

I wonder if the problem for some riders could be solved by welding a little loop handle to the seat belt buckle plate so that the rider can get some leverage on the buckle in order to pull it home.....

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

I can understand the safety concerns. You as an individual should determine whether you can ride a certain coaster or not. That is one of the main reasons why they have "test" seats in front of teh bigger CP coasters. I guess its become quality over quanitity.
-----------------
Brian Z.
Assistant Webmaster
Kennywood Park Unlimited
www.kpunlimited.com

Yes, I know that would help. That is the central problem. It is hard enough to even get the restraint down from the inside let alone buckle it.

Just a tip for those who just don't fit on Raptor or Manits. Don't grab the buckle area. Take both hands and grab the lower outside corners of the restraint (for more leverage in 2 spots instead of one). Then make short jabbing pull backs on it. Once you are close take one arm and get the belt, but keep the inside of that arm against the restraint and keep pushing down. Good Luck :).

Legally speaking CP could acrually be opening itself up to more liability by not helping to buckle the belts of riders. If someone now rides one of the rides and buckles it himself or herself and it doesn't latch just right and he or she falls out CP is now more legally responsible for not making sure that the restraint was latched and clicked completely in place. You cannot say we are not responsible (ie.CP) since we didn't fasten the restraint. if an accident occurs. Because if they had fastened and clicked the belt themselves, then there would not have been an accident in the first place.

Oh, Matt. That reminds be of a quote about baseball. I forget who said it though.

The best manager is the one who knows when the right time not to manage is.

Not everyone has the body size that fits into the "average" category.  The rides have to have a certain range of size that will allow the maximum riders, but provide the maximum safety.  Unfortunately, there are people outside of those ranges.  As the rides get wilder, the restraints are more advanced and in many cases, limiting to body size.
I have to squeeze the bar down on Raptor because of my shoulders being big.  Luckily, I can get on everything and lock the belts by myself.  I rode Volcano at Paramount's Kings Dominion and squeezed in the seat, but the ride op loosened the OTSR and put on an add on seatbelt so my chest wasn't smooshed.  I know there are some rides out there like Batman at SFWOA and Alpengeist at Busch Gardens Williamsburg that have specific seats to accomodate larger bodied guests.
Joe E., I agree with Friday the 28th and the stacking.  I wouldn't blame the whole crew though.  I saw them having to yell at an op to press the button to clear the ride, then another wasn't giving the thumbs up when he was ready, even though he was ready.  It seemed that they had some ops that weren't that experienced that night.

*** This post was edited by Digital Daredevil on 10/2/2001. ***

For anyone who has been sued in civil court, you know that it is a very horrible thing to go through.  Whether you are guilty or not, you worry for months and years as the case goes on.  You worry about being held responsible for punitive damages that usually is paid by the person, not the park/company/insurer.  There is a lot of money involved here.  Anyone can sue anyone for almost anything, and the system is awful.  You will have to pay for an attorney to defend you. 

The burden of proof for civil court is a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.  People on civil juries tend to throw out money like water, and greedy attorney's aren't helping the situation.

I have been sued for something I didn't do.  Luckily, I was cleared, but that is rare.

The costs to defend, and even more if you lose are sky high.  I don't blame the parks for being safe.  I wouldn't like to be one of the persons left out of riding the ride, but like I said, anyone who has gone through civil litigation will agree that is best to be safe than sorry.

I don't think it is very fair to put an 18 year old through that kind of experience being sued and having the thought of someone injured or worse hanging over their head.  Being a ride op is a big responsibility.  Most of us take it for granted that they just check seat belts and press buttons. 

I agree about our current situation with our court system.

It s a sad day since some are now considered a liability instead of a park guest.

---

coasterkingoftheworld said:
If someone now rides one of the rides and buckles it himself or herself and it doesn't latch just right and he or she falls out CP is now more legally responsible for not making sure that the restraint was latched and clicked completely in place.

---

No one ever said that they didn't check the restraint. There is a difference. They're still tugging on the belts.
-----------------
Jeff
Webmaster/GTTP
Watch my grass grow: http://www.sillynonsense.com/subdivision/

Sorry Jeff I have ridden on rides without the belt latched and yet the ride ops have tugged and cleared me to ride anyway. So, to say that they avoid liability because they are not latching the belts themselves is a false notion of security. Besides, due to past practice CP has set a precedent that nobody ever fell out when they helped latch the belts, so now if someone falls out due to them not helping to latch the belts they are opening themselves up to legal liability. Past precedence holds a lot of legal weight. A change in practice which leads to an accident in the future will open one up to more liability not less.

*** This post was edited by coasterkingoftheworld on 10/2/2001. ***