Discrimination
If only it were as simple as lengthening a seatbelt to allow for larger riders. I see and hear this comment made all of the time for B&M rides. I also hear everyone talk about the averages and that Americans are getting bigger. Well although that might all be true, it does not change the fact that there are many riders that fall well below the average too. Although I have no concerns about CP operations, a ride manufacturer simply cannot trust that seatbelts will be closed properly or restraints will be pushed down to the point that they should be. This means that the restraints still have to be safe on their largest closed position for the smallest possible rider. If you merely increase the size of the seatbelt, the ride might now be unsafe for a smaller rider.
It sounds like CP changed policy on the height limitations for MF to allow for smaller riders. This also means a change should have been done on the belts which it was. It comes down to the averages...there were more potential smaller riders than larger.
-------------
-Brian
I really should be working...
It sounds like CP changed policy on the height limitations for MF to allow for smaller riders. This also means a change should have been done on the belts which it was. It comes down to the averages...there were more potential smaller riders than larger.
-------------
-Brian
I really should be working...
I found that Superman Ride of Steel at Darien Lake, which uses the same trains as MF and was the ride that had someone fly out of the train has what appeared to be longer belts than MF. I had to tighten the belt a good inch or two where on MF, I don't.
As far as manufactureres go, Morgan seems to have tried the hardest to accommodate the most guests. On thier coasters, the seatbelts are similar to that of a car, on a retractable roller. You just pull the belt out of the side of the seat to the length you need. Arrow looping, newer mine trains, and Gemini/Magnum and Vekoma traditional coaches are pretty accommodating. I know that Intamin provided a seat belt extention for their Volcano Coaster at PKD (though does not offer this on Superman at Six Flags). B&M is the absolute worst. If you are overweight, forget it. The problem with their rides is that in the event of an accident (collision or if the train were to get stuck in some funky sideways/upsidedown position), if the bar does not come far enough down, you have a better chance of falling out since your entire torso is not covered by the restraint, and there is very little lateral support. If the bar were too high, you could slide out if the car was halted on it's side.
I know that safety is always, and should be the number one concern, but have the manufacturers gone overboard? When you fly on a commercial jet travelling at hundreds of mph, all you have is a seat belt. In a car, all you have is a seat belt. Would it be possible to equip these rides with a seatbelt similar to a car, one that comes over the shoulder and hips, only with a lock that could only be electronically released by the ops at the pannel? I would think this would be infinitly more comfortable and much better for visiblity than those humongous B&M restraints.
Are there other solutions? Could a retractable seatbelt around the hips as opposed to attaching to the restraint a possibility? Could the supports on the sides of the seats on the B&M's be lengthened slightly? Is it worth it to the manufacturers to design these changes? There does come a point however where no train design will accommodate everybody.
Idora Wildcat *** This post was edited by Idora Wildcat on 7/24/2001. ***
As far as manufactureres go, Morgan seems to have tried the hardest to accommodate the most guests. On thier coasters, the seatbelts are similar to that of a car, on a retractable roller. You just pull the belt out of the side of the seat to the length you need. Arrow looping, newer mine trains, and Gemini/Magnum and Vekoma traditional coaches are pretty accommodating. I know that Intamin provided a seat belt extention for their Volcano Coaster at PKD (though does not offer this on Superman at Six Flags). B&M is the absolute worst. If you are overweight, forget it. The problem with their rides is that in the event of an accident (collision or if the train were to get stuck in some funky sideways/upsidedown position), if the bar does not come far enough down, you have a better chance of falling out since your entire torso is not covered by the restraint, and there is very little lateral support. If the bar were too high, you could slide out if the car was halted on it's side.
I know that safety is always, and should be the number one concern, but have the manufacturers gone overboard? When you fly on a commercial jet travelling at hundreds of mph, all you have is a seat belt. In a car, all you have is a seat belt. Would it be possible to equip these rides with a seatbelt similar to a car, one that comes over the shoulder and hips, only with a lock that could only be electronically released by the ops at the pannel? I would think this would be infinitly more comfortable and much better for visiblity than those humongous B&M restraints.
Are there other solutions? Could a retractable seatbelt around the hips as opposed to attaching to the restraint a possibility? Could the supports on the sides of the seats on the B&M's be lengthened slightly? Is it worth it to the manufacturers to design these changes? There does come a point however where no train design will accommodate everybody.
Idora Wildcat *** This post was edited by Idora Wildcat on 7/24/2001. ***
Maybe somehow all companies could make two-four seats for larger guests in a certain row. But doing this could end up reducing capacity too. It's already pretty hard anyways to make seats that can fit many different sizes anyways.
-------------
Kerry - Bright Man of the Elite Eight
-------------
Kerry - Bright Man of the Elite Eight
Well, you don't do barrel rolls and vertical loops in a car or a commercial jet, either. I like the idea of coasters being equipped with the roller/retractable seat belts, because that would make it much easier to have the correct length, and people could not leave the seat belt so ultra loose as to have no point. The reason that they attach to the harness, as far I have seen however, is as another safety measure: if for some reason the harness were to unlock, it can be held closed (to a degree) by the seatbelt. If the belt were not attached to it, it would simply fly open, voila.
-------------
PO!NT OF VIEW - A Different Look at Roller Coasters
http://www.crosswinds.net/~justmayntz/thrills/
-------------
PO!NT OF VIEW - A Different Look at Roller Coasters
http://www.crosswinds.net/~justmayntz/thrills/
Might parks prefer to use non-retracting seat belts because of maintenance concerns? More moving parts=more parts that can break, and with all the work the maintenance team at any park has to do, that might be something the park considers.
Ride of Steel said:
"Just for clarification on the Mine Ride issue, the lap bars go down to the same place regardless of if big people or little people or no people are in the ride. It only locks in ONE place. Period"
But the one place is different on most coaches. Lead coach of train 3 (I think. Oh, Dave?) comes to mind. Now that's a tight fit! That's a problem that gets pinned to those who rebuilt the trains in winter.
-------------
Scott W. Short, Rail Junkie
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentr
"Just for clarification on the Mine Ride issue, the lap bars go down to the same place regardless of if big people or little people or no people are in the ride. It only locks in ONE place. Period"
But the one place is different on most coaches. Lead coach of train 3 (I think. Oh, Dave?) comes to mind. Now that's a tight fit! That's a problem that gets pinned to those who rebuilt the trains in winter.
-------------
Scott W. Short, Rail Junkie
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentr
You must be logged in to post