height for mf
None of us know for certain yet, but my best guess (along with most everyone else's) would be 48 inches, which is the height requirement for Intamin's other hyper, Superman RoS.
*** This post was edited by Logan on 2/7/00. ***
*** This post was edited by Logan on 2/7/00. ***
Will it be taller then normal because there is no shoulder harness? Or is just a mandate from some paranoid lawyers (not that I want to see anyone get hurt, just wondering if there is a technical reason).
I don't know what the height will be, nor do I know the reason. I said it before... Cedar Point likes to err on the side of caution.
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
How many times do we have to go through this?
Intamin has set a precedent for having a rider height requirement of 1.2m on this type of ride. That would be about 48".
Cedar Point generally abides by the manufacturer's recommendation, but sometimes makes changes of its own, adjusting for local conditions. Cedar Point is ultimately responsible for designating the official requirement. When Raptor and Mantis were announced, all advertising materials for both coasters included a bold type disclaimer that riders had to be 54" tall. So far, none of the Millennium Force propaganda has had any such disclaimer. This, coupled with the elimination of the "tweener" admission price for 2000...and the fact that the adult admission price still kicks in at 48"...suggests that the park's planning up until now has been in terms of 48".
But there is one other thing to remember. Cedar Point is also notorious for making such critical decisions at the last minute. For example, until three days before the park opened, all of the literature indicated that adults would not be permitted to ride Woodstock Express, a restriction which was changed on or just before opening day.
So to recap...
o Intamin has probably designed the ride based on 1.2m riders.
o The ride is probably safe for 48" riders.
o The park has thus far made hints that the ride will be a red-stripe (48")
o The park HAS NOT announced the official restriction yet
o The park does not have to announce the official restriction until Opening Day
o Goliath at SFMM has a 48" requirement.
My guess is that the park wants their ride dynamics consultant to check the thing out first. Then, once he has made his recommendation, they will set the ride restrictions. In the mean time, we just have to wait and see.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Intamin has set a precedent for having a rider height requirement of 1.2m on this type of ride. That would be about 48".
Cedar Point generally abides by the manufacturer's recommendation, but sometimes makes changes of its own, adjusting for local conditions. Cedar Point is ultimately responsible for designating the official requirement. When Raptor and Mantis were announced, all advertising materials for both coasters included a bold type disclaimer that riders had to be 54" tall. So far, none of the Millennium Force propaganda has had any such disclaimer. This, coupled with the elimination of the "tweener" admission price for 2000...and the fact that the adult admission price still kicks in at 48"...suggests that the park's planning up until now has been in terms of 48".
But there is one other thing to remember. Cedar Point is also notorious for making such critical decisions at the last minute. For example, until three days before the park opened, all of the literature indicated that adults would not be permitted to ride Woodstock Express, a restriction which was changed on or just before opening day.
So to recap...
o Intamin has probably designed the ride based on 1.2m riders.
o The ride is probably safe for 48" riders.
o The park has thus far made hints that the ride will be a red-stripe (48")
o The park HAS NOT announced the official restriction yet
o The park does not have to announce the official restriction until Opening Day
o Goliath at SFMM has a 48" requirement.
My guess is that the park wants their ride dynamics consultant to check the thing out first. Then, once he has made his recommendation, they will set the ride restrictions. In the mean time, we just have to wait and see.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Everything you say is true, Dave, but I'm not making this stuff up. There is a very real consideration that the ride will have a taller requirement. I would tend to agree that it defies all logic, particularly as you outlined, but that doesn't change what I've been told by People Who Know(TM). :)
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
how tall do you think the height will be jeff because if it is 60" i will have to grow 2" before the summer comes or I wont be rideing the millennium force this year
*** This post was edited by MFreak on 2/8/00. ***
Well, if I knew exactly, I'd tell you. I seriously doubt it would be 60".
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
-------------
Jeff
Webmaster/Guide to The Point
im glad very glad because i havent grown an inch since november and i dont think im going to grow any more any time soon
hey jeff arent you the one that runs this site if you are it is the best site on the inernet from my opinion *** This post was edited by MFreak on 2/8/00. ***
hey jeff arent you the one that runs this site if you are it is the best site on the inernet from my opinion *** This post was edited by MFreak on 2/8/00. ***
You know, raising the height may not be such a bad idea. My ten year old daughter is hell bent on riding MF, and that scares me. The last thing I want to do is let her go on a coaster she may not be ready for. I'm afraid if she is too scared, it could turn her off on riding coasters all together.
I'm sure 48 in. would be safe, but I can't imagine a kid much smaller than her riding this.
-------------
Puff'n the Winston..Drink'n a 4-O..Toofast, and I'm gona let ya know.
~~Steven~~
I'm sure 48 in. would be safe, but I can't imagine a kid much smaller than her riding this.
-------------
Puff'n the Winston..Drink'n a 4-O..Toofast, and I'm gona let ya know.
~~Steven~~
good point, TooFast...i too thought of the same thing...just 'cause you're tall enough doesn't mean you can handle the ride...my 8 year old cousin is almost 48" tall and he in no way could handle MF.
-------------
"I think I scrambled my brain!!"
-------------
"I think I scrambled my brain!!"
Considering the height requirements for Mantis and Raptor are 52", I think MF should definitely be 52". I mean 92mph and a 300 foot drop- I would not want someone riding it that is not ready for it.
(let me try this again...it failed the first time)
Jeff, it's not that I doubt you (I know better than that!)...
I was merely indicating the best intelligence which has been made public so far, and I should have noted that to apply logic to anything that Cedar Point does is a dubious effort at best anyway.
The point is, though, that CP's behavior so far indicates that from the beginning they were planning around a probable 48" requirement, and from what we have seen so far, we can assume that...
a) CP has been thinking in terms of 48". They may choose to do something else, but this is what their initial plans called for. I think there is a good chance that when they started to see the thing in person, they started to have second thoughts, so I don't doubt that 52" or 54" are also being considered.
b) The limit has not been decided yet.
Regardless of what Intamin says, I can assure you that CP will not make a final decision regarding rider requirements for the new ride until their ride dynamics consultant has done his measurements and made his recommendations. If Intamin says 1.2m and he says 48", then it will be entirely up to the gut feeling of a committee of people at Cedar Point. In any case, they aren't going to set the requirements in stone (or ink) until they get the ride finished and at least begin doing dynamic testing.
I suspect that if it is higher than 48" we will see some changes in the admission pricing policy...either a change in the adult admission cutoff to 52", or a return of the Tweener ticket.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Jeff, it's not that I doubt you (I know better than that!)...
I was merely indicating the best intelligence which has been made public so far, and I should have noted that to apply logic to anything that Cedar Point does is a dubious effort at best anyway.
The point is, though, that CP's behavior so far indicates that from the beginning they were planning around a probable 48" requirement, and from what we have seen so far, we can assume that...
a) CP has been thinking in terms of 48". They may choose to do something else, but this is what their initial plans called for. I think there is a good chance that when they started to see the thing in person, they started to have second thoughts, so I don't doubt that 52" or 54" are also being considered.
b) The limit has not been decided yet.
Regardless of what Intamin says, I can assure you that CP will not make a final decision regarding rider requirements for the new ride until their ride dynamics consultant has done his measurements and made his recommendations. If Intamin says 1.2m and he says 48", then it will be entirely up to the gut feeling of a committee of people at Cedar Point. In any case, they aren't going to set the requirements in stone (or ink) until they get the ride finished and at least begin doing dynamic testing.
I suspect that if it is higher than 48" we will see some changes in the admission pricing policy...either a change in the adult admission cutoff to 52", or a return of the Tweener ticket.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Personally, I think they should set the height for the absolute minimum practical height. I don't think they should try an guess who's "ready" to handle Millenium Force by increasing the height restrictions. There are people who are almost 7 feet and still can't handle rides like the Corkscrew. I think it's the parent's job to decide if they want to take their child on MF, and not Cedar Point's. Suppose there is a 48" child who can handle MF. CP should not deny them a ride as long as their height permits safe operation of the ride. (Besides, it's a stupid roller coaster, they'll live. I think people should be more concerned about kids riding simulation rides like Disney's Alien Encounter at the Magic Kingdom Orlando. That could seriously terrify a kids, but that's another forum)
*** This post was edited by RockDown2G on 2/9/00. ***
I agree honey, (cough), I mean Toofast, Our daughter has ridden every coaster she can, including appolos chariot, but sometimes i think she does it to impress her daddy! She looks white as a ghost on the way up, but when the ride is done, she loves it. But I am really wondering if I should let her ride MF. I dont want to scare her off from riding others, I still havent let her ride power tower due to that fear. But being that she will be tall enough no matter what the height req. is, I know she will go nuts if we dont let her ride it. I say we try her on power tower first. It should be that MF has the highest height req. for the fact that the thing goes almost upside down with no shoulder harness, I get nervous of the thought of a 10 year old on it!
-------------
The more you ride it, the more you want it!
~~~Darla~~~
-------------
The more you ride it, the more you want it!
~~~Darla~~~
But consider this...
One of the reasons for the higher height requirements on some rides is *because* they have shoulder bars on them. A shoulder bar is designed to secure riders across the upper part of the chest, an area which is about the same size on most people regardless of size.....but an area whose position is *highly* dependent on the rider's height. One of the many advantages to a lap bar is that given that the rider is sitting on a seat, his lap will be in approximately the same location regardless of his size, and the big concern with adjustability is to make sure that the bar can clear the rider's knees. It's fairly easy to make the case that a lap bar is more readily adjustable to securely restrain a wider variety of riders than is any shoulder bar arrangement (except possibly the prototype system on the Arrowbatic car) available today.
For what it's worth, anyway...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
One of the reasons for the higher height requirements on some rides is *because* they have shoulder bars on them. A shoulder bar is designed to secure riders across the upper part of the chest, an area which is about the same size on most people regardless of size.....but an area whose position is *highly* dependent on the rider's height. One of the many advantages to a lap bar is that given that the rider is sitting on a seat, his lap will be in approximately the same location regardless of his size, and the big concern with adjustability is to make sure that the bar can clear the rider's knees. It's fairly easy to make the case that a lap bar is more readily adjustable to securely restrain a wider variety of riders than is any shoulder bar arrangement (except possibly the prototype system on the Arrowbatic car) available today.
For what it's worth, anyway...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Closed topic.