New Iron Dragon Height Requirement

Tony, are you aware the ride vehicle design on Iron Dragon is different than that of The Bat? I don't remember the specifics, but my understanding is the design evolved between 1987 and 1993, and the coaster now known as The Bat received a new train design.

If you say you want to be consistent with height requirements for similar rides, like Iron Dragon, Vortex, and The Bat (the three Arrow suspended coasters I am aware of at Cedar Fair parks), Surf Dog and Pipe Scream need to have the same height requirement.

-Sam

OnPointTony said:

cedardorney said:
I find the consistency between parks rationale to be interesting. I was hoping to take my boy on the Surf Dog at Kings Island after I noticed 42" requirement reported for Pipe Scream. No, the high limit is 44"

https://www.cedarpoint.com/rides/Roller-Coasters/Pipe-Scream

https://www.visitkingsisland.com/rides/Worlds-Best-Kids-Area/Surf-Dog

So, while consistency is a nice goal, it appears to still be a work in progress.

The reason those aren't consistent is because KI's ride vehicle is a different design.

Thanks Tony for the clarification. You do a great job keeping everyone updated!

Agreed, Tony. It's much appreciated.

Let's not drag Tony into a debate. He does us a favor by chiming in on stuff, and I like to think this is a place for him to do so freely without having to worry about getting into an argument.

And, I've been on both The Bat and Iron Dragon and I don't find much difference in the ride vehicle. I think what evolved was the mechanical design of the running gear, not so much the passenger seating.

I was thinking the same thing, Pete. If there is a difference, it's always gone over my head, and I;ve ridden both numerous times. Big Bad Wolf at BGW was exactly the same as well.

It's just bad timing for us, with our daughter just now hitting 46".

Life goes on. Fun will be had.

At least Banshee got a 52" height requirement instead of 54" like Raptor...

I wonder if this has anything to do with the passage of ASTM F 2291-14:6.4.2, which establishes restraint requirements for rides that can accommodate children under 48" tall and codifies the whole idea of a "supervising companion". Are there *any* older adult rides at Cecar Point with minimum height requirements under 48" now?

--Dave Althoff, Jr.
(Who was shorter than 48" for his first rides on both Mine Ride and Cedar Downs...)

I am a former resident of Ohio who now lives in Central Florida. As a teacher, we travel each summer to Ohio and visit Cedar Point. While I know the decision will likely not be changed here are my thoughts:

- My 5 year old daughter just turned 46'' and we were planning a trip this summer when we are in Ohio knowing this was the year she was to tackle bigger coasters like Iron Dragon (and Disaster Transport- though it is gone). We are now canceling the trip because she will be unable to ride Iron Dragon--- we will hit the park when she's 48".......

- We are season pass holders to Disney World.... since she was 44'' my daughter was able to ride things like Tower of Terror, Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, Thunder Mountain, etc.

These things may seem like just 2" to some people--- but it really excludes a major part of the family. Since she was 3 and 4 years old she was able to ride major signature attractions at Disney---- this is a perfect example of Disney's success. Moving most requirements to 48" pretty much means you have to be around 8 years old before a trip is even worth it.

Sure--- there's the new Pipe Scream..... but tell that to a girl who is used to riding things like Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, Terror of Terror, etc.

This is really disappointing--- especially after 26 + years of operating at a different requirement. If anything--- the Bat should have been lowered to 46".

Tilt-a-whirl, I hate to be THAT guy, but I strongly believe Iron Dragon would be a snooze fest to a child who is used to riding Space Mountain, Thunder Mountain, and Tower or Terror. After riding Surf Dog at Kings Island, I also believe Pipe Scream will be more intense than Iron Dragon.

I don't know about that. Sure, ID is pretty tame compared to a lot of coasters, but it's not what I'd call a snooze fest.

I mean that's coming from one opinion to another. Especially after someone who is telling me her child has ridden a list of thrilling rides at other parks, and underestimating Pipe Scream's thrill without even riding it yet.

While I understand the change, I am definitely disappointed by it. If it ain't broke, don't fix it...especially after 25 years of safe operation.

I believe the tubs are definitely different on Iron Dragon versus The Bat (ID's are bigger I think). Back around 2007, Cedar Fair added seat belts to The Bat which made me fear that the same was soon going to happen to Iron Dragon. However, those seat belts were removed from The Bat prior to the 2013 season and never did make it to Iron Dragon.

Because the design is a tiny change, most of the GP won't know, hey theres more room in the ride, etc. However, they will see an Arrow Suspended Swinging and be like, hey I can get on ID, why not The Bat?

Besides, I understand people being frustrated, however, understand it from the parks standpoint. It gets rid of a well I rode this why can't I ride that complaint, and makes things across the chain similar. All of this was done for as said streamlining, and honestly it's a safety requirement. The chain cares alot about safety, as evident by the flagship park. As being serious in this endeavor they felt this was something that needed to be changed, and it's their right to do so now, or at anytime as needed. It's dissappointing for the young ones getting close to that requirement or right on, but there will always be next season, or the next visit for that matter. It sucks trust me I've been there personally as a kid like probably all of us, but you'll eventually get on at some point in life. Be happy the chain cares about safety and efficiency as much as they do, it's def. much more impressive to see than other chains, trust me there.

thedevariouseffect said:
...and honestly it's a safety requirement.

But that's the thing. I don't see how ID was less safe with the lower height requirement. This seems like a move that was completely motivated by the legal team.

I'm not knocking the park for doing what's legally prudent, but I don't buy that there's a legitimate safety issue that this solves.

I remember before Gatekeeper's height requirement was officially determined, my not-yet-54" son was waiting with bated breath. When it came out at 52", he was over the moon, because up to that point, every other winged coaster was 54". It's hard to explain/justify that when considering the Iron Dragon height comparison.

At the end of the day, I think it was a silly move, and if it was done because of lawyers, then it's a slimy move. No amount of design, testing or comparison competes with over two decades of safe operation precedence. Like said above, if anything, the Bat should have been lowered.

No matter the presidence of "it worked" things happen.

Millie had great excellent safe operations, then Darien Lake happened and changed the SOP. Things happen, the park wants to make sure everything is safe and consistent ride to ride, park to park, it's staying. I'm sure they'll catch flack and whatnot but it's their choice to go this route and it makes sense

thedevariouseffect said:
...it's their choice...

No one is questioning that.

...it makes sense

They're questioning this.

That's because it makes no sense. All this move is going to do is make a bunch of kids sad, confused, and angry, not to mention the parents.

I appreciate Tony chiming in, but there is zero advantage to any customer to any park. No customer travelling from Cedar Fair park to Cedar Fair park expects "consistency among suspended coasters" in terms of height requirements.

In fact, if anything, customers going to KI and riding the Bat and then going to CP and riding Iron Dragon would be downright confused as to why they have the same height requirement.

I would strongly encourage Cedar Point to rethink this before the season starts.

We represent a very small segment of who visits the park. A fraction of a fraction. Think of all the kids out there who are either a) planning on riding it, or 2) rode it last year and can't wait to ride it again...and their parents have no clue about this rule change. Which makes no sense. At least I can try to explain it to my 6-year old ahead of time.

I sure would not like to be the employee who sits outside the line or Iron Dragon this season.

Kevinj said:
In fact, if anything, customers going to KI and riding the Bat and then going to CP and riding Iron Dragon would be downright confused as to why they have the same height requirement.

Huh? If customers don't care about height requirement consistency between parks why would they be confused as to why two similar style coasters have the same height requirement?

I think what he's getting at is that the two coasters' intensity are more obviously different than their designs are similar.