Seat belt lenght

The PointGuru said:

Maybe you missed your high school physics day field trip. Yes, that is exactly what happens. Objects in motion etc...

Exactly, an object in motion will continue on the path it's on unless something induces a force against it. In this case, as the train falls away on an airtime hill, the lapbar/seatbelt pulls the rider down with the train. Otherwise the rider would continue on a ballistic trajectory, and Six Flags has proven what happens in that case.

Apparently the manner in which we fund schools has impacted how physics is studies in high schools across the country.

:)

Just for reference, I went to public school and didn't take any physics classes ;)

Thrillerz said:
So back to my original question.....does anyone know the approximate length of the seat belts on TTD and MF? Going with the shorter end since it sounds like there are varying lenghts.

Would anyone happen to know the answer to this? The past few years, I've had to squeeze and get help from a ride attendant, but I've been able to ride both of them. Those trips were in June and July, though.

I have lost weight this year thanks to diet and exercise, but I'm a little worried about if I'll be struggling to ride coasters in May.

The PointGuru said:
It is useless trying to explain the laws of physics to brick walls. Factually, most (and I emphasize MOST) coasters are designed so even an inanimate object could ride and not fall out or be thrown from the ride even without any restraints at all.

Is that so? Well, professor, by all means, explain, preferably with the use of free body diagrams, how physics work in your world. Don't forget to show your work if you want full credit. :)

The fact is that most (and I emphasize MOST) accidents at parks have to to with rider or operator error and mechanical failures.

So, what you're saying is, most accidents at parks would have been prevented had the restraint system been used properly and/or not failed. Even though most of those restraint systems aren't needed in the first place.

It does limit the fun for a segment of the population that could have rode...

The point you keep ignoring is that there is a limit to how large a spectrum of body size and/or configuration can be safely secured by a restraint system (not counting your home planet, where physics has some interesting properties). No matter how much effort ride manufacturers exert during design, and how much ride purchasers are willing to spend on that effort, some people will be unable to safely ride.

That said, your argument about the inconsistent belt lengths on rides isn't without merit. The problem is that you've now extended that argument to suggest that restraints aren't needed at all.

The problem is people keep trying to change and ignore what I have said. All I am saying is the park could simply install longer seat belts to accomadate more people if they wanted to. They just make the bad customer relations decision not to. I never said that no restraints are needed. I said seat belts are purely cosmetic at most of the rides in the park. Even when I emphasize the word MOST, people still seem to think I said ALL. You are correct, if someone has no legs, a lap bar may not be effective, of course, neither would a seat belt. Yes, most accidents in parks could have been prevented if the restraint systems designed by the manufacturer was used properly. What you ignore is that seat belts are cosmetic and pay no role in the design of the coaster.

JuggaLotus said:

The PointGuru said:

Maybe you missed your high school physics day field trip. Yes, that is exactly what happens. Objects in motion etc...

Otherwise the rider would continue on a ballistic trajectory...

Unless acted upon by another force called gravity. Come on man! People are not inanimate objects. We exert other forces when we ride. Holding onto a handle bar exerts force, clenching your butt cheeks togather exerts force, wind and a million other factors affect the ride. Coaster designers cannot take all of these factors into account which is why there are retraints. Making sure the cosmetic seat belts are the same length or long enough is not a coaster designers concern.

My question to the whole thing is why does Cedar Point have their seat belts shorter then everyone else in the country? I've ridden 4 other impulse coasters in the last two years; V2 at Great America, Possesed at Dorney, Vertical Velocity at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom and Steel Venom at Valleyfair and I fit fine with quite a bit of slack. But I haven't fit in Wicked Twister for the same two years. Was I unsafe on those other rides?

I would have to think Cedar Point has their own agenda, not Intamin.

The PointGuru said:
The problem is people keep trying to change and ignore what I have said. All I am saying is the park could simply install longer seat belts to accomadate more people if they wanted to.

Well, unless the ride manufacturer says they can't.

The PointGuru said:
The problem is people keep trying to change and ignore what I have said.

Right, because it couldn't possibly be that most just think you're wrong. It must be our failure to comprehend the logic you're layin' down.

Like your modified laws of physics, for example. I don't know why anyone would question you on that. ;)

Gplez90 said:
Personally, i dont feel bad for people who cant fit in the seats. In many ways its their own fault. Eat the right food, workout on a regular and you should have no problems.

It isn't always a weight issue, however.

Tallness plays a factor, as well as your overall body type.

I know a guy who is 6'4", and basically a stick figure with no fat on him. He BARELY is able to fit on TTD, due to how tall he is.

As for me, I am 6', and around 260 lbs. No, not the most fit, but not a super obese fatty either. I am able to fit on everything consistently except TTD, where I've done the walk of shame a couple times (Fortunately I was able to ride it twice last year as well). However, I'm about 95% certain that if I were the same weight, yet 2 inches shorter, TTD would be an easier fit, due to my legs not going up so high making the belt such a tight fit. Yet, in that case, I would be "Fatter", with a higher BMI. I bet there are people in the 5'3"-5'5" with a BMI of at least 5 over mine, who fit fine. "FATTER" than me, but who don't have these issues.

Not trying to bemoan my personal situation. (I am doing my best to slim down and am cautiously optimistic for this year). But to assume that people who can't fit is always because they are fat and lazy is extremely ignorant. I have talked to people who have been to amusement parks all over the country, and they state they always fit on everything everywhere except CP.

What I really want to know is, did they replace the seatbelts on MF and TTD from last year. If no, I should be in good shape. If yes, I might be screwed for a while, at least until they get stretched out, especially on TTD.

The laws of physics cannot be modified. Good luck disagreeing with them. I guess the manufacturer has specified that only Cedar Point must have seat belts that are different lengths on the same rides and must be shorter than every other park in the country. The manufacturers of the Scrambler and other spinning rides also must have specified that Cedar Point needs seat belts but other places don't. The manufacturer of the Cadillac, Antique, and Turnpike cars must have found some mechanical flaw (after decades of operation) that was causing countless people to be hurled from their cars in a ballistic fashion. Yes, now I see how none of this is bad customer relations by management.

The PointGuru said:
I see how none of this is bad customer relations by management.

I'm not saying that ALL rides that have seat belts require them, some are just to cover their asses. I am sure that it does reduce the insurance cost for the park considerably, so would you be happy if they took all the seat belts out and jacked the price of admission up $20? No? Ok, then live with the seat belts. And as for the belts on MF, TTD, and WT, to the require seat belts, probably but should they all be the same length, yes.

Chaindog said:
I would have to think Cedar Point has their own agenda, not Intamin.

Cedar Point is required by Ohio Law to abide by manufacturer requests regarding restraints. So if looking for someone to blame, I would blame intamin and the state of Ohio before blaming CP.

And I agree that a huge problem is the inconsistency of the belts. You can go from not fitting to pulling 4" of slack and everything in between with just switching seats a few times.

davidw said:

The PointGuru said:
I see how none of this is bad customer relations by management.

...so would you be happy if they took all the seat belts out and jacked the price of admission up $20?

I would prefer that if they are going to charge everyone the same price then they should at least make the seat belts the same length or long enough to accomadate everyone. Especially, if the ride doesn't require it and the only reason the person has to do the walk of shame is because the belt is too short. Even worse, is that if they had somehow been lucky enough to find a seat with a little longer belt they would have been able to ride.

I'm not against the park covering their butt or even against seat belts on rides. This subject doesn't even really affect me. As I stated in a previous post, I fit on everything except WT. What does bother me is the park telling only a certain segment of the population they can't enjoy the park the same way everyone else does because they don't feel like dealing with the problem. It also bothers me how some people on this forum try to defend the parks mismanagement by trying to imply it is somehow the guests' fault or not the parks problem.

So two years ago when my wife was pregnant and couldn't ride anything except the CP&LE RR, Paddlewheel, and Space Spiral, we should have paid less for admission? Give me a break! The park is open and upfront about their policies. We knew before we went what the deal was. Point is if you don't like the policy, don't patronize the park. Cedar Point is one of if not the most popular amusement parks on the planet. It doesn't sound to me like they are having too much of an issue with customer relations.

I never said that no restraints are needed. I said seat belts are purely cosmetic at most of the rides in the park.

I'm sorry, but you said this:

Ok, I give up. It is useless trying to explain the laws of physics to brick walls. Factually, most (and I emphasize MOST) coasters are designed so even an inanimate object could ride and not fall out or be thrown from the ride even without any restraints at all.

You stated that most coasters are designed so that no restraint is necessary. At all.

That's when I jumped on board. Did you mis-speak here? I certainly am not taking anything out of context.

You started off by saying the seat belts are merely cosmetic, but then shifted into stating that intimate objects could sit in a coaster seat and return to the station perfectly fine without any restraint system whatsoever.

It would interesting to hear from someone who worked on MF, specifically, to chime in on varying seat belt lengths. I wonder how much is fact, and how much is biased conjecture. No, I'm not calling anyone a liar, I'm just curious what the truth is. I've never thought "gosh this seat belt seems shorter and/or longer" on MF...but then again I have zero issue with fitting.

Bret said:
So two years ago when my wife was pregnant and couldn't ride anything except the CP&LE RR, Paddlewheel, and Space Spiral, we should have paid less for admission? Give me a break!

Why not discount the ticket prices for the pregnant women and people of "exceptional size" if they can't ride. According to some of the thoughtless comments made on this post CP should make their money back from the discounted ticket prices from excess concession purchases right?!? Give ME a break...

My thoughts exactly. It would be nice if the park had some type of non-rider discount. They offer junior and senior discounts. The park gives guidelines of what a person of exceptional size is, but there is no real way of knowing until you try getting on the ride. It is one thing if the person actually does not fit on a ride and quite another when the person fits on the ride but gets thrown off because the park doesn't want to be bothered with making sure the seat belts are long enough.

Even the new CEO has acknowledged the park needs to do a better job with customer service. Maybe he will, but if people keep trying to pretend the problem doesn't exist or its not the parks problem it won't get fixed. No one on this site will argue that Cedar Point is a fabulous park. However, no one could ever confuse Cedar Points customer service standards with WDW.

Or just ignore the contradiction altogether and it goes away.

They already offer a non-rider discount. It's activated by not purchasing a ticket.

Make a new policy, make more paperwork, rules, logistics, guidelines, and policy abusers.

Who monitors the "non-riders"? If a "non-rider" gets on a ride, are they kicked out of the park? Who watches these people? Are they electronically monitored?