Seat belt lenght

The PointGuru said:
Try this game. It will explain faster than I can on this forum. I will find information for you proving the world is round also if you would like.

I'll take that as you admitting you cannot substantiate anything you're saying. Because if you could, you would.

As for my comprehension ability, I understand physics just fine, thank you. As well as statics, dynamics, mechanical vibrations, fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, materials science, and bowling... because PE credits are required even for an engineering degree. :)

I think someone who is familiar with this site stated something to the affect of "that's science son". I would take an educated guess that Intamin and every other coaster design company out there have better simulator software than the free stuff you can find on the internet.

djDaemon said:

I'll take that as you admitting you cannot substantiate anything you're saying...

Now, now. It's not nice to try and say things I didn't say. You may be smart but your comprehension ability still is in doubt. Please explain to me then why TTD has roll backs once in a blue moon. I say the designers did not plan for them to happen in their concept of the ride. However, they also were able to understand, because of the laws of physics and various factors they cannot always control, they knew that a roll back was a possibility. That is way they built design features into the ride to protect passengers if a roll back happened. Likewise, designers could have designed TTD so the train was still going 100 MPH when it reached the top of the hill (launched the trains faster or shortened the hill). In that case you would get some pretty good air time if not for the restraints; but, if you were riding with the restraint you still might get more air time than you wanted because your legs would probably snap off your body (OK, don't have all the scientific data that would happen every time but it is a reasonable guess).

The airtime hills on Magnum are basically just speed bumps. If you are driving your car fast enough and you hit a speed bump will get airtime and probably hurt. Now, go slower over the speed bump. You still get a brief second of zero or reduced G forces but no one gets injured. Coaster designers know what speed trains need to be traveling and what angles the parabolic curves need to be to be safe yet still fun. Just because one person hits a lap bar harder than another person does not mean coaster designers intend for rides to eject passengers.

And again, none of that nonsense does anything to substantiate your claim that "most" coasters do not need any restraint system.

To be clear, all you're providing is your totally-unsubstantiated opinion as to why you think "most" coasters do not need any restraint system. Opinions do not prove anything, no matter who they come from.

So until you're able to prove your thesis, all you're really doing is spouting opinion that flies in the face of logic.

I think there is one thing we're forgetting. Humans, in general, are idiotic. Especially when it comes to being at an amusement park. When I was working maXair in 2010, you don't know how many guests we had to throw off the ride because after explicit instructions to secure their camera or phone for their own safety and the safety of others they decided it was a good idea to start taking video.

My point here is, how many times have we heard instances of people getting thrown from a ride because they unbuckled their seat belt and managed to get out of the harness?

What about those rides where the harness fails or the ride is stuck upside down (which has happened before)? A seat belt and harness generally comes in hand at that point.

You can't just say, "that rarely happens" and move on from it. If it happens even once, it completely warrants all measures of safety for the guests riding the ride, those that aren't, and employees as well.

I'd rather manufacturer's and parks be overly cautious than grossly negligent.

To be clear. All I have said 100% accurate and scientically proven. None of it is my opinion. If you do not agree with the laws of physics and the basic principals of coaster design that is your option. If you choose to believe coasters are designed as death traps and their architecs are nothing more than serial killers, OK. If it makes riding coasters more fun for you, by all means keep fooling yourself into believing that only because your superior coaster riding ability you narrowly avoided death yet again as you exit the train.

Coaster designers understand that there are any number of factors they cannot control that is why there are multiple safety systems (that do not include seat belts) built into the design of a ride. Why is it so hard for some people to grasp the concept that just because most coasters are designed so they don't ordinarliy need any restraint system at all, it's still a good idea to make restraints part of the design. Coaster designers also implement safety features into a ride so riders cannot tamper with them. That is what makes it part of the designed system. Seat belts can be tampered with by guest during the ride, so that is not even a safety system considered by designers. That is why seat belts are cosmetic. At best they give riders a warm fuzzy feeling that they are a little bit more safe and they control their own safety.

The PointGuru said:
To be clear. All I have said 100% accurate and scientically proven.

Well then it should be easy to show your proof. So... where is it?

If you do not agree with the laws of physics and the basic principals of coaster design that is your option. If you choose to believe coasters are designed as death traps and their architecs are nothing more than serial killers...

So, disagreeing with you is the equivalent of all that? Wow. That might be the strawiest straw man I've ever encountered.

Why is it so hard for some people to grasp the concept that just because most coasters are designed so they don't ordinarliy need any restraint system at all, it's still a good idea to make restraints part of the design.

I understand that concept perfectly well. All I'm looking for is some sort of proof that "most" coasters don't need restraints.

So, do you have any evidence to support your claim?

Your asking for proof of a theoretical concept. In theory coaster designers could design a coaster that is 10,000 feet tall and breaks the sound barrier. That can be proven. There have already been examples given of at least one coaster that did not have restraints. Although not coasters Mill Race and White Water Landing had no restraints yet STR now does. You just choose to ignore facts and try to change what has been stated to suit your position. I think Wikipedia says something about that in the definition of "straw man".

If they ignore silly things like physics, yes they could build a coaster that size.

Citing a handful of rides which do not have restraints as proof that "most" coasters do not need restraints doesn't validate your argument.

The PointGuru said:
Your asking for proof of a theoretical concept.

Wait, so now the thing you've been repeating as fact for several pages is now theoretical? In that case, you could have saved everyone a lot of time had you simply said: theoretically, most coasters could be designed so as to not require restraints. Of course, that's not what you've been saying.

There have already been examples given of at least one coaster that did not have restraints.

"One" is categorically not the same as "most".

You just choose to ignore facts and try to change what has been stated to suit your position.

Incorrect. Your statement was:

The PointGuru said:
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.

All I've been asking is for you to demonstrate that this is factually true. With evidence. Can you do so?

Yes, I can; but, I need you pick any coaster you choose and convince that parks management to place a "crash test dummy" or whatever object they use to test the coaster with in the seat and take all the restraints off the train. According to the laws of physics, MOST of the time the "crash test dummy" will return to the station unharmed unless it is one of the few coasters that are designed to keep the passengers in the train by utilizing the restraints.

Other than that you have to trust common sense and the laws of physics.

Don't even need to do that.

Just take a tennis ball (inanimate object) with you and place it on the seat next to you before you crest the lift hill on Magnum.

When you get off, apologize to the person behind you for hitting them in the face with a tennis ball.

The PointGuru said:
...I need you pick any coaster you choose and convince that parks management...

In other words, "no", you cannot prove that.

And that's all I'm trying to point out here. Having a theory is one thing; passing unproven theory off as fact is something completely different (commonly referred to as "talking out of one's backside").

JuggaLotus said:
So, a "simulator" for teaching kinetic and potential energy explains gravity and weightlessness how?

Is this even a real comment or do you guys really not know how a simulation works? If the train does not have enough momentem to finish the circuit the ride design will fail. If the train has too much momentum then it will transfer to much energy to the riders causing them to be injured and the ride design will fail. You have to know that coaster design companies have better software that take G forces into account. The goal for coaster designers is to create a lay out for a new ride that will pass the laws of physics. After that, designers worry about what types of restraints would work best on a ride. Therefore, that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that most coasters are designed so they in theory can be riden without restraints. Or, do you think that companies just invest tens of millions of dollars on new coasters and hope for the best?

The PointGuru said:
Therefore, that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that most coasters are designed so they in theory can be riden without restraints.

That most certainly is not proof of anything. Proof requires evidence. You have none.

JuggaLotus said:
Don't even need to do that.

Just take a tennis ball (inanimate object) with you and place it on the seat next to you before you crest the lift hill on Magnum.

When you get off, apologize to the person behind you for hitting them in the face with a tennis ball.

Actually, that could work (it would be about the same thing as the Demon Drop experiment I referenced earlier). You would have to make sure the ball is sitting on your lap and shielded from the wind because coaster designers do not design coasters for tennis balls which are a miniscule fraction of the body mass of even the smallest rider, but, the same laws of physics apply. Now of course, about 10 thousand other factors could influence the ball causing you to drop it and hit the person behind you and I'm sure you would have a good chance of being thrown out of the park or arrested. But, thank you for confirming my point.

Can not! Can too! Can not! Can too!

Can't we please lock this thread? You guys sound like two little boys arguing in the back seat on the way to Cedar Point. Don't make me stop this car!

I'm enjoying this! At least it is providing me with entertainment to pass time for the rest of the off-season. ;)

djDaemon said:

That most certainly is not proof of anything. Proof requires evidence. You have none.

OK, You are technically correct. The laws of physics are in actuality are nothing more than working theories. All coasters are based on these reliable, but, unproven theories. If billions of passengers safely riding coasters for decades is not enough proof, then I guess there never will be.

The PointGuru said:
If billions of passengers safely riding coasters for decades is not enough proof, then I guess there never will be.

Do those coasters have restraints? :)