Shorties not allowed in line for coasters

Most people seem to understand the concept of a time on their hand. The Parent Swap is not well understood because it is not well publicized. The first time someone uses it, it may be confusing, but the second time, I am sure people get the idea.

The parent swap is about as advertized as possiable without taking a full ad out on the radio or television. How often do you read the Map/Guide that they give you? It's in there, as well as on the web site. And I know that I attempt to suggest it to people, as well as other employees.

I think Chitown has a good point too, it's not like it's going to ruin your day to miss 3 out of the 15 coasters (and Power Tower) that CP offers. And in no way would I ever feel comfortable putting my child in a holding pen, let alone letting them sit by themself. The height of your children is a factor that you have to accept before entering the park, that you may not be able to ride all the rides. When your child is big enough, then they will be premitted. That's it. There's no discrimination, it's just a fact.

------------------
~Sabrina~
2001 Gemini
2002 Gemini/Corkscrew/Live E: Hooray for Hollywood

---

Pete said:As far as the SFGA policy, I consider that very risky. It's too easy to miss something in the hectic environment of the loading platform. Capacity isn't even the issue, it's keeping kids safe that is most important.

---

I disagree that it is any more risky than having a "platform" or "queue entrance" guard as they are apt to miss a shorty as well. Unless you can show me that either one of the SFGAs has a higher rate of accidents due to a "small" person riding a ride, then I'd submitt that your risk perception is a mere allegation, with no substantial evidence to support it.

In both cases, you have a person responsible for ensuring that only persons of proper height experience the ride. And in both cases, it is the final responsiblity of the platform operators to not dispatch the train with an "under height" rider. I'm not seeing the great deal of difference in the "risk assesment".

Neither technique is *wrong*, I just prefer one over the other.
lata, jeremy

Having an entrance host reduces the chances that a small child will even enter the line. By reducing this aspect, it allows the platform host to concentrate more on securing the lives of those about to ride, instead of constantly looking out for those who are not permitted to ride. Insuring eveyone's safety is the most important goal of an employee, and of Cedar Point. Unless Cedar Point decides to load every line like MF, filtering the crowd through one at a time, the concept of no entrance host would not work. To give an example from personal experience the Gemini Platform, with two platform entrances, 20-second setup intervals and six trains, it is one of the most hectic and uncontrollable platforms in existence. Yes, the platform hosts are well-trained in spottings of potential short children, but having a reliable entrance host who will not permit prohibited items or small children to enter the line allows the platform host to concentrate more on securing your life than your convenience.

Yes, there is a difficulty in bringing a child who may be too small to ride all the rides. It may even seem unfair. But the reason that Cedar Point has the rules that they do, and the reputation that they do, is because they are constantly concerned with everyone's safety. Safety is the number one concern, even if it over rules convenience. You may argue that the technique is wrong, Jeremy. But I would rather have someone at the entrance of the line to tell me that because of safety reasons my child cannot ride the ride, than to waste my time waiting in an hour-long line only to learn that we cannot ride. And in no way would I ever leave my child sitting on the platform alone while I, or another member of my family, rides. Having a child means that you have to accept the responsibilities and the consequences. Even if it means that you cannot ride all the rides at Cedar Point until everyone is big enough.

------------------
~Sabrina~
2001 Gemini
2002 Gemini/Corkscrew/Live E: Hooray for Hollywood

---

Gemini Witch said:
But I would rather have someone at the entrance of the line to tell me that because of safety reasons my child cannot ride the ride, than to waste my time waiting in an hour-long line only to learn that we cannot ride.

---

That right there is why as a guest, I've always admired Cedar Point for having the entrance position. People get extremely displeased if they wait an hour for a ride and then get told they can't ride. So I would argue that the entrance person in fact enhances convenience as well as safety.

The goal is that only people who meet the requirements for the ride get through the entrance. If by some chance, someone gets past the entrance or jumps through the bushes into the queues, then that is what the turnstyles person is for.

For many platform (train side) positions at Cedar Point, it is simply too fast paced and hectic to expect that a person checking heights right before the people get on the train is going to do an effective job. Lets face it - on Magnum you have about 20 seconds between the time one train leaves and the time people start boarding the next one. On Raptor or Gemini (with 3 trains on a side) it is less!

Another thing I really don't get is why people would feel comfortable leaving their kid on a ride platform. Not only are dozens of people going to be walking directly by them (just as on the midway), but there are also the dangers of heavy machinery being operated a few feet from them - an additional danger that would not be present on the midway. I don't get it. Personally, I wouldn't leave my child behind in either place. I don't get what you people are thinking!

I'm not going to make the capacity argument because in this case, that's not really what it's about (although I can't speak for Great America, but Great Adventure, Nitro aside, had plenty of capacity issues this year when I went). We're talking about safety here and that is the most important thing.

-Matt
2001 Magnum Crew
*** This post was edited by MDOmnis 10/21/2002 6:26:14 PM ***

First off, Sabrina, I *clearly* said that I do NOT think the technique is "wrong". Second, I agree that personal responsiblity is paramount. However, that has nothing to do with this discussion. Why not? I'm glad you asked.

In your situation, an entrance host isnt even needed. Why would you need a host to tell you that your child cannot ride? In every major park I've been to, the height requirements are CLEARLY marked at the entrance to the rides. Knowing that you would not want to leave your child unattended for even a minute, you would not enter the line even if there was no guard there. While I commend you for your decision, that is a moot point.

And addressing your first paragraph, what you have outlined point to capacity issues,not safety issuse. It seems to point to an assertion that platform employees cannot hit interval and keep an eye out for shorties simultaneously. THAT I disagree with. There is no evidence to support such a claim. Again, I point to parks that do exactly that. I am not aware of any increased "saftey issues" because of their implementation as opposed to CP. They are merely different. And I prefer the other.

What has come up many times in this thread is that CPs way is the "best" way to assure safety. It is almost to the point of saying that CP's way is the only way to assure safety. I challenge someone to show me that one method is "better" than the other.
lata, jeremy

As far as the question of why a host is needed to tell parents that the child is too short, it may be "CLEARLY" printed on a sign, but that doesn't mean that parents don't try to get their children in regardless of the rules. I have pulled everything from mulch to pre-made wooden blocks out of children's shoes, as well as seen little boys wearing girls' shoes for more height in the sole. The entrance host is needed in order to insure that everyone riding meets all of the standards.

I'm not saying that Platform hosts cannot look for short children and work the platform at the same time; they can, and they do. What I'm saying is that the entrance host can spend more time examining the people entering the line and making sure that the people meet the riding specifications than a platform host, allowing platform hosts to concentrate on smoother intervals and safety. It's not a matter of the capacity of the riders, it is always a matter of the safety of the riders. Cedar Point has no ride capacity issues when over a million people ride a each major ride per year (two and a half million a year on the Gemini). Cedar Point does not get the reputation they have by concentrating only on capacity.

There is no 100% perfect way that would permit single parents a way to ride all the rides. That's the problem with parenting, accepting the sacrifices that come with the job, isn't it? I always thought it was relishing the joys, personally. Cedar Point does an exceptional job in creating a family environment. Having to skip a few (and I stress few) rides until all the family members are big enough to ride is just a fact of life.

------------------
~Sabrina~
2001 Gemini
2002 Gemini/Corkscrew/Live E: Hooray for Hollywood

Are you asserting that because the height requirements are clearly lined out in front of each ride that it will be sufficient and no children under the height requirement would enter the line? In reality, even with an entrance host present there are still people that try to bring all kinds of things through besides small children, such as babies, strollers, wheelchairs, lawn chairs, and seeing eye dogs with the asumption that they can just carry them through the train. That is, in fact, more difficult. The other reason there is an entrance host (rather than placing the measuring responsibility on the platform hosts) is that they can take more time to measure accurately. They can determine weather the child's shoes are too thick, or weather they are stuffed, and there is the swing bar scale at the entrance as well which there is not on the paltform. This allows for more accurate measurement as well as allowing the platform hosts to focus more concentration on their duties.

------------------
2000 - Mean Streak/Magnum
2001 - Mean Streak ATL
2002 - Magnum TL

Come on Jeremy... you know every parent who has a kid that's 47-15/16" would say "close enough" and head into the line. You need a human to measure and make the call for them.

------------------
Jeff
Webmaster/GTTP
"There's nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, when it's all in your mind. You gotta let go." - Ghetto, Supreme Beings of Leisure

More like every parent who has a kid who's like ANYWHERE close to 48" would be like "oh he's okay"

Even moreso on rides like the Cedar Creek Mine Ride, which has the safety rules for reasons SOLELY consisting of the restraints. If the restraints were different, there wouldn't be a height requirement, as we all know CCMR is quite tame. If there wasn't someone checking heights there, people would be trying to take handheld INFANTS on (trust me, I've worked turnstiles and seen it all).

------------------
Natalie
Mine Ride '99
Thunder Canyon '00
Millennium Force '01

I always thought the Parent Swap was a fabulous idea.

I love taking my shorter kid(s) for lap after lap of rides with short lines while everybody else cools their heels in line, coughing in second-hand smoke from thick-headed trailer trash (like CBaby was Saturday).

Simple solution: Treat a friend to a day the park. I know I have.

-'Playa

(father of 57" CBaby and an officially 48" Midget - TR to come)

------------------
The CPlaya 100--6 days, 9 parks, 47 coasters, 2037 miles and a winner.....LoCoSuMo.

---

MDOmnis said:
For many platform (train side) positions at Cedar Point, it is simply too fast paced and hectic to expect that a person checking heights right before the people get on the train is going to do an effective job. Lets face it - on Magnum you have about 20 seconds between the time one train leaves and the time people start boarding the next one. On Raptor or Gemini (with 3 trains on a side) it is less!

I'm not going to make the capacity argument because in this case, that's not really what it's about (although I can't speak for Great America, but Great Adventure, Nitro aside, had plenty of capacity issues this year when I went). We're talking about safety here and that is the most important thing.

---

Whether you *wanted* to or not, you actually DID bring up the capacity issue. You are asserting that the reason an entrance guard is needed is because there is not enough time between trains to effectively, secure and dispatch the trains if the platform personnel are required to check heights as well. To me, that sounds like a "capacity" or "interval" problem not a safety concern.

What I say to you is that I am not under the impression that the two are mutally exclusive. Again, I point to to the other parks where I have seen it done with NO decreased capacity and NO increase in "mishaps". Do you all *still* wish to assert that CP's way is the only *right* way to do it? Then prove that the other methods *necessarily* increase safety violations. I submitt that you all cannot prove that. You can merely allege that.

jeremy

---

Jeff said:
Come on Jeremy... you know every parent who has a kid that's 47-15/16" would say "close enough" and head into the line. You need a human to measure and make the call for them.

---

I was *specifically* referring to Sabrina's personal situation. Please do not take my comments out of context. Of course there should be a final go/no go person employed by the park (goes to CYA). My arguement is that that person can just as readily be the platform operator as the entrance guard.

The funny thing is, that even with CPs procedure it is STILL the ultimate responsibility of the platform operators to ensure that only riders of sufficient height are allowed to ride.

lata, jeremy

CP does actually use this procedure on Blue Streak. Often there is nobody at entrance and the height is checked on the station platform.

While I would agree it can be done, often things don't go as smoothly as the other way. On my visit to Great Adventure, (the best SF park I have visited when it comes to capacity) Nitro was rolling in trains regularly. Their only downfall was on two occasions they did not catch a shortie, and this was after the restraints were locked. So then they had to unlock and measure which of course caused a double stack.

The only park I have has seen successfully implement this kind of system without capacity suffering is Holiday World. Not only do they looks for shortness but they store your loose articles :). If I recall they had and extra person on the load side who would check heights and take bags and then help check the train once those duties were done.

What works at other parks may not work best for CP though.

------------------
Wow, they're building a new ride!

*** This post was edited by Joe E. 10/22/2002 7:15:44 PM ***

Actually look at the wildcat where no entrance person is employed i saw last weekend four parents in a row with children too short to ride the ride. when that happened there the person dispatching had to cross the train and measure the child thereby holding up the next three to four cars from being dispatched. This leads to longer lines in the park therefore making everybody in the park wait longer. this finally brings me to the point that not only does cedar point have the highest safety standards but they also do pride themselves in efficient and quick wait times that would definately suffer as seen at places such as pki. as another point interval is a safety thing too. if a coaster does not hit interval it usually causes the train somewhere on the ride to stop in a set of breaks, usually harder than it would in the station causing many complaints concerning neck and back injuries, therefore interval and safety are both a concern in combination with one and other. an example of this occured at pki on vertigo where i was stopped in a set of block breaks so hard that i had to go to first aid due to a sore neck and basically had to sit the rest of the day out...that was miserable

---

2Hostyl said:
The funny thing is, that even with CPs procedure it is STILL the ultimate responsibility of the platform operators to ensure that only riders of sufficient height are allowed to ride

---

Don't you love it when people who have no clue try to talk about things like they do have a clue? While the platform operators ARE responsible to scan the crowd and measure a kid IF they see one that looks really small, it is not their ultimate responsibility to measure everybody that comes through. That is why there is an Entrance Host. Look in any Ride OP manual for position descriptions.
------------------
2000 - Mean Streak/Magnum
2001 - Mean Streak ATL
2002 - Magnum TL

Don't get technical about positions and don't talk down to him... you know damn well what he means. Maybe the better way to describe it would be that it's the park's responsibility, but seeing as how you're the front line, that makes it your responsibility. If the park were ever to get sued, the courts are not going to give a rat's ass about what your position in the rotation is supposed to be doing.

------------------
Jeff
Webmaster/GTTP
"There's nowhere to run, nowhere to hide, when it's all in your mind. You gotta let go." - Ghetto, Supreme Beings of Leisure

Is CP's approach the bestest? Nah.

Does it have its advantages--if you think about it long enough? Yep. Does it have its weaknesses? You bet.

But you see, many other parks approach the issue with more coasters that fit the smaller set. That's about four billion times better than CP's approach. Da Midget had to be officially measured to ride CP's Corkscrew but could board SFGAM's superior loopscrew two years ago.

That's a challenge CP has yet to meet--frankly, to even approach.

And that's hostyl with a 'y'.

-'Playa

(father of two formerly CP-dissed kids)

------------------
The CPlaya 100--6 days, 9 parks, 47 coasters, 2037 miles and a winner.....LoCoSuMo.

*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 10/23/2002 8:30:37 PM ***

He meant what he said, that it is the responsibility of the platform host to ultimately measure, when it's not really that simple. I'm tired of hearing criticizm of the ride ops from people who haven't worked there and who think they know your job better than you do.

------------------
2000 - Mean Streak/Magnum
2001 - Mean Streak ATL
2002 - Magnum TL
*** This post was edited by Mother Goose 10/24/2002 12:07:09 AM ***

Jeremy and Jeff, I apologies if I talked down to anyone. I have made a mistake in my choice of words. But I have not been the only one who is condencending. Every time Erin or I made a valid point, you negated it. I agree with Erin. How can you judge us when you've never walked in our shoes? Our viewpoint is different than yours, so it frustrates us even more when people don't take us serously.

------------------
~Sabrina~
2001 Gemini
2002 Gemini/Corkscrew/Live E: Hooray for Hollywood