Why did CP put headrests on Blue Streak???
I see no reason why CP did this. They lost the classic coaster status because of it and you head bumps against the head rest a lot. Does anyone know why CP added headrests?
-------------
www.geocities.com/coasting_ohio for Real/Defunct/mini coasters and parks for RCT
-------------
www.geocities.com/coasting_ohio for Real/Defunct/mini coasters and parks for RCT
Cedar Point has always been one to err on the side of over-restraining. I'm sure there would be seatbelts on Corkscrew and Iron Dragon if they could figure out a way to do it. I can't believe the train doesn't have seat belts yet. I agree, the head rests result in some head-banging. I guess they should be applauded for their sense of safety, but most rides are like riding in straight jackets now. Though I am not a huge PKI fan, what they did to Outer Limits (removing the shoulder restraints for more comfortable restraints) I'm convinced would NEVER happen at the Point.
Idora Wildcat-who remembers this awesome wooden coaster that did not have a seatbelt or locking safety bar-and no one flew out (that is unless they were stupid enough to stand up).
Idora Wildcat-who remembers this awesome wooden coaster that did not have a seatbelt or locking safety bar-and no one flew out (that is unless they were stupid enough to stand up).
I have a theory, but no proof, so I won't go public.
The thing is, the ride ran for 31 years apparently without incident, suddenly in '96 they decided to go with headrests and new lap bars that actually hurt people. It doesn't make any sense unless someone just thought it sounded like a good idea.
It may be that there was some concern about whiplash when the train hit the brakes in the 1994 and 1995 seasons (remember that? First years with the fin brakes...train hits block brake, riders eat lap bar. But the solution to that problem isn't to add headrests; the solution is to fix the brakes. Which they finally did.
Today there is, in my opinion, no compelling reason for that ride to have headrests on it, and I can think of several reasons for it NOT to have that awful foam crap.
sigh. At least last year they fixed the lap bars so that they are more-or-less correct instead of off by 45 degrees...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
The thing is, the ride ran for 31 years apparently without incident, suddenly in '96 they decided to go with headrests and new lap bars that actually hurt people. It doesn't make any sense unless someone just thought it sounded like a good idea.
It may be that there was some concern about whiplash when the train hit the brakes in the 1994 and 1995 seasons (remember that? First years with the fin brakes...train hits block brake, riders eat lap bar. But the solution to that problem isn't to add headrests; the solution is to fix the brakes. Which they finally did.
Today there is, in my opinion, no compelling reason for that ride to have headrests on it, and I can think of several reasons for it NOT to have that awful foam crap.
sigh. At least last year they fixed the lap bars so that they are more-or-less correct instead of off by 45 degrees...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
sigh...If you ask me, headrests are more of a safety hazard. They give you nasty headaches! It's the same way with OTSR's. They, too, are safety hazards because of head-banging.
Headrests are a good idea if you are worried about high speed collision accidents (which I think is why they are used as a safety device on many rides).
I think the idea is, if your hit from behind by a vehicle going full speed, and your vehicle is standing still, you won't brake your neck. This has always puzzled me though. I remember reading somewhere that headrests only work if you have your head firmly against the headrest.
From my personnel experience, rides with High G-Force that have no head rests really do hurt. Strong G-Forces and sustained G-forces can cause the head to jerk or be pulled back. This can be quiet painful, especially if the G-forces are sustained for long periods (even if small). This confuses me yet again because I don't think negative G's cause any effect on the neck or head. My only guess is that the park decided to lower the amount of force that warranted a head rest.
I think the idea is, if your hit from behind by a vehicle going full speed, and your vehicle is standing still, you won't brake your neck. This has always puzzled me though. I remember reading somewhere that headrests only work if you have your head firmly against the headrest.
From my personnel experience, rides with High G-Force that have no head rests really do hurt. Strong G-Forces and sustained G-forces can cause the head to jerk or be pulled back. This can be quiet painful, especially if the G-forces are sustained for long periods (even if small). This confuses me yet again because I don't think negative G's cause any effect on the neck or head. My only guess is that the park decided to lower the amount of force that warranted a head rest.
Rideman said...
sigh. At least last year they fixed the lap bars so that they are more-or-less correct instead of off by 45 degrees...
But what about installing some grab bars??
-------------
Scott W. Short
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentral.com
sigh. At least last year they fixed the lap bars so that they are more-or-less correct instead of off by 45 degrees...
But what about installing some grab bars??
-------------
Scott W. Short
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentral.com
I think it might be due to liabilities. When you think of it, the bigger parks have more of a chance of lawsuits than smaller parks. Places like CP,PKI, & SFW create more publicity,so it tends to bring people out of the woodwork that just want to make a buck buy trying to tarnish the image of these great parks. I don't like these restraints as well, but realize they install them to cover themselves so they can say "this ride is up to date with today's safety standards"
I agree the headrests are a bit much. The bars and seat dividers I understand.
-jerry-
-------------
http://www.magnummania.com
jerry@magnummania.com
I agree the headrests are a bit much. The bars and seat dividers I understand.
-jerry-
-------------
http://www.magnummania.com
jerry@magnummania.com
...Except that...let me point something out here. This is the dirty little secret of modern PTC trains.
Let's start with the ratchet lap bars. Those bars have six positions. When installed in accordance with the factory drawings, the THIRD notch is about the same distance from the seat back as the traditional double bar, but quite a bit HIGHER. The fourth notch is closer to the seat back than the traditional bar, but about the same height. That leaves only positions 5 and 6 that are any closer than the traditional bar. This suggests to me that the ratchet bars may be more accommodating to larger riders, but also more likely to allow a rider to be thrown from the train! Heck, it happened on a European CCI coaster!
Of course, with the individual lap bars, it is also necessary to have the seat divider, which is a problem on Blue Streak because that seat is so narrow to begin with. I can sort-of see logic behind the high seat back (see my prior message) but in practice, once the block brake was fixed, I can see it causing more discomfort than it avoids. And the switch from sponge-rubber-and-vinyl seats to high-density water injected foam has led to a seat that can cause lower back injuries.
I swear, the Blue Streak seats are something that "seemed like a good idea at the time", a classic example of something born from conventional wisdom instead of engineering...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Let's start with the ratchet lap bars. Those bars have six positions. When installed in accordance with the factory drawings, the THIRD notch is about the same distance from the seat back as the traditional double bar, but quite a bit HIGHER. The fourth notch is closer to the seat back than the traditional bar, but about the same height. That leaves only positions 5 and 6 that are any closer than the traditional bar. This suggests to me that the ratchet bars may be more accommodating to larger riders, but also more likely to allow a rider to be thrown from the train! Heck, it happened on a European CCI coaster!
Of course, with the individual lap bars, it is also necessary to have the seat divider, which is a problem on Blue Streak because that seat is so narrow to begin with. I can sort-of see logic behind the high seat back (see my prior message) but in practice, once the block brake was fixed, I can see it causing more discomfort than it avoids. And the switch from sponge-rubber-and-vinyl seats to high-density water injected foam has led to a seat that can cause lower back injuries.
I swear, the Blue Streak seats are something that "seemed like a good idea at the time", a classic example of something born from conventional wisdom instead of engineering...
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
I cannot comment on the high seatbacks/headrests, I really do not understand how much they help with safety, but I can add some comments about the seat dividers/individual lapbars.
I have noticed that many of the "enthusiasts" who complain about the individual restraints are of "larger" proportions. Hence, they dont like them because the seat dividers cut down on room for their behinds. However, as a little kid I rode several coasters with my much bigger father and on those with a single two person bar, there was easily enough room for me to escape at will. I was too scared to try anything like that, but some of the kids these days are absolutely fearless and I could foresee accidents.
In today's America, no one is responsible for their actions (remember the McDonalds coffee incident?) so parks must practice CYA (cover your anus). Personally, the individual bars dont make a lick of difference in the ride (yes I rode it both ways). And I find the "ACE Coaster Classic" standards to be arbitrary and borderline absurd. But it's their award so if they want to be arbitrary, it is their prerogative. It wont affect my riding decisions.
lata,
jeremy
--Snowy's Ice Cream Factory Tours: Have an ICE ride!
I have noticed that many of the "enthusiasts" who complain about the individual restraints are of "larger" proportions. Hence, they dont like them because the seat dividers cut down on room for their behinds. However, as a little kid I rode several coasters with my much bigger father and on those with a single two person bar, there was easily enough room for me to escape at will. I was too scared to try anything like that, but some of the kids these days are absolutely fearless and I could foresee accidents.
In today's America, no one is responsible for their actions (remember the McDonalds coffee incident?) so parks must practice CYA (cover your anus). Personally, the individual bars dont make a lick of difference in the ride (yes I rode it both ways). And I find the "ACE Coaster Classic" standards to be arbitrary and borderline absurd. But it's their award so if they want to be arbitrary, it is their prerogative. It wont affect my riding decisions.
lata,
jeremy
--Snowy's Ice Cream Factory Tours: Have an ICE ride!
Higher seatbacks make it harder to be ejected up and back, because you can be held in longer. Also, you cannot arch over the seatback and 'flop' over it like a high jumper. (I've seen this occur accidentally before on another CCI).
BTW, would that European CCI be Megaphobia or Stampida? Those are the only two I can think of.
BTW, would that European CCI be Megaphobia or Stampida? Those are the only two I can think of.
Just a note... ACE said that they are going to change the coaster classic thing. They said they are going to look into the subject more at their next meeting. Also the GP thinks that Blue Streak is a ACE coaster classic because there is a sign still in front of Blue Streak that says it is.
-------------
Andrew
http://www.experiencethepoint.com
-------------
Andrew
http://www.experiencethepoint.com
Bill... The accident was on Stampida.
I used to think that the idea behind the high seat backs was to protect standing riders from being flung from the train. That was before that girl in Kansas City proved on Timber Wolf that the high seat back is no hinderance at all. :(
Still, I wouldn't object to them nearly so much if they didn't feel like they were made from poured concrete.....
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
I used to think that the idea behind the high seat backs was to protect standing riders from being flung from the train. That was before that girl in Kansas City proved on Timber Wolf that the high seat back is no hinderance at all. :(
Still, I wouldn't object to them nearly so much if they didn't feel like they were made from poured concrete.....
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
You must be logged in to post