Witches Wheel

My sister wanted to ride it but she couldn't.

Could some one tell me why you have to be so tall (54 in.) to ride? *** Edited 6/28/2006 7:04:26 PM UTC by TOPGUN1993*** *** Edited 6/28/2006 7:05:16 PM UTC by TOPGUN1993***

Because the ride's manufacturer says you have to be 54 inches to ride it.

Never Mind

What were you hoping to hear? Apologies about how she should have been allowed to ride, and that you should go complain to anyone with an ear about how you and your sister were wronged for her to not be able to ride?

The ride's specifications state that a rider must be 54" tall to ride. This is their safety specification and therefore by Ohio State law, a rider must be 54" tall to ride the witches wheel.

If he was looking to hate on Cedar Point, he's in the wrong thread. ;)

It's pretty simple, as Jugga pointed out.

Safety 1st. The height requirements aren't something to blow off.

I'm not trying to blow it off, I just wonder why is the requirement so big.

Because there is no way a small child could handle the g's on that sucker.

There are many factors that determine a height limit for any ride. On Witches' Wheel they might include the way the cabin is, the fact it has no in-cabin harness, the operation of the ride among countless other factors.

Or they chose a height that would guarantee that you are mature (physically) enough to handle the forces generated by the ride.

Actually I beleive Huss has set a height requirement for their enterprise rides to 48 inches. I beleive CP changed (or averaged since CP's requirement used to be 48 - 60 in 2002) their Enterprise to straight 54 inches after a few? or just one incident where the Enterprise Ride transmissions would abruptly stop and passengers would be thrown forward due to the sudden loss of force. The smaller younger passengers sustained more injuries than the older bigger passengers because they were unable to brace the cabin rails strong enough to support and control their throw or someting odd like that.

Huss apparently changed their website, they used to list all the requirements with the rides on their site a few years back, so I can't back up the Manufacturer height reuirement.

However I beleive it was the Kings Island Enterprise that had the trans mission malfunction. CP always reacts to incidents across the world, if something happens they will make appropriate corrections to help prevent the same problems. CP checks the transmission more regularly and raised the height requirement for safety precautions.

Another CF change to the enterprises is that the release latch is on the top of the cabins instead of the side above the door. Hence part of the reason why they removed the Enterprise at Geauga Lake.

Personally it annoys me when people question height requirements. It's just like people who drive 70 in a 55 because the speed is "just a suggestion, not a safety precaution." If something is written and posted, their is a very good reason why that is posted, and should not be argued. Just my two cents about arguing height requirements. John stole my Ohio Rider Responsibility law quote already.

RideMan if you know anything about what I'm talking about here let me know, otherwise just tell me I have no idea what I'm saying ;) Somehow I feel a bit stupid here. However, I remember reading about the incidents a few years back.

Ok that is what I was looking for Thank You.

There was hardly anything left of the enterprise at GL when CF bought it. It was in extreme disrepair. In all the time that SF owned it, I don't think I ever saw it actually assembled of the 2 or 3 trips I made each year.

MonsterMan said:
Another CF change to the enterprises is that the release latch is on the top of the cabins instead of the side above the door. Hence part of the reason why they removed the Enterprise at Geauga Lake.

It's too bad it's still INCREDIBLY easy to open your own gondola.

I'm sure it would be a little harder to do during the ride than if the latch were still on the side. I agree that with the cabins, smaller children probably wouldn't be able to stay seated firmly without sliding back and forth constantly.

Do you still have to be 60" to ride alone? When I worked there in 2001 and 2002 I got measured a few times. :( Good thing I had a tall boyfriend to ride with me.

^No they changed it to 54" in 2005 or 2004.

For years Witches' Wheel always looked like it would make me sick. Turns out I just had to try it and I was surprised. It is now one of my favorite flats.

For all you people who stick to the coasters and large rides, you're really missing out on the smaller rides. CP has so much more to offer than coasters.

The cabins are so easy to open because you don't even need to reach for the latch. You just push up on the little locking mechanism, reach back and undo the hook on the chain/strap and out you go. Your hand doesn't need to leave the cabin except to reach for the hook.

Should we really be promoting how to bypass a ride's safety system that's been adjusted or been made a certain way for a reason?

Do I really have to say "don't do this, it's bad. You might die, kill somebody, or land on a little kid. Think of the children!"?

It's also possible to hit the release pedal on Magnum's front car if you sit in 1-3 on the right. Should I "promote" that, too?

Oh! And don't forget about releasing Matterhorn's restraints!

*** Edited 6/29/2006 2:03:33 AM UTC by Michael Darling***