Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Busch Gardens Williamsburg (BGW BGE) Discussion Thread

P. 467: Media Town Hall Report

Recommended Posts

Being short and having to endure the "Are you sure you are going to be tall enough to ride?" taunts from my friends there is satisfaction when the really tall guys are too big to ride.

 

What would be the top five parks for 48" and under coaster riders? (Maybe this belongs in a new thread?) My youngest is stalled at 49". Cheetah Run, Super Duper Looper, and Lochness are probably her top three. She liked El Toro but wasn't up for a reride. As a family I think we like BGW the best. First Knoebels trip set for August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robb makes a great point about Hersheypark, it really is the best park if you have kids that are 42, 48, and 54 inches tall. We went for 3 days two years ago and there really was something for everyone in the family. My youngest went on her first looper (SDL) and her first big woodie (Comet). Her favorite though was Laff Trak, which is a really fun take on the family spinning coaster. Just the fact that Hershey has four non-kiddie coasters that she could ride at 42 inches sold us on taking a trip there. My son, who was just over 48 inches at the time, loved Lightning Racer and Sidewinder (those new Vekoma shoulder straps are much better than traditional OTSRs). Then my oldest rode her first B&M invert and her first Intamins (Storm Runner and Fahrenheit), but she stopped short of Skyrush. I was totally ok with that though, as I got 5-6 rides on Skyrush each morning during the early entry.

 

SFGrAm is actually a great park too for families with kids 42-48 inches tall. It has two 36 inch coasters (Little Dipper and Whizzer), two 42s (Demon and Dark Knight), and a bunch of 48s (Am Eagle, Goliath, Joker, Viper, plus Giant Drop). When you add in the new Justice League ride and one of the last remaining Condors, there's actually a lot for families with younger kids to ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now I'm going to add a ride op's perspective on the height requirement argument.

 

I have 2 years experience operating a ride with the greatest height requirement in the park. There are so many angry parent stories swapped around the breakroom about a child being just barely too short and crying while the parent yells at the ride op. The parent yelling at the ride ops because the kid was already on all other rides in the park and now can't get on this one. Or was on the ride earlier in the day/season.

 

That's the kind of thing I hate the most. Worse than the drunks. Worse than the tossed cookies I have to clean up. Worse than those who think that they're above the rules. It's the look on the kid's face as their tears stain the cement.

 

But my biggest question in this debate is: who's to blame the most? The park who ordered the ride and set the requirement or the engineers who designed it?

B&M Family Invert: approx 45"

Cedar Fair Vekoma Family Suspended: 44"

Legoland Florida Vekoma Family Suspended: 48"

Fun-Spot Orlando's Vekoma Family Suspended: 36" with adult/48" without

 

And since we're on the subject of GCI, If I remember correctly, when Legoland Florida switched out the PTC trains on Coastersaurus for GCI Mini-lenium flyers, the height requirement increased and some weren't all too happy about that.

 

While the trains look and ride GREAT, I have to be honest it was disappointing to hear that the height restriction was raised from 36" to 42". I really hope the park can work with Great Coasters to lower that a bit, at least to 40" to match The Dragon also at Legoland as well as other rides in the area. The 40" mark is kind of a key height restriction in Central Florida. How do you tell a kid "Sorry, Johnny, I know you were able to ride Tower of Terror, Test Track, Big Thunder Mountain, Dinosaur, Star Tours, Splash Mountain, Spider-Man, and Transformers... but you can't ride the junior woodie at Legoland." Gotta think something can be done (38" with an adult, 42" to ride alone maybe?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But my biggest question in this debate is: who's to blame the most? The park who ordered the ride and set the requirement or the engineers who designed it?

B&M Family Invert: approx 45"

Cedar Fair Vekoma Family Suspended: 44"

Legoland Florida Vekoma Family Suspended: 48"

Fun-Spot Orlando's Vekoma Family Suspended: 36" with adult/48" without

 

And since we're on the subject of GCI, If I remember correctly, when Legoland Florida switched out the PTC trains on Coastersaurus for GCI Mini-lenium flyers, the height requirement increased and some weren't all too happy about that.

 

While the trains look and ride GREAT, I have to be honest it was disappointing to hear that the height restriction was raised from 36" to 42". I really hope the park can work with Great Coasters to lower that a bit, at least to 40" to match The Dragon also at Legoland as well as other rides in the area. The 40" mark is kind of a key height restriction in Central Florida. How do you tell a kid "Sorry, Johnny, I know you were able to ride Tower of Terror, Test Track, Big Thunder Mountain, Dinosaur, Star Tours, Splash Mountain, Spider-Man, and Transformers... but you can't ride the junior woodie at Legoland." Gotta think something can be done (38" with an adult, 42" to ride alone maybe?)

All fair and valid points, but let's address your question: But my biggest question in this debate is: who's to blame the most? The park who ordered the ride and set the requirement or the engineers who designed it?

 

Personally, I think the blame lies 50/50. In the case of the GCI woodie, not even InvadR but a ride like White Lightning or the new woodie that went into Plopsa Panne last year, IMO there is just no reason why those coasters need to have as high of a height requirement as they do. I believe GCI should have engineered a way for those rides to be 42" and I refuse to believe there isn't a solution. Even if that solution also was 48" to ride alone or 42" to ride with an adult.

 

I also feel it's the parks responsibility to ensure they have a good balance of attractions for all ages and heights. When you have a park that is so unbalanced you have to stop and ask "Why do they keep building rides for one group of guests, but not the other?" Busch Gardens Tampa went through this as well, but at least they did finally install Cobra's Curse which has a 42" height restriction to help fill that gap.

 

I also feel that BGW should have tried to convince GCI to lower the height restriction or come up with a solution. And while yes, 46" is lower than 48" I still believe that ride is not more intense or scary than Tower of Terror, Big Thunder Mountain, or Test Track. And you have to be 6" taller to ride those GCI woodies than Tower of Terror??!?! That makes zero sense to me. That's either poor engineering saying your trains or restraints require that height to the park not fighting the ride manufacturer to get it lower.

 

I just wish that parks would take this more into consideration than they do.

Edited by robbalvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I like the idea of making it 42" with an adult and 48" alone, but it's just one of those things you have to deal with I guess. I'm 6"7' and could ride most rides at a young age (hence my love for them), but I still know it sucks to see those awesome coasters and not be able to ride them. Is this a problem at BGT too? I used to live in Tampa when I was five and could ride Scorpion ( Scorpion) but nothing else, and I was pretty tall. I know really tall five year olds still can't ride like Kumba or Montu but I'm just curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^I like the idea of making it 42" with an adult and 48" alone, but it's just one of those things you have to deal with I guess. I'm 6"7' and could ride most rides at a young age (hence my love for them), but I still know it sucks to see those awesome coasters and not be able to ride them. Is this a problem at BGT too? I used to live in Tampa when I was five and could ride Scorpion ( Scorpion) but nothing else, and I was pretty tall. I know really tall five year olds still can't ride like Kumba or Montu but I'm just curious.

 

Though I've unfortunately yet to experience BGW, I'd say BGT is worse. The monkey-fighting Schwarzkopf has a lower height requirement than their wild mouse! The three B&Ms and Falcon's Fury all have 54" requirements. Sure there are some rides for the kiddies, but there's a lot of walking involved in the Floridian heat. Though there is a fun-looking shaded jungle-gym type play area in the Sesame Street area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question remains though - if Joris is 42" and it has the same trains, then isn't GCI off the hook here and all the blame should go to the parks? I'm assuming they have a minimum spec for their train design, and that Joris meets it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question remains though - if Joris is 42" and it has the same trains, then isn't GCI off the hook here and all the blame should go to the parks? I'm assuming they have a minimum spec for their train design, and that Joris meets it...

I'm going to guess that Efteling worked with GCI to come up with a solution to make that ride 42" since every other GCI out there is either 46" or 48" and that's why I said, it's up to the parks to work things out with the ride manufacturer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this a problem at BGT too? I used to live in Tampa when I was five and could ride Scorpion ( Scorpion) but nothing else, and I was pretty tall. I know really tall five year olds still can't ride like Kumba or Montu but I'm just curious.

Well, it's not uncommon for a five year old not to be able to ride Kumba or Montu since those rides are 54" and our daughter, who is ten years old, is still not tall enough to ride them.

 

It is an issue at BGT where they have more 54" rides than they do for younger kids, but it's not as bad as BGW. The Tampa park at least offers 1 "kiddie" coaster at 38", two full-sized coasters at 42" (Scorpion and Cobra's Curse), the Wild Mouse is 46", Cheetah Hunt is 48" and everything else is 54". It's a *little* more balanced than BGW, but I still feel like BGT could probably use one or two more 42" or 48" big rides to really balance out the mix. But they are most certainly on their way!

 

Though I've unfortunately yet to experience BGW, I'd say BGT is worse.

You're statement is 100% completely wrong. See what I posted above. Please don't make posts to our forum if you don't know what you're talking about. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't help but get curious about this. It's potentially state regulation (and insurance) related. Virginia doesn't play around with some things.

 

There is no explanation, IMO, only poor excuses.

That would fall under the "poor excuses" category. I do not believe this is a "Virginia thing" I believe it's a park and/or ride manufacturer issue.

 

I also don't think that quoting a bunch of ride restrictions makes you an "expert" on Virginia stage regulation and insurance, am I right?

Edited by robbalvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Virginia is the outlier. Location, location, location.

Did you bother to do any research on this? It took me about 90 seconds to find these two documents:

 

http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/images/SBC/CodeBooks/2012%20Virginia%20Amusement%20Device%20Regulations.pdf

 

http://www.dhcd.virginia.gov/images/SBC/Virginia%20Amusement%20Device%20Regulations%20%28VADR%29%20FAQs.pdf

 

and I did not find any reference at all to a rider needing to be 46" in the state of Virginia to ride a medium-sized wooden roller coaster. I admit I am not an expert on this either, but I at least took the time to search to see if there was any actual regulations beyond just looking at parks websites, regurgitating height restrictions text, and pretending to be a know-it all on the subject.

 

Please. If you're not willing to fact check something, don't post to our forums. Thank you.

Edited by robbalvey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People argued that California banned lap-bar only inverting coasters at the same time that Montezooma's Revenge was operating daily at Knotts. That's all I'm sayin.

Yep. This also came to mind as well. If there is one thing I've learned over the decades of working with the amusement industry is that most parks could in fact find a solution for something if they wanted to, but usually will just give you an "excuse" for the things they don't to satisfy a justification for a decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also don't think that quoting a bunch of ride restrictions makes you an "expert" on Virginia stage regulation and insurance, am I right?

 

Ha! Yes, you're right. I was guessing. Finding that big difference in VA versus all the others seemed like something that could relate. The different height requirements, not just here but internationally like with Joris, are really interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Couldn't help but get curious about this. It's potentially state regulation (and insurance) related. Virginia doesn't play around with some things.

 

46" Invadr

 

Now compare height requirements for the same coaster ...

 

Virginia = 46" Woodstock Express (Kings Dominion)

Carolinas = 40" Woodstock Express (Carowinds)

Ohio = 40" Woodstock Express (Kings Island)

Canada = 40" Ghoster Coaster (Canada's Wonderland)

Note: Riders between 40" and 46" must be accompanied by a Supervising Companion

 

So, Virginia is the outlier. Location, location, location.

Nope, Woodstock Express at Kings Dominion is 40" supervised, 46" unsupervised. Source: https://www.kingsdominion.com/help/height-safety

 

I was there just today and saw a kid with a 40" wrist band with a parent in line.

 

As for InvadR itself, I liked it. It packed just enough of a punch for a family "first big" coaster (height restriction aside). The first drop was much more intense than I expected, back seat at night (my only ride).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The base trains aren't designed for someone under 46 inches, I'm thinking it's that simple... sure you could do some work arounds here and there but BGW didn't want Mini Millennium Flyers and you can only get so low with Gwazi's trains. The park and GCI could probably lower it to 44 inches or lower if they wanted to, but it's way better to stay on the safe side and have a kid wait a year before they can ride InvadR

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The base trains aren't designed for someone under 46 inches, I'm thinking it's that simple.
There is no explanation, IMO, only poor excuses.

That would fall under the "poor excuses" category. Joris en de Draak uses the same base trains and that ride has a height restriction of 42"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more recent POV's of InvadR seem to have some trees that weren't there in the beginning. I don't know if I just wasn't watching closely at first, but it looks like in the TPR and Coasterforce POV's the first turn after the drop and the turnaround have trees that weren't there in the official POV. Does anybody know if they're planting trees around the ride? Is it even possible to plant fully grown trees? It seems like there should be some more landscaping and I trust BGW to do it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/