Are Kid Slides OK for Kids Over 48"

[Mom2six]

They don't. My 7 year old went to both parks this Summer, and had a great time on plenty of slides. There was PLENTY for her to get to do, and we didn't even get through everything.

Maybe it is just hard to tell from the website! They only show the areas geared toward younger children as under 48 inches, and then they show the big slides/ and the steep wilder rides. But if there are gentler slides that a 48 inch tall girl can go on, then it might be worth it. I just don't want to go and have her be the only one that can't do anything fun. She tried the big slide at SSR pool last month and plunged under the water, and another slider sort of ran into her...so now she's terrified of the bigger slides.

 

[Suellen]

That area you are talking about I don't think is restricted. I think the website is wrong...we went down those slides and I saw plenty of parents going off the t-bar.

I think that height information is incorrect ~ or at least it definitely is NOT enforced in the that area...

I assume you are talking this area:
http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/parks/blizzard-beach/attractions/ski-patrol-training-camp/

That is most certainly wrong.... it even says kids under 60 inches in the description.

 

[Mom2six]

That area you are talking about I don't think is restricted. I think the website is wrong...we went down those slides and I saw plenty of parents going off the t-bar.

I think that height information is incorrect ~ or at least it definitely is NOT enforced in the that area...

I assume you are talking this area:
http://disneyworld.disney.go.com/parks/blizzard-beach/attractions/ski-patrol-training-camp/

That is most certainly wrong.... it even says kids under 60 inches in the description.

That makes a lot more sense...I can see the website saying the wrong height restriction! Thanks for that.

 

[PeanutButterMom]

I go back and forth on this. PB is very interested in the water parks (part of her homework tonight was a paragraph on "typhoon lagoon or blizzard beach", I kid you not). But she will 100% be over 48" (she's 46 now) and Jelly will be barely 40. She loves swimming but is terrified of big slides and stuff. We went to Great Wolf for her birthday and she spent 75% of the time having a killer time on the "baby" slides. I know she would LOVE Ketchakiddee Creek but if they won't let her in she would be devastated. We'll probably stick to the resort pools.

 

[WantToGoNow]

There is a pool and a couple of slides in the Ski Patrol area of BB that they could both do. That water is not deep. The water where the tbar is is deep and my dd7 choose not to do it even though she swims well but doesn't like to be in deep water. My ds10 loved it and went over and over. The water in the ice berg area wasnt that deep either. There's also the wave pool, lazy river and family ride that you can all do together.

 

[Mom2six]

I know she would LOVE Ketchakiddee Creek but if they won't let her in she would be devastated.

This exactly.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

I state again, they are very, very strictly enforcing the height limitations in applicable areas, buying tickets to a park on the hopes that the website is incorrect or that a lax employee will let them in is a biiiig gamble. If you are uncertain, call the park directly and ask for advice, or wait until it's closer out (it looks like you're almost a year away from your trip) to make your decision.

Anecdotes on the internet are all well and good, but don't plan your trips around them, especially with something like height restrictions. The person who makes the determination is Disney on that day, not Disney a year ago, a month ago, or even a week ago, and if somebody else got in or didn't in a similar situation and announced it online will mean absolutely nothing to the lifeguard who's saying no. The last thing, the LAST thing, I'd ever do is assume an entire official website is wrong because it's not matching up with the anecdotes told by anonymous people online.

So, if you're concerned, call the park. Let that be what you use to determine how to spend your time and money.

 

[Suellen]

The area OP is asking about allows kids taller then 48 inches in. The description says for bigger kids and preteen's and kids under 60".

This is not hoping to get in a restricted area. I will grab a BB pamphlet tomorrow while out. The website actually gives conflicting information.

Here is a PDF of the map... as you can see... there is no height requirement/restriction on the Ski Patrol area.

http://www.wdwinfo.com/maps/blizzard.htm

 

[Mom2six]

I state again, they are very, very strictly enforcing the height limitations in applicable areas, buying tickets to a park on the hopes that the website is incorrect or that a lax employee will let them in is a biiiig gamble. If you are uncertain, call the park directly and ask for advice, or wait until it's closer out (it looks like you're almost a year away from your trip) to make your decision.

Anecdotes on the internet are all well and good, but don't plan your trips around them, especially with something like height restrictions. The person who makes the determination is Disney on that day, not Disney a year ago, a month ago, or even a week ago, and if somebody else got in or didn't in a similar situation and announced it online will mean absolutely nothing to the lifeguard who's saying no. The last thing, the LAST thing, I'd ever do is assume an entire official website is wrong because it's not matching up with the anecdotes told by anonymous people online.

So, if you're concerned, call the park. Let that be what you use to determine how to spend your time and money.

It's such a hard call! I don't know how much she will grow by then. She is do for a growth spurt, but I want to book this vacation soon. But I just realized I could always add on the WP&M once I get there if she is under 48" - right? I think that would be best to wait and see.

 

[WantToGoNow]

The area OP is asking about allows kids taller then 48 inches in. The description says for bigger kids and preteen's and kids under 60".
?
This is not hoping to get in a restricted area. I will grab a BB pamphlet tomorrow while out. The website actually gives conflicting information.

Here is a PDF of the map... as you can see... there is no height requirement/restriction on the Ski Patrol area.

http://www.wdwinfo.com/maps/blizzard.htm

The OP is asking about Tikes Peak which is the little kid area for those under 48".

 

[Colleen27]

It's such a hard call! I don't know how much she will grow by then. She is do for a growth spurt, but I want to book this vacation soon. But I just realized I could always add on the WP&M once I get there if she is under 48" - right? I think that would be best to wait and see.

Yes, and we've found that to be a good idea regardless. The two times we added it at booking we had weather issues arise that kept us from getting much waterpark time (storms on one trip, cold on the other). So now we just add it on the day we want to first use it.

 

[Cheshire Figment]

Also consider how many times you may be going to the minor parks. Here is the current pricing: (all prices add 6.5% sales tax)

Age 10+ = $52
Ages 3-9 = $44
Adding WPF&M if you do not have Hopping = $57
Adding WPF&M if you do have hopping on your ticket = $22

All of this can be done at the Gate, and normally the ticket window lines are short.

 

[Suellen]

Oh, I just mention 3 year old because the replies all seemed to center around 2 and 3 years olds being hurt by older children. When you look up height and weight charts, the average 6 to 7 year old is 48 inches tall. I understand having little kid areas! I even agree with that, and I'm fine with tikes peak and ketchakid being for little kids. I just wonder why when you look at pictures of the attractions on the website, half of the pictures are of children who are obviously older than the under 6/7 year old crowd.

Upon reading the descriptions of some the areas, the 48 inch height requirement seems patently absurd. The description of the ski patrol area says for those too big for tikes peak, that the water is over 8 feet deep, and on the side it says height requirement is under 48 inches. My 5 year old certainly wouldn't be hopping across pieces of "ice" over 8 foot deep water! Seems crazy to me! And the pictures they have of the kids sliding down (the 4 of them next to each other, 2 of those girls are close to preteens). Why not just show little kids if the area is for little kids? That's what's gotten me irritated here.

The OP is asking about Tikes Peak which is the little kid area for those under 48".

Actually here - she is not talking about the kiddie area but the Ski Patrol area.

 

[SmallWorld71]

Can't comment on Typhoon Lagoon as I have only been there pre-kids, but have taken kids ranging from 2 to 18 to Blizzard Beach. A few thoughts:

1) Water parks in general are very hard to tour by yourself, with multiple children, until the kids are old enough to do most things on their own. If you have another adult with you, then you are good to go. If not, I would think about skipping it.

2) Tike's Peak - This are really is geared towards toddlers/ preschoolers. I remember going with DD(5 1/2). (I don't remember her exact height, but she was tall enough for EE but not for Rock 'n' roller coaster. So, between 44" and 48") Honestly, she stood out like a sore thumb because she looked so tall compared to all the other kids in there. DS loved it at the age of 2, but it really wasn't particularly appropriate for a 5 year old and we left after less than 10 minutes and went to Ski Patrol. The area is cute. But, honestly, any 6 year old that would be happy here would be just as happy with the resort pool and you would save money.

3) Ski Patrol Training Camp - The kids were 5 and 9 and LOVED this area. It really was designed with the tween in mind. BUT, 60" is very tall. My DD9 is tall for her age and only 56" so you could likely see kids up to the age of 12 in this area. If you decide to take your DD to this area, I would highly recommend a life jacket because some of the kids can be (and I can understand why!) a bit overzealous. Parents were allowed in some of the areas here (such as the ice bergs and the slides). Not sure if that is still the case. The only area where I couldn't help her/ supervise her was the t-bar jump. So, only DS(9) did that.

4) There are a couple of other areas that we spent plenty of time in as well - the lazy river and the pool. I wouldn't go specifically for these areas, but they are a lot of fun.

The long and short of it is that if your DD is only afraid of big slides, there should be plenty to do. But, if she is timid in water in general, I would skip the water parks.

 

[SmallWorld71]

Upon reading the descriptions of some the areas, the 48 inch height requirement seems patently absurd. The description of the ski patrol area says for those too big for tikes peak, that the water is over 8 feet deep, and on the side it says height requirement is under 48 inches. My 5 year old certainly wouldn't be hopping across pieces of "ice" over 8 foot deep water! Seems crazy to me! And the pictures they have of the kids sliding down (the 4 of them next to each other, 2 of those girls are close to preteens). Why not just show little kids if the area is for little kids? That's what's gotten me irritated here.

This area is designed for school aged children who are too big for Tike's Peak but not up for the big water slides. The water was not 8 feet deep in the ice berg area; at 5'5" I was able to stand in it fine to help DD(5). The water under the t-bars is deep. But, it would need to be just like water would be deep if you were diving in.

We were only considering the water parks because of my teenagers, and the Disney Quest. But if there isn't anything for my DD to do there, then we'll skip it. I think that it is a shame that they only have areas for little kids, and then the huge slides. Why not make an area geared toward the 5 to 9 year olds? They like to slide but may not have the swimming skills to handle plunging under the water comfortably. A place geared toward teh 46 to 50 inchers.

As I mentioned, the Ski Patrol area IS designed for the 5 to 9 year old set.My then 5 and 9 year olds spent at least 2 hours in there. And although you will see some older elementary kids in there, the 60" height requirement will keep the teens out. But, no matter how you look at it, a water park isn't designed for those who are timid in water anymore than you can design a roller coaster for those who are afraid of speed.

I don't know how old your teens are. But, mine (17 and 13) would be perfectly capable of touring the water parks on their own. (And they love them!) Just another idea.

 

[Sparkly]

I hate to say this, but I'm actually under five foot so under 60 inches and I'm 18. I wouldn't go play in the kiddies area though because I would feel silly.

 

[Halbleib1]

My son was three years old and under 40 inches when we went to the water parks. We didn't even go near the kiddie area. I asked and was told he could go on the large slides with tubes but that he would have to go by himself. So long as he could hold on to hold himself up we were good to go. I was nervous about this but we decided to give it a try. Either my husband or I went down first with him coming down next so we could be at the end to get him off. He had on a life jacket just in case but he never came off the tube on his own. He had a blast.. We also used the lazy river a lot.

 

[Bertnie20]

Gotta say that that is REALLY unfair to an only child.

.

I don't think it's meant that what but when there Are multiple kids with mom and dad and they aren't old enough to go around by themselves they are stuck there when little brother gets his turn, so I could see the lifeguards Allowing them to play to. But with an only child if they are to big for that area they have no reason to be there