Cheating on Rides

[amykathleen2005]

Yea, I am very tall when I am sitting but when I am standing it is a different story.

 

[taximomfor4]

Here's my opinion..... the harness on the child affects how tall the TORSO is, not the legs. Once the kid sits down, it's the top half that matters. Adding height to the kids shoes so they meet the height does not necessarily affect where the harness falls. And what if you have two kids that are 48", but one has longer legs and a shorter torso so the harness hits different than the other kid who has shorter legs and a taller torso? Should the first not get to ride?

Good thought --

But to me, the bottom line is that WDW sets the rules, and we are their guests. Therefore, we abide by their rules when we are in their "house."

Beth

 

[Tinkerbelle's Mom]

In my dd's case I would not do it. She is very tiny and slender. Even if she meets hieght requirements I still worry about her being able to slip thru the harness since she is so petite. THis being said - its a good thing she does not like these type of rides (yet)!

 

[GreyStr0ke]

Darn, I thought this thread was gonna be about cheating on Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin.

 

[mrp4352]

unrelated but related comment
At a local park last year, not Disney, I was pretty annoyed that my son who barely made the requirment to pay full price rather than child, the cashier measured him and said full price, but when we got to one of those little cars that they drive around on tracks, the attendant said he was not tall enough (same height requirement).

At the Six Flags parks, you can take them to Guest Relations at the park entrance, have them measured and get a wristband so they don't have to be measured again. It helps cut down on those types of situations. I 'think' I recall hearing that Disney does that too, but I hate to promise...

 

[nyfinfan]

Here's my opinion..... the harness on the child affects how tall the TORSO is, not the legs. Once the kid sits down, it's the top half that matters. Adding height to the kids shoes so they meet the height does not necessarily affect where the harness falls. And what if you have two kids that are 48", but one has longer legs and a shorter torso so the harness hits different than the other kid who has shorter legs and a taller torso? Should the first not get to ride?

+1

Thanks! You saved me the trouble of writing the same thing.

 

[meandtheguys2]

I thought I read somewhere that there are state (?) standards for different types of rides.

So, yes, it is a CYA, issue, but may also be a state one.

I also remember a little boy losing the side of his foot on Thunder Mountain when his platform shoe somehow got caught.

I don't think it kills a child to wait until the next trip to ride a certain ride. Maybe you could get one of the rice certificates for your underheight child!

 

[quiltymom]

This discussion is interesting. Here's what happened to us. When my DS was measured for Primeval Whirl, he was 1/4" too short, which included the soles of his sandals which were quite thick. The CM told my DH that they measured the kids with their shoes on, not without, and that if his shoes were 1/4" thicker he would've made it on the ride. We didn't push the matter and left the line without a complaint. DS was disappointed, but we told him that the rules were there for a reason. So he & DH just went on Kali again!

I guess it just all depends upon who the CM is as to how the kids are measured.

 

[bytheblood]

However, the restrictions are set for safety reasons.

And also some CMs doing the measuring, if they see kids who just barely make the height and see the child wearing elevator shoes will ask them to take the shoes off to be measured.

Again, these standards are set to prevent injuries.

Agreed!

I know that sounds extreme, but that is the roll of the dice you are talking about. No ride in the world is worth putting your child's well being in danger.

And Agreed!!!

Just follow the rules.

Lord forbid, but imagine the trouble you could be in if something did happen to your kid and Disney pointed out that you broke the rules.

 

[amykathleen2005]

Not to sound like a typical teenager... but I think that everyone is putting too much stock in what the all powerful and quasi-mystical Disney gods say. In most instances one should round up, if the rule say 48" than 47.5" would do it. As someone pointed out earlier, I am sure that Disney tacks on a couple of inches just to be on the safe side. Also, for many people at this height the safety restricitions would still not be effective because maybe the height is in their legs and they could still slip out, or maybe they are very thin and the harness will not be snug enough to keep them safe. It is all about a judgement call. All of the accidents at Disney that I have heard of have been due to someone who has a some type of unknown condition riding a ride. The signs with the rules also state that you cannot be pregnant and ride, or have a heart, or back condition. One qualification listed for Mission:Space is to be under the age of 55 and for other rides you should be under a certain weight. For none of these rules would someone be asked to prove otherwise to ride the ride, they don't ask for medical records, so why is height any different? I think that the rules are there as guidlines and if someone believes that they or their children are safe enough being a half inch under the limit than go for it.

I normally would not say anything but I think that an honest question was asked and that should be answered respectfully and honestly back. JMHO

 

[Lucky82061]

I know that this probably doesn't exactly fit the conversation but I found this today while bored at work about amusement park safety and it mentions height restrictions (although a little outdated):

http://www.expertsafety.com/articles/DontGo.pdf

 

[Silverbelle990]

Here's my opinion..... the harness on the child affects how tall the TORSO is, not the legs. Once the kid sits down, it's the top half that matters. Adding height to the kids shoes so they meet the height does not necessarily affect where the harness falls. And what if you have two kids that are 48", but one has longer legs and a shorter torso so the harness hits different than the other kid who has shorter legs and a taller torso? Should the first not get to ride?

I think this is very interesting. I am 5'1, not very tall at tall. It is most def not in my short little legs...LOL. Sitting down i am a couple inches taller then my son and with my DH who is 5'9 we are the same height sitting. On a ride what is the difference? We should all be measured sitting down for rides like RNRC.

 

[madcoco]

Not flaming the OP. However some rules are there for your own protection and Disney's protection. Why do people insist on breaking them no matter how silly they may seem to you at the time?
Here comes another opening for another lawsuit. My child injured his/ her toenail on insert Disney ride here.What heel lifts or platform shoes??? We never heard of the like accusing us of stretching the truth. The CM let my child slide even though the CM knew he/she was a millimeter short. His word against ours. Sue for millions Settle out of court. Free vacations in the Castle. Lines now 4 hrs long on an off day due to 10 page waiver having to be read and signed in front of Management. Everyone no matter how tall(Hey some people look taller than what they are) must be measured in barefeet by a laser device with feet taped to the floor.Oh almost forgot, if Tigger or another Disney character passes by remember the restraining order you signed on the way in. You must remain outside a 5 ft perimeter.

 

[bear_mom]

In my opinion it comes down to what do I want to teach my children. If my dd is an inch to short and we were to buy her shoes specifically to make her taller then we are teaching dd that it is okay to bend the rules in her favor. What am I supposed to in 6 or 7 years when she is a teenager and she comes home at 12:30 instead of 12 and tells me "Well it wasn't hurting anything and I was having a good time. Remember that time we went to Disney World and you bought me shoes to make me taller so I could have a good time?"

Emily

 

[nyfinfan]

If CM's are telling people that if they had 'taller heels' , that they would be able to ride, than tell me how it is breaking any rules or not a lesson to teach children. It's like an 'open-book' test. If the Teacher tells you that you can use the book to look up answer's, than it's not breaking any rules. It's more like following the system. JMHO

 

[MushyMushy]

If CM's are telling people that if they had 'taller heels' , that they would be able to ride, than tell me how it is breaking any rules or not a lesson to teach children. It's like an 'open-book' test. If the Teacher tells you that you can use the book to look up answer's, than it's not breaking any rules. It's more like following the system. JMHO

So, if the speed limit is posted at 65, but a nice police officer tells me, "Oh go ahead and go 70," then that makes it okay?

 

[stargrazer]

If CM's are telling people that if they had 'taller heels' , that they would be able to ride, than tell me how it is breaking any rules or not a lesson to teach children. It's like an 'open-book' test. If the Teacher tells you that you can use the book to look up answer's, than it's not breaking any rules. It's more like following the system. JMHO

This isn't a flame, I swear, but this seems like an excuse to break the rules to me. This 'open book' example is a better comparison to the fast pass system, to me, not ride rules. With fast pass, if you know how to work the system, you get to ride without waiting at premium attractions. The information is there if you are willing to get it, it's 'open' to everyone, yet shocking how many think fastpass holders are cutting in line because they don't take the time to seek out the information. Not so with ride rules.

In this case, it's not like an open book test. That implies that the information is plainly there for those that wish to look it up...IE...If Disney (or any theme park for that matter) was willing to bend on a couple of inches, then the sign wouldn't say 54", it would say '54" give or take a few', or '54" except in certain circumstances". Obviously CM's are trained to abide by the height policy but for whatever reason, this CM decided to try and tell this family how to get around it; I doubt Disney recommends CM's to do this, as, among other things, it is teaching a child that posted rules do not have to be enforced...from what I've read about the Disney family, something Walt himself would not appreciate, I would think anyway.

Ultimately, I agree that a few inches probably isn't going to injure the child. In some cases, ride heights may be more indicitave of how intensive the experience is, not necessarily safety perhaps. But my daugher can read signs, and she knows how tall she is. In our house, that means if you are not x tall to ride x ride, then no go.

If others choose to lift, platform or whatever to get their child on a ride, I don't judge them for that choice, but I think ultimately you can't say the rule is bendable, you have to say you chose not to follow it.

IMHO.


~~~~
Diana

 

[Not so Dumbo]

Not to sound like a typical teenager... but I think that everyone is putting too much stock in what the all powerful and quasi-mystical Disney gods say. In most instances one should round up, if the rule say 48" than 47.5" would do it. As someone pointed out earlier, I am sure that Disney tacks on a couple of inches just to be on the safe side. Also, for many people at this height the safety restricitions would still not be effective because maybe the height is in their legs and they could still slip out, or maybe they are very thin and the harness will not be snug enough to keep them safe. It is all about a judgement call. All of the accidents at Disney that I have heard of have been due to someone who has a some type of unknown condition riding a ride. The signs with the rules also state that you cannot be pregnant and ride, or have a heart, or back condition. One qualification listed for Mission:Space is to be under the age of 55 and for other rides you should be under a certain weight. For none of these rules would someone be asked to prove otherwise to ride the ride, they don't ask for medical records, so why is height any different? I think that the rules are there as guidlines and if someone believes that they or their children are safe enough being a half inch under the limit than go for it.

I normally would not say anything but I think that an honest question was asked and that should be answered respectfully and honestly back. JMHO

Very well put.

OP- we made inserts out of foam rubber for DS's shoes. He slipped these in his shoes before walking up to the ride. They added between .5-1 inch. Enough to ge him on RnR.

 

[Samantha/NC]

I would just buy him some Heely's

they give you an extra inch or so and are great for getting around in the parks.

 

[MisunderstoodLilo]

I think that everyone is putting too much stock in what the all powerful and quasi-mystical Disney gods say.

Umm...it's not just WDW that has height or medical restrictions on rides. Last I checked, all amusement/theme parks with intense rides had height or medical restrictions.

Please wait to have your child ride what he or she may be too short for. It's in their best interest. It's not WDW trying to be high and mighty.

Good luck in your decision.