Height leniency for rides!!!

[bumbershoot]

No flaming, I'm with you. We took my niece and she was "fast pass ticketed" out of RNR. She had on her sandals with no socks. So the next day we put her in her tennis shoes and socks and BAM!...she was miraculously tall enough. So anyone who flames you for an extra pair of socks is just wanting to pick a fight over nothing. And I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it's no more dangerous to put a kid on the ride who's a piece of paper too short, than it is to physically lift and strap a person in who has zero control of their body. I'm sure I'm gonna get the whole "but he's tall enough" and "muscle control has nothing to do with safety". Whatever. Bottom line is that no one is gonna be endangered by being .001 inches too short. And no CM is gonna get fired for not putting a FP ticket under the head of a kid that is .001 in too short.

But they have to draw the line *somewhere*. And THAT is where they draw it. Exactly at that mark.

 

[jdb in AZ]

Hi,

I would like to add something. I am not going to judge the op or anybody else, they need to do what is right for their family. The height requirement system is really flawed though. I go to many amusement parks and I will see the identical ride in a different park with two different height requirements. A lot of the height requirements are done state by state according to what the insurance companies dictate. Oh and throw in that more of it depends on your torso then your actual height. Anyway good luck op with your trip.

I wonder why they don't have the kids sit down to get an accurate torso measurement, since that's more important than the legs, and shoes/socks wouldn't be able to "fudge" that measurement. DH is 10 inches taller than I am, but our legs are exactly the same length. go figure. Naturally, my torso height is way short, and any kid with long, long legs that help them meet the height requirement would be too short for the shoulder harness.

 

[Dominus]

Hi,

I would like to add something. I am not going to judge the op or anybody else, they need to do what is right for their family. The height requirement system is really flawed though. I go to many amusement parks and I will see the identical ride in a different park with two different height requirements. A lot of the height requirements are done state by state according to what the insurance companies dictate. Oh and throw in that more of it depends on your torso then your actual height.

Anyway good luck op with your trip.

You are spot on. The only thing accurate or consistent with the height measurement system is that it's ultimately and totally up to the cm in charge. I've been on two trips where one member of the party was right at the height for certain rides. Both times we had very inconsistent enforcement. They could ride some rides, but not others. Ride the same ride later in the day that they were turned away from earlier (even thought they should by then be theoretically shorter!). Ride the ride the next day when they were turned away the day before (growth spurt I guess). So it unnerves me a bit when people take the position that it's black and white, anything less (even a piece of paper less) than that magic bar is totally unsafe and near child abuse to let them ride.

 

[Kona65]

How strict is the height policy on the rides?? My youngest DS is 39" and is scared of very little things. I was wondering if him standing on his tip toes would suffice the CM @ the ride. This would bring him to 40". Fingers crossed he'll grow a little the next 2 months.

Safety is the reason for the height requirements, and nothing else.

 

[justakrazymom]

How strict is the height policy on the rides?? My youngest DS is 39" and is scared of very little things. I was wondering if him standing on his tip toes would suffice the CM @ the ride. This would bring him to 40". Fingers crossed he'll grow a little the next 2 months.

From what we saw VERY strict..

We vacationed with my friend who's son was turning 4 on the trip and is on the short side. He made the 40 inch mark at some rides..didn't on other's.. even more he would make it thru 1-2 check points in the queue only to be checked again at the load area and be told NO.. it was frustrating for my friend ( in fact my friends husband was NOT happy many times) but IMO id much rather them be cautious with my kiddo then not!

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

Disney has a policy to cover their own butts. It's not safety, it liability. There are too many sphinctors out there, and Disney has every right to cover their own. . .interests.

I don't think I've ever seen a more true statement on one of these "ride height" threads ... ever.

Seriously ... a difference of an inch, or two, or even three is NOT NOT NOT the difference between life and death on any amusement park ride. No engineer, anywhere, would design a ride that could be lethal if someone was a couple of inches, let alone the width of a sheet of paper, too short.

Disney has such strict height guidelines for liability reasons ... millions and millions of visitors and very deep pockets.

In reality, you could probably ride 90% of Disney rides with no restraints at all and still not get hurt unless you did something stupid like jump out of a moving SM log....

 

[doconeill]

I don't think I've ever seen a more true statement on one of these "ride height" threads ... ever.

Seriously ... a difference of an inch, or two, or even three is NOT NOT NOT the difference between life and death on any amusement park ride. No engineer, anywhere, would design a ride that could be lethal if someone was a couple of inches, let alone the width of a sheet of paper, too short.

Disney has strict height guidelines for liability reasons.

In reality, you could probably ride 90% of Disney rides with no restraints at all and still not get hurt unless you did something stupid like jump out of a moving SM log....

What you say is true about liability - but that liability issue is due to safety. No one can sue just because they didn't have a tight enough restraint, but they CAN sue because they got injured because they didn't have a tight enough restraint. And the courts have upheld the liability of the corporation against the idiocy of the plaintiff for doing stupid things.

And has been said on this thread elsewhere, there has to be a line. The line is the height stick. If you don't meet it - even by a hair - you don't meet it.

 

[deegack]

I don't think I've ever seen a more true statement on one of these "ride height" threads ... ever.

Seriously ... a difference of an inch, or two, or even three is NOT NOT NOT the difference between life and death on any amusement park ride. No engineer, anywhere, would design a ride that could be lethal if someone was a couple of inches, let alone the width of a sheet of paper, too short.

Disney has such strict height guidelines for liability reasons ... millions and millions of visitors and very deep pockets.

In reality, you could probably ride 90% of Disney rides with no restraints at all and still not get hurt unless you did something stupid like jump out of a moving SM log....

Psst dh is an engineer who has designed roller coasters as part of a year long internship. An inch or two can make a difference in how the safety equipment works. Some rides (although none at Disney) have height restriction where if you are over a certain height you can't ride. He won't let dd ride any rides with a height limit until she meets the limit in her bare feet.

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

An inch or two can make a difference in how the safety equipment works. Some rides (although none at Disney) have height restriction where if you are over a certain height you can't ride.

Granted ... if you are too big (height or width) for the safety harness/latch to engage at all, then it's not safe. But, as you note, no Disney ride works like that.

Being the width of a sheet of paper below the 40" requirement is not the difference between life-and-death on BTMRR or TOT. THAT is purely a liability issue. Disney simply CANNOT make exceptions for legal reasons.

 

[thomas998]

Thanks guys for the replies. I would never want to jeopardize his safety, thought I would ask, I couldn't remember from our trip in '09. Think he'll have to hope that his daily milk 'rations' will kick in and give him that extra inch. One thing about Disney though, even though he can't go on some of the 'bigger' rides, he'll have plenty to do.

While the height restrictions are for safety, I'm also willing to bet that they have built in margins of error so a person that slips through and is probably as much as 2 inches too short isn't going to get hurt.... The right kind of shoes might easily make up an inch (think cowboy boots)... also they are very inconsistent on how they check... some will just eyeball and if they are close they don't care others are extreme and will measure like they are preparing for a space flight....good luck