rockin roller coaster height requirement at disney hollywood studios...

[rgf207]

So they don't use the bracelets for KRR anymore?

I've never been on KRR because I don't like to get wet so I can't confirm that.

 

[MomtoGKC]

If they did that, people would take the bracelets off and give them to riders that were not tall enough. I believe they used to do something like that and stopped for this exact reason.

Ooohhh - they could use those glow in the dark invisible stamps! Anyone remember when you used to get those stamped on your hand at Disney then had to show ti under the special light?

I don't have to worry about this issue anyway, my DS is finally tall enough for the 40 inch rides but he's way too scared to try any of them anyway!

 

[loveysbydesign]

Ooohhh - they could use those glow in the dark invisible stamps! Anyone remember when you used to get those stamped on your hand at Disney then had to show ti under the special light?

I don't have to worry about this issue anyway, my DS is finally tall enough for the 40 inch rides but he's way too scared to try any of them anyway!

That's a great idea too....they could stamp the number of how many inches they need to be...in case they are tall enough for some but not for others!

 

[WDSearcher]

I see your point. My point is I think it would be ridiculous to use the paper. If you put them up to the line and can't tell whether they make it or not you just aren't using good judgement. If they are required to use the "paper" standard (which I'm sure they are not as I've never seen any CM with a piece of paper to do this) then that is fine. But if they aren't then it is an overzealous CM on a powertrip. I would see it as "Hey you think your kid makes it, oh yeah!!!??? Well get a load of my piece of paper!!!"

Try it sometime. Seriously. You need to spend a shift measuring kids. You'd be surprised how easy it is not. You've got kids with hair that belies the actual top of the head -- that is, the hair touches the stick and is thick enough that it looks like it COULD be the top of the head, but you can't be sure. So you slide a piece of paper in there to BE sure. Because being sure is your job. No CM wants to be the one that let a kid through because they weren't sure, and then that kid gets hurt. No CM wants to deal with the parents who go to the CM's manager and say, "My child is not tall enough and the CM was going to let him through! I could sue for that!" (Yes ... that has happened.)

The way the training goes is that you are told that there can be no space between the top of the head and the bottom of the bar. "If you are unsure", the trainers will tell you, "an easy way to tell is to use a piece of paper and see if you can slip it between the child's head and the bar." So ... while it is not expressly decreed that all CMs must use a piece of paper, it is most definitely given as a clear example of a good way to check, should the CM need it. And ... all due respect to the number of times you have been to WDW or the amount of time you have spent watching CMs measure other peoples' kids, but unless you happen to hit it on a day where there are a lot of "almost tall enough" kids in line, you're not likely to see a bunch of CMs whipping out that piece of paper. It's only used when it is a very close call. They don't slide a piece of paper over the kid's head if there's light between the top of the head and the bottom of the bar. But if you decided that one day you were going to stand at RNRC or TOT all day and do nothing but watch the measuring process, you'd see it a lot.

The CMs doing the measuring are very aware that they are dealing with guest safety. They are not on massive operational power trips. And because it is an issue of safety, some CMs are a bit over-zealous when they measure. They'd rather not let your kid on a ride and get berated by you for being on a power trip than to take a chance that they got it wrong and your kid gets hurt. The CMs really have no reason to decide that they're going to deny children the ability to ride on rides. It's not some personal vendetta against your kid. And if your child is truly clearly tall enough, a simple re-measurement with a manager present should prove that.

As far as the doctors office, I again see your point. But how would you feel if your child is 48". You know it, the doctor knows it, it is a fact. But the CM doesn't measure properly and excludes your kid after you spent a lot of money with the knowledge that they meet the requirement. I know you can throw my previous argument about the piece of paper back at me in this example. But I'm just saying that CMs should use good judgement when it is that close a call and they should have some standard on where they stand when they measure people. IIRC most Disney places had a fixed height stick but I also think I saw some with portable sticks and ground slope can absolutely make a difference.

But they DO have a standard when they measure people. It's just that the CM's standard errs on the side of safety, when you'd rather that the standard was closer to "a half-inch won't make a difference."

It's just as likely that the doctor's office got it wrong, you know. I have yet to find two doctors' offices where I weigh the same or am the exact same height. I can go to one right after the other when I'm having tests done or an annual physical, and I can be anywhere from 8-15 pounds heavier or lighter and my height can vary by as much as an inch. So ... which doctor has the "facts"? Which is right and which is wrong? Could be that the kid really IS 47.8" tall and the nurse rounded up because she didn't want to put on her reading glasses to check the little tiny lines. Could be that the kid inadvertantly stood a bit on the balls of his feet because the floor was cold, and so got recorded as 48.5" when he's really not. People get hung up on "My doctor said he's this tall!" Still ... the measuring stick at the doctor's office is no more "official" than the measuring stick at Kali River Rapids. But when you're standing at the entry to Kali River Rapids, the only measuring stick that counts is the one that's there. The doctor's measuring stick is, alas, not available to lend its expertise.

 

[missiloveslouie]

My DD4 was just about 40" last time we were there. She went on the rides without a problem except for test track when the CM did the paper under the stick thing- and told her she was too short. we didn't get upset, or blame the CM, he was just doing his job and protecting himself. Funny though how she measured 40" everywhere else

 

[disneygirlsanddrew]

My dd5 rode expedition everest 2 times in a row in the fall. As soon as she got off, she ran to get back in line again and they wouldn't let her saying she was too short. She was measured the first two times too so I am not sure what made the difference this time. I felt really bad for her b/c she loved that ride and started crying. I think she was confused too since she had just ridden it twice. We just told her she would have to wait for next year. The only good thing about it was I didn't have to ride it again.

 

[A_Princess'_Daddy]

a little more uptight in the last 30-40 years...

when I was a child...my mom drove us around in a pinto( the ones that would explode on impact) without my seatbelt on...and my destination was miami beach... to swim in the ocean ( where sharks, jelly fish and man-o-war live)...

I was 5 years old...

and here we are worried about a few hairs...

how times change....

I guess we can blame it on the local news! lol

OK, I read far more than I post and have never jumped into a debate before (and may soon regret doing so now), but this one just drives me crazy. I disagree with the general premise of "back in my day, we didn't use car seats, we drove in dangerous cars, we chewed on lead paint, we smoked, etc." because while you survived your childhood, many children did not. Infant and childhood mortality are down markedly over the past several decades because of the evolution of safer standards and rules.

The world has evolved, our understanding of safety has evolved, our ability to protect our children has evolved, and to talk about how something didn't hurt you ignores the fact that many children died and many more were seriously and preventably injured. I expect my children to skin their knees, trip and fall, etc., but just because I survived riding without a car seat doesn't mean I'm willing to risk it with my children, because now there are better options available.

For the record, I don't think that 1/8th of an inch probably matters, but as another poster said, it's Disney's business and they get to make the rules. When you buy the ticket, which I agree is expensive, you agree to adhere to their rules. As the father of a daughter who may miss the 40" cut-off by an eight of an inch (or may clear it by a like amount), we're prepared to ride other things if that happens.

 

[bumbershoot]

My dd5 rode expedition everest 2 times in a row in the fall. As soon as she got off, she ran to get back in line again and they wouldn't let her saying she was too short. She was measured the first two times too so I am not sure what made the difference this time. I felt really bad for her b/c she loved that ride and started crying. I think she was confused too since she had just ridden it twice. We just told her she would have to wait for next year. The only good thing about it was I didn't have to ride it again.

Retired chiropractor here. It was exactly those two times in a row riding it that prevented her from riding it a third time. Things like that jar our spine, and over the course of a 24 period we gain and lose height due to the discs in between each vertebra gaining and losing fluid. The jarring forces of a roller coaster can compress the space between each vertebra, which is going to cause a slight change in height.

That's why with every ride that DS is *just* tall enough for, we make sure to warn him that he might not be able to ride another time, and that it's important to check every time and not just assume he can ride again!

I disagree with the general premise of "back in my day, we didn't use car seats, we drove in dangerous cars, we chewed on lead paint, we smoked, etc." because while you survived your childhood, many children did not. Infant and childhood mortality are down markedly over the past several decades because of the evolution of safer standards and rules.

Same here. My ex stepdad's dad ran a towing company in CA. My ex stepdad as a teen got to clean up horrific messes on the roads because of lack of restraints inside of cars.

The people who didn't survive those pre-carseat pre-seatbelt days aren't here to say "I didn't survive".



WDSearcher, good point about doctor's offices! Even at my husband's endocrinologist, where weight is VERY important (the endo specializes in diabetes and pituitary disorders, both of which cause weight changes), his industrial, high weight, scale was off by about 25 lbs.

And his nurse did the calculation wrong going from kg to lb, which made it worse!

The endo argued for over 5 minutes, then left the office for some reason, and then we heard them messing with the scale outside the door. It was off. Very off. Even at a place that really needs excellent measuring devices.


Obviously a scale or measuring stick at ped's office isn't going to be THAT off, but when we were still taking DS for well baby visits, they were constantly doing things that could cause things to be off. One visit she took DS's dipe off. The next visit, she left it on, even though it was cloth AND wet. I stopped her that time, since I needed to change the dipe anyway.

The ped's office could easily be wrong, depending on how long they spent with a child to get a good measurement.

And even then, go in the morning after 10 hours of sleep...going to be taller than 7 hours of sleep, long flight with pressure changes, and a day of walking around the parks...

 

[jngwright]

I hoped my children were tall enough for the attractions on our trips, but I told them ahead of time that they may not be. My main problem with the "fudging of the height" is the fact that you are teaching your children that dishonesty is the way around the rules. Rules that are set in place for your children's safety.

 

[frayedend]

Try it sometime. Seriously. You need to spend a shift measuring kids. You'd be surprised how easy it is not. You've got kids with hair that belies the actual top of the head -- that is, the hair touches the stick and is thick enough that it looks like it COULD be the top of the head, but you can't be sure. So you slide a piece of paper in there to BE sure. Because being sure is your job. No CM wants to be the one that let a kid through because they weren't sure, and then that kid gets hurt. No CM wants to deal with the parents who go to the CM's manager and say, "My child is not tall enough and the CM was going to let him through! I could sue for that!" (Yes ... that has happened.)

The way the training goes is that you are told that there can be no space between the top of the head and the bottom of the bar. "If you are unsure", the trainers will tell you, "an easy way to tell is to use a piece of paper and see if you can slip it between the child's head and the bar." So ... while it is not expressly decreed that all CMs must use a piece of paper, it is most definitely given as a clear example of a good way to check, should the CM need it. And ... all due respect to the number of times you have been to WDW or the amount of time you have spent watching CMs measure other peoples' kids, but unless you happen to hit it on a day where there are a lot of "almost tall enough" kids in line, you're not likely to see a bunch of CMs whipping out that piece of paper. It's only used when it is a very close call. They don't slide a piece of paper over the kid's head if there's light between the top of the head and the bottom of the bar. But if you decided that one day you were going to stand at RNRC or TOT all day and do nothing but watch the measuring process, you'd see it a lot.

The CMs doing the measuring are very aware that they are dealing with guest safety. They are not on massive operational power trips. And because it is an issue of safety, some CMs are a bit over-zealous when they measure. They'd rather not let your kid on a ride and get berated by you for being on a power trip than to take a chance that they got it wrong and your kid gets hurt. The CMs really have no reason to decide that they're going to deny children the ability to ride on rides. It's not some personal vendetta against your kid. And if your child is truly clearly tall enough, a simple re-measurement with a manager present should prove that.


But they DO have a standard when they measure people. It's just that the CM's standard errs on the side of safety, when you'd rather that the standard was closer to "a half-inch won't make a difference."

It's just as likely that the doctor's office got it wrong, you know. I have yet to find two doctors' offices where I weigh the same or am the exact same height. I can go to one right after the other when I'm having tests done or an annual physical, and I can be anywhere from 8-15 pounds heavier or lighter and my height can vary by as much as an inch. So ... which doctor has the "facts"? Which is right and which is wrong? Could be that the kid really IS 47.8" tall and the nurse rounded up because she didn't want to put on her reading glasses to check the little tiny lines. Could be that the kid inadvertantly stood a bit on the balls of his feet because the floor was cold, and so got recorded as 48.5" when he's really not. People get hung up on "My doctor said he's this tall!" Still ... the measuring stick at the doctor's office is no more "official" than the measuring stick at Kali River Rapids. But when you're standing at the entry to Kali River Rapids, the only measuring stick that counts is the one that's there. The doctor's measuring stick is, alas, not available to lend its expertise.

All very good points. You are right. I have not seen them use the paper and I would still see it as overkill but your reasonings make perfect sense and I won't argue that.

Now if I wanted to be a real jerk I could say that by the rules 47.5 inches is perfectly acceptable since Disney doesn't carry the requirement to 3 significant figures you must round up from a mathematical standpoint. Of course I somehow think that would just make me look like more of a jerk.

 

[Timmy Boy]

To the Original Poster, did you yell at the Cast Member for doing his or her job, well aware that it is for your kids safety?

Probably not, but hey, you're above the rules, you're better than them, you don't have to follow them. Slide past the height requirements, it's okay, you're the queen of the universe, have your way.

Ever see the Saw movies? Maybe you ought to learn some respect for someone other than yourself...

 

[meeshkamooshka]

heres a hypothetical for ya...

the traffic light is red....your loved one is dying in the seat next to you...would you run the red light to get them to the hospital or would you just let your loved one sit there dying?

I suppose you'd sit there worried you'd break the law and let your loved one die...

go figure...

I wish someone would pull the plug already...use your energy in more useful ways...like riding the rockin roller coaster....

geezz people...tochy touchy are we?

 

[verticalchaos]

heres a hypothetical for ya...

the traffic light is red....your loved one is dying in the seat next to you...would you run the red light to get them to the hospital or would you just let your loved one sit there dying?

I suppose you'd sit there worried you'd break the law and let your loved one die...

go figure...

I wish someone would pull the plug already...use your energy in more useful ways...like riding the rockin roller coaster....

geezz people...tochy touchy are we?

Oh come on. There is a HUGE difference between a life and death situation - in which case you actually would WANT to be pulled over because that would get the help you need to you and your loved one quicker - and someone not being able to ride a silly roller coaster.

 

[itchin2go]

heres a hypothetical for ya...

the traffic light is red....your loved one is dying in the seat next to you...would you run the red light to get them to the hospital or would you just let your loved one sit there dying?

I suppose you'd sit there worried you'd break the law and let your loved one die...

go figure...

I wish someone would pull the plug already...use your energy in more useful ways...like riding the rockin roller coaster....

geezz people...tochy touchy are we?

Oh, yeah. That's totally the same thing as stuffing napkins in your kids shoes to get him on a theme park roller coaster.

If you don't want people to judge you for breaking the rules, don't start a thread where you BRAG about breaking the rules in the first sentence.

 

[3floridarays]

Oh, yeah. That's totally the same thing as stuffing napkins in your kids shoes to get him on a theme park roller coaster.

If you don't want people to judge you for breaking the rules, don't start a thread where you BRAG about breaking the rules in the first sentence.

Well said.

 

[WDSearcher]

heres a hypothetical for ya...

the traffic light is red....your loved one is dying in the seat next to you...would you run the red light to get them to the hospital or would you just let your loved one sit there dying?

I suppose you'd sit there worried you'd break the law and let your loved one die...

go figure...

I wish someone would pull the plug already...use your energy in more useful ways...like riding the rockin roller coaster....

geezz people...tochy touchy are we?

Seriously? Your loved one dying next to you is the same as your child wanting to ride a theme park coaster? That's not even apples and oranges. That's ... apples and basketballs! That's like telling someone that robbing a bank is perfectly okay. After all, you called in sick last week when you really weren't and no one got caught. I mean really ... what's the difference?

 

[WDSearcher]

All very good points. You are right. I have not seen them use the paper and I would still see it as overkill but your reasonings make perfect sense and I won't argue that.

Now if I wanted to be a real jerk I could say that by the rules 47.5 inches is perfectly acceptable since Disney doesn't carry the requirement to 3 significant figures you must round up from a mathematical standpoint. Of course I somehow think that would just make me look like more of a jerk.

Yeah ... and if Disney wanted to be a jerk, they would carry the requirement to 3 significant figures and turn down your child for a 100th of an inch! (After they had him take off his shoes and his socks, flatten down his hair, and stand against a measuring device calibrated hourly by NASA and MIT.)

 

[frayedend]

Yeah ... and if Disney wanted to be a jerk, they would carry the requirement to 3 significant figures and turn down your child for a 100th of an inch! (After they had him take off his shoes and his socks, flatten down his hair, and stand against a measuring device calibrated hourly by NASA and MIT.)

Oh yeah!!! Well well, then I would tell them that I am from another dimension and in our universe that my son is taller than their ride anyway. And if they want to call things "Future World" and "Space Mountain" then they should be more tolerant of us interdimensional species!!!!

 

[WDSearcher]

Oh yeah!!! Well well, then I would tell them that I am from another dimension and in our universe that my son is taller than their ride anyway. And if they want to call things "Future World" and "Space Mountain" then they should be more tolerant of us interdimensional species!!!!

At which point, the ground would open up and swallow you, sending you through the wormhole under the parks that would neatly deposit you inside the stripped-down Adventurer's Club, where a stiltwalking DJ plays the "Celebrate" song 24/7 while demanding you do the macarena, and where the only beverage available is Florida water from a low-pressure water fountain.

Seriously, dude. Don't push it.

 

[Meteora]

If a child is so close to the mark that he might meet the requirement later that day, I really don't think "sneaking him on with some napkins in his shoes" is going to threaten any checks and balances..no point in waiting on line 3 times trying to figure out what part of the day you are 7/8 of an inch taller.

I wasn't advocating waiting in line multiple times a day, simply sharing an interesting fact about height. To me, the precaution zone of the heights between the actual danger point and the safety point is just that--a precaution. It's not there because it is the acceptable height for children to be able to ride, it is a margin of error there "just in case" in the unlikely event of an accident. I'm not saying it's the same for a child who is 39.9 inches and a child who is 37 inches, as it clearly isn't. I just wonder about people whose children are clearly not tall enough who still try to fool the system, because to me "probably will be fine" should not be enough. They're purposely putting their children in the margin of error of the safety of the ride rather than the point of absolute, certain safety.