Project 2022: Pantheon

[Jonesta6]

There is precedent for the 76" max height, ultra-irritatingly. Intamin has annoyed me with this for more than 15 years now.

Superman at SFNE was the ride that taught me I would sometimes have to wear the thinnest-soled shoes I own and slouch a bit if I wanted to ride certain rides, and that started in the early 2000s. Same max height there, 76". They might have made that change after the fatal accident, or maybe the ride opened that way. Don't remember. But they had a little swing-stick thing mounted at the queue entrance, 76" off the ground, and for a time there was an attendant paying attention to it sporadically to make sure no giants got aboard. If the swing-stick hit you in the head, you didn't get to ride.

VelociCoaster, as far as I know, has no such max height, leading me to suspect it's not about seat or restraint configuration, nor about reach with respect to components or corners of the rolling stock itself. Of course, the vehicles could be different at Universal in a way that establishes a key difference in this area. I really have no idea.

Some other possibilities:

• The max height policy is optional, perhaps suggested rather than required by Intamin, leading to the question of why to have it in the first place
• There is a simple difference between what the two parks' respective insurers are willing to allow, perhaps in connection with the item above
• It's a reach issue, lateral or upward, regarding the proximity of stationary trackside (or overhead?) items, probably net of a very conservative safety margin juuuuuuust to be sure. While I'd be surprised if Intamin cut the design too close in the one most obvious place on the ride -- especially given modern design tools -- it's not like there is no precedent there...

Maybe another reason - they calculated the heartline forces using an average of guest heights; anyone too large could experience forces directed at the extremes of their bodies that otherwise wouldn't be experienced by shorter guests fitting within the average size range.

 

[halfabee]

Most likely, the height restriction is a rider comfort issue, with the riders head above the headrest.

Great point. Sign of the times, that I didn't even think about comfort. Times were, tall-person discomfort on an amusement ride was just an expected part of the experience. Of course launches were much less common at that time too, unless you got one of the faster mules pulling your cart.

That leaves me curious about SFNE Superman. When it first opened, it didn't have headrests at all. I thought the 6'-4" height max was imposed before the headrests were added, but I may simply be wrong about that. Maybe they happened at the same time. A less lazy person would look it up, or make a point to ask the appropriate weird stranger.

 

[qdeathstar]

There is precedent for the 76" max height, ultra-irritatingly. Intamin has annoyed me with this for more than 15 years now.

Superman at SFNE was the ride that taught me I would sometimes have to wear the thinnest-soled shoes I own and slouch a bit if I wanted to ride certain rides, and that started in the early 2000s. Same max height there, 76". They might have made that change after the fatal accident, or maybe the ride opened that way. Don't remember. But they had a little swing-stick thing mounted at the queue entrance, 76" off the ground, and for a time there was an attendant paying attention to it sporadically to make sure no giants got aboard. If the swing-stick hit you in the head, you didn't get to ride.

VelociCoaster, as far as I know, has no such max height, leading me to suspect it's not about seat or restraint configuration, nor about reach with respect to components or corners of the rolling stock itself. Of course, the vehicles could be different at Universal in a way that establishes a key difference in this area. I really have no idea.

Some other possibilities:

• The max height policy is optional, perhaps suggested rather than required by Intamin, leading to the question of why to have it in the first place
• There is a simple difference between what the two parks' respective insurers are willing to allow, perhaps in connection with the item above
• It's a reach issue, lateral or upward, regarding the proximity of stationary trackside (or overhead?) items, probably net of a very conservative safety margin juuuuuuust to be sure. While I'd be surprised if Intamin cut the design too close in the one most obvious place on the ride -- especially given modern design tools -- it's not like there is no precedent there...

How is your name halfabee but you’re twice a man

 

[pizzathieff]

Yikes. I'm feeling very grateful today for being somewhere between 6'3 and 6'4.

 

[DC High Heat]

Yeah SROS SFNE and SFA were like, 6’6” I think before SFNE’s accident. They were changed to 6’4” immediately afterwards. I’m also fortunate because, in shoes, I’m about 6’3.5”. I get checked at least half the time at SFNE’s Superman but always pass.

 

[belsaas]

I'm about 6'1", but I've definitely work boots to the park with 2 inch heels. Never gotten told anything about height though! Didn't know that was a thing!

 

[Coasternerd]

There is precedent for the 76" max height, ultra-irritatingly. Intamin has annoyed me with this for more than 15 years now.

Superman at SFNE was the ride that taught me I would sometimes have to wear the thinnest-soled shoes I own and slouch a bit if I wanted to ride certain rides, and that started in the early 2000s. Same max height there, 76". They might have made that change after the fatal accident, or maybe the ride opened that way. Don't remember. But they had a little swing-stick thing mounted at the queue entrance, 76" off the ground, and for a time there was an attendant paying attention to it sporadically to make sure no giants got aboard. If the swing-stick hit you in the head, you didn't get to ride.

VelociCoaster, as far as I know, has no such max height, leading me to suspect it's not about seat or restraint configuration, nor about reach with respect to components or corners of the rolling stock itself. Of course, the vehicles could be different at Universal in a way that establishes a key difference in this area. I really have no idea.

Some other possibilities:

• The max height policy is optional, perhaps suggested rather than required by Intamin, leading to the question of why to have it in the first place
• There is a simple difference between what the two parks' respective insurers are willing to allow, perhaps in connection with the item above
• It's a reach issue, lateral or upward, regarding the proximity of stationary trackside (or overhead?) items, probably net of a very conservative safety margin juuuuuuust to be sure. While I'd be surprised if Intamin cut the design too close in the one most obvious place on the ride -- especially given modern design tools -- it's not like there is no precedent there...

If im not mistaken, i305 has the same max height, and I think volcano did as well?

 

[AlpenChariot]

If im not mistaken, i305 has the same max height, and I think volcano did as well?

Max height for I305 is 78"

 

[Coasternerd]

Max height for I305 is 78"

Okay, only 2” taller though.

 

[AlpenChariot]

Okay, only 2” taller though.

I see your point but statically most people can ride rides with a max height requirement of 76". After 73" heights really taper off. With that being said I wish everyone who wants to experience Pantheon could.

 

[DC High Heat]

I feel like that 2in makes a big difference. There are a lot of people who are 6’4”, and relatively few at 6’6”.

 

[tursiops]

78 seems like a much better limit.

 

[b.mac]

It's mostly in restraint design and rider envelope which is why they tend to stick to 76 inches. A lot of B&M rides also unofficially have a 76 inch restriction mostly due to a similar philosophy and some of the Vekoma rides have a 78 inch height limit (the SLCs).

I think my most favorite moments dealing with super tall guests on Intamins and B&Ms were when they couldn't get the restraints closed properly or weren't able to fit into the seat properly when attempting to ride, either due to lack of leg room or just simply put that their upper body impeded the restraint from closing properly.

There is some room with negotiation in terms of height requirements but typically the manufacturers will make further modifications to the ride in order to accommodate those changes. The most notable two examples I am aware of are for Laff Trakk at Hersheypark and Oscar's Wacky Taxi at Sesame Place. Laff Trakk, a Maurer SC2000, has a 42 in height requirement whereas all the other Maurer SC2000s are around 48 inches minimum to ride. Part of the agreement with lowering the height restriction for the ride was that Maurer would slightly modify the restraints and also reduce the amount of spinning the cars are capable of compared to the other models. Oscar's Wacky Taxi had its seats modified slightly so that the height requirement could be reduced an inch in order to make it a more accessible ride for kids at the park.

 

[ControlsEE]

I think my most favorite moments dealing with super tall guests on Intamins and B&Ms were when they couldn't get the restraints closed properly or weren't able to fit into the seat properly when attempting to ride, either due to lack of leg room or just simply put that their upper body impeded the restraint from closing properly.

Forgot about that! With an OSTR, you could be the skiniest person in the world, but if your torso is too tall, forget about getting the harness over your shoulders.

 

[Gavin]

If im not mistaken, i305 has the same max height, and I think volcano did as well?

Max height for I305 is 78"

Yes however, atleast when I was there, this was never enforced on I305 or any other ride besides Volcano. We didn’t have a way of measuring max height at any of the rides I worked at, and the rule for Volcano was that as long as their feet weren’t flat on the floor in the station they were good to ride. Interestingly, per Intamin, the minimum height requirement for I305 is actually 48” but the park feels that 54” is more appropriate.

 

[GrantLee123]

Question. I got this email and it says total visits 2, regarding Visits for access to pantheon. Does it mean I visited twice or I need to visit two more times? All it says is Total Visits: 2. I visited Christmas town on Saturday. Do I need to make an additional trip or am I good? Edit: I visited Christmas town after getting this.

 

[bengalsguy601]

I'm sure this is already posted somewhere but can someone tell me what the required number of visits and between what dates in order to get that Pantheon incentive?

 

[vacoasterfanatic]

Annual pass - 2 visits before Halloween
Membership - 3 visits before new years eve

 

[Drachenwolf]

The POV supports my original impressions...
Terrific thrill ride, for any park. Rapid, original, varied, modern...
As a BGW "headliner" roller coaster investment... disappointing.
Suppose the 2nd ride (Drachen Spire) should be considered with it but, would have rather had a single, better coaster.

 

[halfabee]

Had the single-coaster plan remained intact, IMO the result would have been highly marketable but notably worse as a “signature ride” experience than Pantheon alone — much less Pantheon plus something like DS.

Seems like those were the options on the table, so I’m glad for what they built.