Cococay WaterPark FYI for Parents: Brochures Incorrect On Height Restriction

[proggieus]

18 hours ago, drrich2 said:

Actually, there's a lot to be said for letting parents take a look at the prospective ride, consider their extensive first hand knowledge of their own kids, and make a parental decision, instead of having the company pull a 'Big Brother' move to disappoint and upset kids who got all excited looking forward to something special the brochure said they could do.

 

Thanks for posting and letting us know. Pretty much nothing's perfectly safe, and the extent to which some things are taken at times suggests more about placating legal liability concerns than 'safety.'

 

Growing up as an often free-range kid in the rural south, I imagine my childhood would've looked like a litany of near-death experiences by today's standards...🤗

 

Richard.

 

[kassimer1]

5 hours ago, drrich2 said:

 

Has it really? I did a little quick Googling and didn't turn up any basis. My suspicion is that it's likely arbitrary, perhaps based on average (or low average) heights associated with some age or grade group. 

 

Recommendations aren't always based in experts having proven much of anything, and sometimes catch on like they're natural law. The recommendations that one should drink 8 glasses of water per day, and the assertion that breakfast is the most important meal of the day, have both come under scrutiny. Many people just believe what they hear said. I would to know the evidence base for that. 

 

I agree. Be interested to know what that's based on. 

 

 

I doubt it is. I suspect it's based on arbitrary assertion, but no way to know for sure. 

 

 

That's a bit extreme (but the kid could be a midget, and the safety concern mental not physical!). 

 

If people had received false advertising, I'd probably spot them 4 inches or so if reasonable if I could. 

 

We're not changing the world here. Just sharing me view about what I perceive to be another example of an over-paternalistic nanny state that seems to have cheer leaders.

 

Richard.

determine height requirements on rides?

The basic determining factors are:

• ASTM Standards for amusement rides, which give a range of force tolerances per age or height requirement
• Manufacturers and safety restraints, which would be determined by rider proportions, forces, and points of contact
• Parks, state laws, and insurance; Factors such as insurance costs, number of back-up or fail-safe systems, type of restraint, and size of the ride may be adjusted at a more direct level, usually in the form of raising the height requirement so that a more mature audience is targeted.

These are the main ones, but there are other smaller factors that are more directed at a park-by-park basis.

 

i got this off an engineering site,  since you dont know the forces placed on the childs body at lower heights or pionts of contact maybe listening to those that do and have calculated these things out would make more sence than ignoring it. 

[drrich2]

Tried to go to your link; couldn't get through, said the blog's for invited readers only. Appreciate the info., if not the tone it was delivered in. Thanks for posting. Since you have access, do you have any indicator whether this is the basis for Royal Caribbean's restrictions? We've also been elsewhere, including to a water park excursion on that same cruise I saw her turned away from the Splashaway Bay purple slide, and it's evident there's substantial discrepancy in real world practices as to who can do what.

 

For the record, I wasn't 'ignoring those who do.' No such had been shown on the thread, and while you've put forward a possibility, is it known to be what's in play in this instance? Could well be.

 

That said, what you provided here makes interesting reading. Unless you or someone else has additional direct source material, I suppose the positions have been articulated, people will decide what to think.

[the_dylaness]

No one right answer here, but I agree that the situation these parents were placed in certainly doesn't seem "fun". 

 

They did the responsible thing, read the brochures, assessed what options they had for their kids, and went ahead.

 

But because SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE, messed up, a lot of little kids were very disappointed when it could have been headed off at the pass- "Here are the slides/activities you CAN do- let's look at the other ones next time when you are a little taller."

 

This issue strikes close to home- I have a very strong swimmer of a daughter who happens to be also very short for her age.  She *just* this year reached the height (by the skin of her teeth) for the slide at the local pool.  When we hit this height at home in mid winter measuring on the door jamb, she was elated!

 

The first day at the water park she was measured by the lifeguard and found to be "not quite tall enough".  (And unfortunately most of her friends, who are less capable swimmers, have been going on this activity for the past two years.)  We asked for a re-measure on a *ruler* instead of the sign.  What d'ya know, she's almost an inch past the requirement, and now showing the slides who's boss.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

This issue is about a typo in the brochure, as well as the corresponding question as to why there is a height limit for the Coco Cay Thrill Water Park slides.

 

The answer is that this is about child safety, using common best practices and established procedures. Imagine the horrific hypothetical news of a child being injured that "gets past" these rules. The blame game would inevitably be started immediately.

 

Any second-guessing and several posts here already reflect overthinking the rules & purpose, as well as a heavy dose of analysis paralysis.

[BigHouseFootball]

It’s actually pretty common knowledge that theme parks always overshoot the height restriction by a couple of inches just to be extra safe. 

 

So could someone who is a half inch short ride a roller coaster and be perfectly safe every time? Absolutely. Parks are protecting themselves by inflating the height restrictions. I get it. Not going to fight it. 

 

What really gets me is when I see kids meet the height restriction but the parents still don’t let them ride because they believe it’s still not safe. Or better yet when they are on the ride and the parent is holding on acting like the safety bar! If your kid meets the height restriction they don’t need anything but the harness!

Edited June 10, 2019 by BigHouseFootball

[ilovetotravel1977]

19 hours ago, time4u2go said:

Would an adult that's less than 48" also be prevented from the slides?

While not at Cococay, my family just returned from The Grand at Moon Palace in Cancun. They have a waterpark there with mat racers and tube slides. Tube slides were for 5'3" and taller. I'm 42 and 5'1" and I was denied riding.

 

It definitely happens.

[CRUISEFAN0001]

59 minutes ago, BigHouseFootball said:

It’s actually pretty common knowledge that theme parks always overshoot the height restriction by a couple of inches just to be extra safe. 

Interesting speculation. However, historical statistics by the commercial insurance industry pertaining to injuries (often based on design elements) are used industry-wide as the reason for specific height limits.

 

Here are some facts:

 

https://saferparks.org/safety-tips/minimum-height-restrictions

 

https://safe-wise.com/downloads/ConsiderationsforWaterSlideOperation.pdf

 

 

 

[BigHouseFootball]

Parks are not going to put themselves in a position where the only thing standing between them and a potential lawsuit is a 17 year old ride op manning the line. There’s wiggle room in height restrictions. 

 

Im not advocating for trying to sneak your child on, nor faulting the parks for being strict on the height restrictions. But to think that parks wouldn’t add in some buffer is ridiculous. 

[CRUISEFAN0001]

35 minutes ago, BigHouseFootball said:

Parks are not going to put themselves in a position where the only thing standing between them and a potential lawsuit is a 17 year old ride op manning the line. There’s wiggle room in height restrictions. 

 

Im not advocating for trying to sneak your child on, nor faulting the parks for being strict on the height restrictions. But to think that parks wouldn’t add in some buffer is ridiculous. 

The same could be said for on-board activities like the Rock Climbing Wall, FlowRider, etc.  That must be why you have to sign a waiver.

[poncho1973]

10 hours ago, BigHouseFootball said:

It’s actually pretty common knowledge that theme parks always overshoot the height restriction by a couple of inches just to be extra safe.

 

 

Oh it's pretty common knowledge you say, well then, you've changed my mind completely. 

 

- no one ever

[BigHouseFootball]

42 minutes ago, poncho1973 said:

 

Oh it's pretty common knowledge you say, well then, you've changed my mind completely. 

 

- no one ever

Thanks for adding nothing but meanness. 

Edited June 10, 2019 by BigHouseFootball

[poncho1973]

Just now, BigHouseFootball said:

Thanks for adding nothing 

 

You, too!  We're both equally good at it.

[BigHouseFootball]

1 minute ago, poncho1973 said:

 

You, too!  We're both equally good at it.

Ok internet tough guy. Feel better about yourself? 

[poncho1973]

You've lost me there.  Sorry.  I don't see the jump you made with that comment.

[ONECRUISER]

On 6/9/2019 at 9:29 AM, time4u2go said:

Would an adult that's less than 48" also be prevented from the slides?

Know they are on Amusement Park rides. There are multiple cases of under height or over weight being hurt and killed on rides. Not sure what determines Height/Weight limits on Slides. Might be Manufacture

[illiniwahoo]

On 6/8/2019 at 8:59 PM, Rccsunbaby said:

Thought I would let parents who have young children going to the Thrill WaterPark know that the brochures are incorrect for the height requirements at Splash Summit. These are the ones that include the raft Waterslides (SlingShot, Twister, Splash Speedway racer slides only).

 

All of the brochures (including the detailed one that you get in your stateroom the night before arrival at Cococay) state that the Rider min. height: 48" (OR 40" with life vest).

This is not the case. If your child is not 48" tall they will be denied regardless of the life vest.

 

We were told to take off the life vest since life vests are not allowed on any of the water slide rides at Splash Summit. After doing so, we were then told that our youngest was too short to ride by the lifeguard manning the bottom of the stairs. After asking the lifeguard, he said that the brochures are wrong and that they need to be updated.

 

There were several other parents that encountered this as well with crying children after being told they could not ride.

Thanks for starting this post. Hopefully the admins will just remove the asinine discussion that ensued rather than the whole thread. 

 

It totally stinks that the brochure was wrong. I know I may not have chosen to purchase the water park tickets if we all couldn't participate in the activity as a family- that's what family vacations are all about! Hopefully it didn't ruin your time, or you complained and got your money back! Royal should own their mistake and fix it asap so other parents can make properly informed choices about how to spend their precious vacation time and dollars.

[pyrateslife4me84]

I hope you got a refund. If they marketed it this way, you certainly have grounds to demand a full refund.