Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

The Six Flags Magic Mountain (SFMM) Discussion Thread

Page 2218 - Wonder Woman Roller Coaster for 2022!

Recommended Posts

^^If only I got to hold regular conversations with Jay haha

 

I think it's good that the SFMM park heads constantly read these boards as it helps them quickly address the changes to be made. Knowing how good SFMM's management team is right now, I'm deeeeecently confident that they can reduce the height limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^If only I got to hold regular conversations with Jay haha

 

Why does the thought of that terrify me?

 

Then again, he'd probably be more annoyed with me asking if we're getting a B&M or Intamin with a custom layout around the mountain...

 

"Are we getting a B&M?"

"No."

"Are getting a B&M?"

"No."

"Are we getting a B&M?"

"No!"

"......How about an Intamin?"

*sighs*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why does the thought of that terrify me?

 

Then again, he'd probably be more annoyed with me asking if we're getting a B&M or Intamin with a custom layout around the mountain...

 

"Are we getting a B&M?"

"No."

"Are getting a B&M?"

"No."

"Are we getting a B&M?"

"No!"

"......How about an Intamin?"

*sighs*

 

I'd love to see you do that...while it'd be pretty rude, I'd still laugh my *** off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a couple thoughts...

 

Could the height restriction be insurance related??

 

Afterall, in sue-happy, idiotic California, roller coasters are killing/maiming machines. For a cash strapped company like SF, that could add up to quite a bit of $$. Now, before anyone mentions that other SF parks have the same ride with the 36" requirements, SFMM is (technically) open year round. Thus, effectively doubling or tripling, insurance payments for SFMM on the same ride.

 

That could also *possibly* explain why the change was made to Jaguar. (Figuring that the old policy was in effect when CF bought KBF, and to renew the policy with the new owners, the insurance company demanded the changes be written.)

 

Disney, OTOH, is not as cash strapped as the others, and markets everything specifically towards families, much like Legoland would.

 

I do understand that families are not the core audience of SFMM, but if increased insurance costs are their reasoning behind this, it's time to bite the bullet, pay the difference, and market the ride as it is/was intended.

 

 

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do understand that families are not the core audience of SFMM, but if increased insurance costs are their reasoning behind this, it's time to bite the bullet, pay the difference, and market the ride as it is/was intended.

 

Hasn't this been Shapiro's main goal with all their parks: To make them all more family-friendly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paint it shiny gold, put dollar signs all over the place, and market it as "The World's Most Expensive Kiddie Coaster!" - make a big statement about how insurance companies are milking California business dry (and contributing to their failure and/or leaving of the state).

 

They could have media day for the ride be a BIG political statement, as well as a great way to make some strong ties with state/local government for Six Flags.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually curious how much power the insurance companies have when it comes to setting height restrictions. If the insurance company thinks 36 inches is too great of a risk, the park may have been forced to set the height at 42 inches in order to afford the insurance premiums on the ride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, what a hot topic! I guess I'll chime in and be on the "This is ridiculous" side. Going through the thread and seeing the misunderstanding of "boycotting", nobody would have to boycott the ride because nobody who would want to ride it can. (Well, except for Jeff.) This is just really stupid. (I know, I'm just repeating what everyone else said, it just feels really good to type it.)

 

They mind as well just put a swing set there, and set the height requirement to 42". They would have saved a lot of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just wanted to point out this is not the first Roller Skater with this limit within the chain. The Roller Skater at SFKK also has the same limit

OMG! READ THE THREAD BEFORE YOU POST!!!!

 

The Roller Skater at SFKK is 36" w/ an adult or 42" to ride alone.

 

This has ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED, and we have ALREADY DETERMINED what is posted on the SFKK site is incorrect. I have a recent brochure that shows this.

 

Here...I'll post a picture....

roller.jpg.7a2940a2a3367970c1ae207a2a3d26c5.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually curious how much power the insurance companies have when it comes to setting height restrictions. If the insurance company thinks 36 inches is too great of a risk, the park may have been forced to set the height at 42 inches in order to afford the insurance premiums on the ride.

 

If the insurance companies were that involved, they would demand restraints or a height restriction on the Log Jammer.

 

I don't know when all the other roller skaters where installed in California, but I initially thought there might have been a law change where the old roller skaters were grandfathered in at a lower minimum. But if Jay Thomas is trying to get it changed, that's not the case. It would have been very easy for SFMM to come right out and say it's 42 inches because the State of California now mandates it if there had been a law change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^Thanks for clearing that up, you never know what crazy laws each individual state will enact in any area.

 

I thought I remembered hearing a while back that the State of California has something to do with the change in Revolution's restraints from lap bars to OTSRs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was all just a rumor. The only law governing amusement rides (AB850) didn't even get passed until 2000.

 

In reality, I would guess that they were added as a response to some sort of incident(s) the park had where they felt OTSR's were the best solution to the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer Tim gave was something along the lines of "Six Flags agreed to go with the ASTM standards...", which based on some interpretations of the standard, could very well be true.

 

Revolution was build before the ASTM standards existed, so there is a chance that OTSR's were the only way to modify the ride to meet those standards. The only thing I can think of that might apply to Revolution is the standards on the reach envelopes. Not 100% sure on that one though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/