Over The Shoulder Restraints. (OTSRs)

[Rill'o'beily]

...Seems like if the train free to stall in the loop, it wouldn't end all that well.

 

"stall in the loop"

 

get out

[viking86]

Always wondered how the Schwarz lapbars could even do loops... Seems like if the train free to stall in the loop, it wouldn't end all that well.

 

I would say this went quite well...

 

[canadianparkfan]

Always wondered how the Schwarz lapbars could even do loops... Seems like if the train free to stall in the loop, it wouldn't end all that well.

 

I would say this went quite well...

 

Hmm... Never saw it happen with a full train. I remember reading somewhere that Revolution stalled on its first test run, but that was with an empty train .

 

Seeing that video makes me wonder why Schwarzkoph never used any other elements besides loops... Seems like the trains were able to handle a little more hangtime.

[david84]

But, I am a huge fan of Flight of Fear and it's awesome lapbars. Would it work on the Arrow and Vekoma loopers? I dunno, not without an entire train redesign

You just answered your own question right there.

 

We've already seen plenty of examples of new restraints that do away with OTSR's for looping coasters - Premiere's lapbar system, Vekoma's "vest" that they've put on an SLC and a couple of loopers, the X-Car restraint, etc.

 

The biggest issue here is retro-fitting an old coaster would cost the park hundreds of thousands of dollars to do this. So unless they are wanting to re-market an older ride, like Morey's Piers did with Great Nor'Easter, I don't think we'll see this happen.

 

I would hope that any future Premiere, Vekoma or Maurer Shoune installations come standard with their updated versions of lapbars for looping coasters, and it would be nice to see some other manufacturers, like Gerstaluer or B&M for example, follow suit.

 

But I also know that developing a new restraint system, when you already have one that works just fine for the parks, is VERY expensive to put into production. So unless a park is willing to fund that development when ordering a new ride, I doubt that's going to happen either.

 

So to answer your question - Why do we have them? Because it's expensive to do anything else.

You are correct.

[david84]

But, I am a huge fan of Flight of Fear and it's awesome lapbars. Would it work on the Arrow and Vekoma loopers? I dunno, not without an entire train redesign

You just answered your own question right there.

 

We've already seen plenty of examples of new restraints that do away with OTSR's for looping coasters - Premiere's lapbar system, Vekoma's "vest" that they've put on an SLC and a couple of loopers, the X-Car restraint, etc.

 

The biggest issue here is retro-fitting an old coaster would cost the park hundreds of thousands of dollars to do this. So unless they are wanting to re-market an older ride, like Morey's Piers did with Great Nor'Easter, I don't think we'll see this happen.

 

I would hope that any future Premiere, Vekoma or Maurer Shoune installations come standard with their updated versions of lapbars for looping coasters, and it would be nice to see some other manufacturers, like Gerstaluer or B&M for example, follow suit.

 

But I also know that developing a new restraint system, when you already have one that works just fine for the parks, is VERY expensive to put into production. So unless a park is willing to fund that development when ordering a new ride, I doubt that's going to happen either.

 

So to answer your question - Why do we have them? Because it's expensive to do anything else.

You are correct.

[CPmillenia94]

I try to imagine rides like Maverick, I305, or older B&M inverts without OTSRs. In my opinion they are completely necessary to remain comfortable for the rider during fast transitions. In fact, it might be unsafe if someone were to pass out and not have any upper body control.

[fraroc]

Always wondered how the Schwarz lapbars could even do loops... Seems like if the train free to stall in the loop, it wouldn't end all that well.

 

I would say this went quite well...

 

Hmm... Never saw it happen with a full train. I remember reading somewhere that Revolution stalled on its first test run, but that was with an empty train .

 

Seeing that video makes me wonder why Schwarzkoph never used any other elements besides loops... Seems like the trains were able to handle a little more hangtime.

 

 

Well, there are those strange, misshapen "loop screws" on Thriller/Zonga/Texas Tornado.

[RCF]

I try to imagine rides like Maverick, I305, or older B&M inverts without OTSRs. In my opinion they are completely necessary to remain comfortable for the rider during fast transitions. In fact, it might be unsafe if someone were to pass out and not have any upper body control.

 

I have seen this happen before, however with perfectly conscious bodies. While in line for Wicked at Lagoon a few years ago, someone came back into the station with a fairly busted up face and some blood on the restraint. He claimed to have slammed his face onto the restraint when he hit the bottom of the drop. I remember when it first opened and I was much younger that I did the same thing, however never hit my face against the lap restraint. Only was in a very uncomfortable position after leaning forward during the drop.

 

Definitely a GP thing to not realize you need to sit back into the seat at all times. I was just starting to get into roller coasters myself when I was 14, so I was GP at the time as well.

[DirkFunk]

I try to imagine rides like Maverick, I305, or older B&M inverts without OTSRs. In my opinion they are completely necessary to remain comfortable for the rider during fast transitions. In fact, it might be unsafe if someone were to pass out and not have any upper body control.

 

I'm not sold at all. Somehow RMC manages to make the rides they did without OTSRs. The purpose of OTSRs isn't to try and keep an inert body from smashing into the restraints or car sides to prevent injury either, just to keep it in the vehicle. If the vehicle is that poorly designed, you'll have injuries regardless.

[LiftThrill]

RMC transitions aren't nearly as snappy as Maverick's (or i305's probably). I'm personally totally fine with Maverick not having lapbars. Poltergeist's transitions can be pretty painful if you don't brace yourself (my sister got a concussion during the Maverick-styled turn from hitting her head on the side of the car) and I don't really want to imagine how my neck would feel after a lap on a lapbar-only Maverick.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

^ Go ride Outlaw Run and tell me that the transition from the first inversion to the following left turn isn't as snappy as anything on Maverick.

[DirkFunk]

^ Go ride Outlaw Run and tell me that the transition from the first inversion to the following left turn isn't as snappy as anything on Maverick.

 

Or christ, Lightning Rod. Storm Chaser too (and probably Wicked Cyclone, Joker, and Medusa).

 

Poltergeist's transitions can be pretty painful if you don't brace yourself (my sister got a concussion during the Maverick-styled turn from hitting her head on the side of the car) and I don't really want to imagine how my neck would feel after a lap on a lapbar-only Maverick.

 

So like I said, if you poorly design the vehicle, you're likely to give people concussions regardless of if they're conscious or not. The Premier launched coasters with OTSRs were some of the most abysmal attractions ever and probably hurt way more people than they protected.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

Yeah, truth on Storm Chaser too. Haven't experienced Lightning Rod yet, but yeah, all the RMC's toss you around. That's the main reason they're so good. I love the reactions of people who haven't been on an RMC and they're puzzled as to why the restraints are so powerful. Then when the ride's over they completely understand.

[Henry M]

Regarding the restraints on Schwarzkopf lap bar restraints, they were made to be able to be safe if left upside down and I herd a story about it. Lawyers and insurance people did not like it and made high insurance prices for if an accident happened, but Anton obviously did not like this and invited them to go on one of their trains and be inverted on a loop and held there by a crane. They got the idea after one minute.

[coasterbill]

I'll actually give you credit, this reeks of bull*** but there are actually sources for it being true. I don't know how credible they are but I've seen variations of this story in a few places after searching it.

[ytterbiumanalyst]

I've heard that story, and told that story too. I don't know how true it is, but if the story's good, tell it anyway.

 

I think just based on an amateur understanding of physics--and mind you, this is probably wrong--but Schwarzkopf's coasters didn't need strong restraints because the shape of the loop was such that the forces themselves kept people in their seats. In other words, the coaster design was it's own safety mechanism.

[DoinItForTheFame]

RMC transitions aren't nearly as snappy as Maverick's. . .

 

 

RMC transitions are just as snappy as Maverick's if not more snappy. Maybe not every transition on every RMC coaster, but I can think of a few transitions on Outlaw Run that make Maverick feel like a wacky worm.

[Wisco Woody]

If there were comfortable or tight OTSR vests on Outlaw Run like on Maverick, you would see how much more snappy and abrupt the lateral transitions are on Maverick. The difference is that on Maverick the restraints work so well that a normal sized man is smoothly and comfortably held through the transitions, while on Outlaw Run and the back rows of most RMCs you are allowed to fly from side to side. There is a limit on rapid lateral g force that you have to use an OTSR system, and while Outlaw Run is just below that limit, Maverick and I305 are well beyond it.

[thrilladdict]

There is a limit on rapid lateral g force that you have to use an OTSR system, and while Outlaw Run is just below that limit, Maverick and I305 are well beyond it.

 

You're just making crap up now. There is no such "limit" .... who would be responsible for enforcing your imaginary "limit?"

[Wisco Woody]

If you think normal park goers could safely or comfortably ride Maverick or I305 without an OTSR system, then you need to learn some basic physics and realize the risk for collision of rider's heads and upper bodies.

[DoinItForTheFame]

You're just making crap up now. There is no such "limit" .... who would be responsible for enforcing your imaginary "limit?"

 

[coasterbill]

There is a limit on rapid lateral g force that you have to use an OTSR system, and while Outlaw Run is just below that limit, Maverick and I305 are well beyond it.

 

You're just making crap up now. There is no such "limit" .... who would be responsible for enforcing your imaginary "limit?"

 

[Wisco Woody]

^ The 2 smartest, most hilarious people on the forums right here. The limit on G force and how much support a person needs to avoid injury is a relative one, it's different for different people. As a coaster enthusiast, this should be obvious if one has at least a high school education. The back rows on Outlaw Run and Goliath can cause smaller riders to slam into the sides of the car upon exiting the rolls and stalls, but in general the vast majority won't be injured. But remove the OTSR vests on Maverick and I305, you would see several cases of whiplash and lesser injuries due to impact with the seat or person seated next to them.

[DoinItForTheFame]

Every row on Outlaw Run and Goliath can cause smaller riders to slam into the sides of the car upon exiting the rolls and stalls. . .

 

Fixed that for you.

[RollerManic]

There is a restraint classification system where certain restraints are necessary due to acceleration or force in an axis. The codes also cover stuff like shinbars.

 

I can not find the document I occurred a long time ago over this, but I do have some proof of regulations to this sort of thing.

 

First, regulations in general: http://www.saferparks.org/standards

 

See 1.2 on ASTM F2137-15a: http://www.astm.org/Standards/F2137.htm