What to do when kid is ALMOST tall enough ?

[jcvalenti]

We're on our way to Disney in mid-June. My 2 year old (turning 3 next week) is ALMOST there ... in sock feet, he's a little over 39". With Crocs on (which are about as thick as the sandals he wears in Disney), he's about 1/8 inch over 40.

The kid is an absolute terror, and loves rides. More importantly, he hates being the only one of the group who can't do anything.

So my question is, for those of you with kids who were adventuresome and who loved going on any ride they can, did you have any problem with your little one getting on any rides when they were right at the limit ? Were any of the measuring sticks a little higher than 40" ?

We're going to play it by ear, and obviously if the little guy gets freaked out waiting in line, we won't be forcing him on the ride, but last year he was 36" and just able to fit on Goofy's Barnstormer, and it was by far his favorite thing of the whole trip. If he can get on rides like Big Thunder, Splash Mountain, Soarin', Test Track and Star Tours ... he's going to have an absolute blast this trip.

[Disney Doll]

I'm sure when it's super close it could go either way and you just have to rely on the discretion of the CMs. I'd just prep your child by making sure he knows that he may not be quite tall enough that way he doesn't get his hopes up.

We had a similar situation when we took our nieces. The 6 yr old could ride pretty much anything while the 4 year old who was small for her age anyway didn't meet the requirement on several rides. We would split up and try to let the younger one do something special while we waited for the other half of our party to ride. An ice cream while we waited or a little trinket from one of the shops usually did the trick.

[SBETigg]

They do measure and they are strict about height requirements. If you know he's not going to make it, I wouldn't get his hopes up and have to deal with it immediately pre-boarding. That will be harder on everyone than prepping him in advance. They have measuring devices outside the ride as well as inside at the end of the queue area. It's for safety's sake, so I wouldn't try to fudge it just to get him on. It's always something to look forward to for the next trip, or maybe he'll actually grow enough in time. I know it's hard to let them down when they want to ride. Best wishes.

[deedeenmickey]

When my daughter was at that height she had rode RNRoller coaster on the previous trip and absolutely loved it. The next trip the CM said she wasn't tall enough. :( We walked over to one of the snack counters and got a stack of napkins and put them in her shoes. We walked right through about 10 minutes later and she got to ride.:mickey:

I know a lot of people wouldn't agree with this but she had rode it before this and she LOVES roller coasters and rides...the scarier the better!

[Ian]

Our son just turned two and he's about 36" right now. When we were in DL last month we took him on the Matterhorn and on Gadget's Go Coaster (i.e. the West Coast version of Goofy's Barnstormer) and we had no issues.

The one challenge we ran into with DD was that kids tend to slouch a bit and if you had a particulary snippy CM they wouldn't always allow you to re-measure. Make sure he stands up nice and straight for them.

[Michigander]

I had a bigg issue when my dd when she was 3. The first CM measured and said yup she's tall enought to ride Splash Mt. so into line we got one hour later when we were ready to get on another CM measured and said no. This made me very angry after standing in line for that hour. If I had known she wasn't going to beable to ride we would have gone off to ride something she could have gotten on. It was a wasted hour during a peak seaon time so most lines were long and I felt if they had alrady said yes and we stood in line she should have been let to ride!:thedolls:

[Mendelson]

Thick-soled shoes...and lots of padding if needed! Worked for us about seven years ago. Very simple...good luck and have fun.

[yjgirl32]

We had a similar incident- not at Disney but a park in Pa. We measured him outside the park- then measured him again when got to the ride- then when we got to the top of the tube water ride the cm measured him and said yes- went down twice they switched cm's and the new cm said no. He was devastated. He did get to go down one more time because I complained. Be prepared. Good luck.

[Young@Heart]

They do measure and they are strict about height requirements. If you know he's not going to make it, I wouldn't get his hopes up and have to deal with it immediately pre-boarding. That will be harder on everyone than prepping him in advance. They have measuring devices outside the ride as well as inside at the end of the queue area. It's for safety's sake, so I wouldn't try to fudge it just to get him on. It's always something to look forward to for the next trip, or maybe he'll actually grow enough in time. I know it's hard to let them down when they want to ride. Best wishes.

This is pretty much what I was going to say. It can be hard when your DC are too small for a ride, but the restrictions are to keep them safe. On DD's first trip (it was during her 3rd b'day) she was too small for most of the "thrilling" attractions. Last year (when she was 5) she finally made it on SplM, Soarin', Test Track, TOT, Star Tours, and there may have been a couple more. We just measure for our August trip and she's 43.75". So she'll be able to do EE this year! She's watched the video we made while on the ride many times and is super-excited!
So, while missing out on a few thrilling rides might be upsetting now, just think of the fun you'll have next time, when there'll be a whole new set of rides your DS will experience for the first time! :mickey:

[WDWdriver]

We walked over to one of the snack counters and got a stack of napkins and put them in her shoes. We walked right through about 10 minutes later and she got to ride.:mickey:
!

I have seen this happen many times, and I can't begin to tell you how much it disturbs me. There is a height requirement on rides for a reason. Each attraction and its associated restraint systems are engineered to keep riders safe within known tolerances. When a parent or a CM violates those tolerances the ride is no longer safe. In simple terms it means that a rider who doesn't meet the height requirement could slip beneath a restraint and could be ejected from the moving ride.

I have had to turn away many a disappointed young rider and family when they came close to the height requirement but didn't quite reach it. And I have seen more attempts to cheat than you can imagine.

The bottom line for me is - if you are not tall enough to ride then it is not safe for you to ride. And I wouldn't EVER consider jeopardizing the safety of a member of my family because he or she "loves roller coasters and rides".

[BMan62]

Why can't they come up with a way to measure once and give the person (it's not always kids that are short) a wristband or card or some such device to show what rides they can go on? They could do this outside the main entrance - just past the ticket machines - or make a special line for measurements.

Say a green wristband for 40"+; a yellow wristband for 36"+; a red wristband for under 36"?

Then there would be no getting by the height requirements -- no wristband, no ride; wrong color, no ride.

[d_m_n_n]

The one challenge we ran into with DD was that kids tend to slouch a bit and if you had a particulary snippy CM they wouldn't always allow you to re-measure. Make sure he stands up nice and straight for them.

We actually practiced standing up nice and straight before we left home. DS was *right* at 40". Everytime he saw the stick come at him, you should have seen him stand at attention like a soldier! It worked and he was never turned away. :D

[faline]

I have seen this happen many times, and I can't begin to tell you how much it disturbs me. There is a height requirement on rides for a reason. Each attraction and its associated restraint systems are engineered to keep riders safe within known tolerances. When a parent or a CM violates those tolerances the ride is no longer safe. In simple terms it means that a rider who doesn't meet the height requirement could slip beneath a restraint and could be ejected from the moving ride.

I have had to turn away many a disappointed young rider and family when they came close to the height requirement but didn't quite reach it. And I have seen more attempts to cheat than you can imagine.

The bottom line for me is - if you are not tall enough to ride then it is not safe for you to ride. And I wouldn't EVER consider jeopardizing the safety of a member of my family because he or she "loves roller coasters and rides".

Well said, Ron. We all want our children to be happy but they don't always know what is best for them. We have a neice who has always been very tall for her age. When she was younger, we took her to a local fair and she wanted to go on one of the adult rides. We told her it was older people and she started to whine a bit. Although she was certainly tall enough to get on the ride, it did not seem appropriate for her at her age. Once I told her it wasn't going to happen, she was fine and enjoyed the rides that were more geared to her age - physically and emotionally - regardless of her height!

[emmatink]

I have to agree with another poster and say that if your child is close it is best to prepare for a "no". My daughter was almost 3 on our last trip and she was 40 inches tall but denied entrance onto Soarin. She did do Goofy's Barnstormer and loved it. There are plenty of other rides to go on so I wouldn't stress over it. Besides you will be back again right :)

[Stitchahula]

I like the post about the wrist bands. I haven't been able to understand how on 1 ride they are tall enough but the next ride the fall just short.:confused: If there was 1 place to measure than there would be no confusion.

[Ian]

The wristbands are a good idea, but unfortunately they'll never be implemented because they'd cost too much.

They just did away with the wristbands for EMH, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't turn around and roll them out again for height requirements.

Just FYI, though, if you do run into a situation where your child is tall enough and you're denied access to the ride, ask to speak with the area manager. I've found they're very reasonable, take the extra time to make sure the child is properly measured, and will work with you to allow your child on a ride if it's appropriate.

For whatever reason, there appear to be some CM's that power trip and deny access to kids who are an appropriate height. Happened to us with DD on the Barnstormer once and it turned into a huge mess.

Don't mistake me ... I'm absolutely in line with Ron in terms of safety. But once the kid hits the height, it can't be subjective depending on what CM you happen to run in to. If it's important to you, make an issue of it until it gets resolved.

[DisneyPrincess21]

We're on our way to Disney in mid-June. My 2 year old (turning 3 next week) is ALMOST there ... in sock feet, he's a little over 39". With Crocs on (which are about as thick as the sandals he wears in Disney), he's about 1/8 inch over 40.

The kid is an absolute terror, and loves rides. More importantly, he hates being the only one of the group who can't do anything.

So my question is, for those of you with kids who were adventuresome and who loved going on any ride they can, did you have any problem with your little one getting on any rides when they were right at the limit ? Were any of the measuring sticks a little higher than 40" ?

We're going to play it by ear, and obviously if the little guy gets freaked out waiting in line, we won't be forcing him on the ride, but last year he was 36" and just able to fit on Goofy's Barnstormer, and it was by far his favorite thing of the whole trip. If he can get on rides like Big Thunder, Splash Mountain, Soarin', Test Track and Star Tours ... he's going to have an absolute blast this trip.



Use lots of hair spray & gel and tease his hair up!! LOL. Just kidding. I have no real answer I just couldn't resist the suggestion when I saw the thread title. :D

[KSS]

if he is just 40 inches now and you are not going for 3 more months... chances are he will grow a bit more before you go and you should be fine.

[WDWdriver]

Just FYI, though, if you do run into a situation where your child is tall enough and you're denied access to the ride, ask to speak with the area manager. I've found they're very reasonable, take the extra time to make sure the child is properly measured, and will work with you to allow your child on a ride if it's appropriate........ If it's important to you, make an issue of it until it gets resolved.

I agree, Ian. If you think the CM is wrong, don't argue or get angry. Be polite and insist that a manager be called.

[jcvalenti]

Thanks for all the tips. I'm certainly not looking to bend any rules, but if the kids 40", I want to make sure he has the option to go on all the rides.

I'll definately start working on getting him to stand up straight (and stand still) - once he learns that what it takes to get on the rides, he'll be marching lock-step.

[javamama]

ITA w/Ron the rules are rules for a reason just like the rule we keep our kids in booster seats/car seats for a safety reason to protect them. Sure they might throw a fit, but at least we know they can't get hurt and it's for a reason. My dd is 2.5 she's tall, so she's close to the 40" mark probably around 38-39 I'm not stuffing shoes, she can wait until next year to ride Splash Mtn, and what not--she'll live, and I'll feel better about it.

[WDWdriver]

Sorry, I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I want to throw in a story that is somewhat related.

A couple of years ago at Kali River Rapids a woman stepped out of a raft at the end of the ride holding a baby. I don't mean a young child or a toddler, it was a BABY! The height requirement at KRR is 38 inches. This woman somehow smuggled the child onto the ride beneath a poncho. Having cheated the safety rules, she laughed at us as she walked away.

I am certainly not saying that anyone here at Intercot would be that stupid. But this is an example of how far some people will go to get around the ride restrictions.

[DisneyPrincess21]

Sorry, I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I want to throw in a story that is somewhat related.

A couple of years ago at Kali River Rapids a woman stepped out of a raft at the end of the ride holding a baby. I don't mean a young child or a toddler, it was a BABY! The height requirement at KRR is 38 inches. This woman somehow smuggled the child onto the ride beneath a poncho. Having cheated the safety rules, she laughed at us as she walked away.

I am certainly not saying that anyone here at Intercot would be that stupid. But this is an example of how far some people will go to get around the ride restrictions.

:mad: WOW That Is UNBELIEVABLE!!! People that have such disregard for the safety of their own children shouldn't have children. That baby could have swallowed water and choked or been knocked out of the lady's arm and drowned or countless other terrible things that could have happened to that poor baby! Hopefully that baby makes it through life long enough to realize what a wack job the mother is and then go live with a relative. That is just terribly upsetting.

[grwoolf]

As far as those concerned about safety, I agree in principle. However, the height requirements are part of the engineering aspects of the ride and have a great deal of margin built in just like the mechanical aspects of the ride. There is absolutely no physical danger in putting a few napkins in a shoe and making the child 1/8 of an inch taller. The issue I'd be more concerned about is you don't want to teach the child to cheat and the napkins certainly step into a grey area. If your kid needs a little boost, wear some thicker shoes or get some comfy inserts. Obviously, you want to be reasonable and not put your 5 year old in high heels, although I've seen some kids pushing the evelope (and I've seen CM's turn them away). Probably not a danger on the ride, but not the best walking gear at wdw. Disney must also use physical height to measure the maturity of a child (it's all they have). Maturity can be a more critical safety concern then physical size on some rides. You don't want a very young child freaking out on Splash Mtn and jumping out of the boat for example.

I would never do anything to jeapordize the safety of my children beyond the every day dangers of driving down the road in a car, letting them play sports, etc.. All these things are much more dangerous than any thrill ride at disney, napkins in the shoes or not (not that I approve of that).

[Melanie]

Why can't they come up with a way to measure once and give the person (it's not always kids that are short) a wristband or card or some such device to show what rides they can go on?

They tested a program very similar to what you described a few years back at Disneyland, and it didn't work. Can't remember the specifics of why.

Let's please remember Ron's wise words regarding why it's not safe for children to ride if they aren't yet tall enough. We don't allow any talk of cheating the system here on INTERCOT.

[jonahbear2006]

shop for boots. thats what we did, and only wore them on the days we needed the extra heighth. It wont harm the child, if it were going to, they would insist on measuring without shoes on every child. we bought boots for our son and it worked wonderfully and he was just borderlined.

[jcvalenti]

Well, I've got 3 months ... so I think what I'll do is just start pumping the kid full of hormone-enhanced milk and genetically engineered beef and chicken. Hopefully he'll grow another inch or two before June, and he'll be well past the height limit.

I'm just worried about him getting to 41 or 41.5", and then going to Splash Mountain only to find the measuring stick they are using is a little higher than regulation.

Hopefully they calibrate those things once in a while.

[deedeenmickey]

I knew that would spark alot of debate. Just to clarify..my child had already rode the ride twice with the CM blessing. She was 40 inches (or whatever the requirment was). She must have been slumping at the time or something. The CM wouldn't measure her again and I knew she was tall enough. I would never do anything to put my child in jeopardy just to ride a ride. I didn't want to ruin our vacation by arguing or having her be disappointed unfairly and maybe this was teaching her a way "around the rules" but sometimes it is required. :cool:

[Mendelson]

Grwoolf hits it on the head, I think, and it certainly isn't cheating the system.

Let's say a person is X inches tall in a pair of thin flip-flops and X+2 inches tall in his Reeboks...and the threshold for riding is X +.5 inches. We all measure in at different heights depending on what shoes we wear any day. Simply deciding to wear the shoes that put you at the accepted height I don't think is cheating.

And the restraint systems are really about body bulk. I don't think anyone believes that the difference in shoes resulting in a difference of an inch or two is putting anybody in jeopardy.

[BamaJenn]

This past trip my son was just over 40". I was SO excited because I was going to be able to take him on things he'd never done before. We started our day at Splash Mountain which turned out to be a mistake. He was tall enough and LOVED it but hated being wet. Being wet ruined him for the rest of the day. He refused to do Big Thunder because he thought he might get wet. He was even afraid to do IASW!

Bottom line... as others have said... as long as his head hits the line on the stick and the CM says he's tall enough... go for it.

[SBETigg]

And the restraint systems are really about body bulk. I don't think anyone believes that the difference in shoes resulting in a difference of an inch or two is putting anybody in jeopardy.

If they're about bulk, then why not allow people on by body weight? There are some kids who are tall, but not very bulky, and some kids who are short who are indeed quite bulky. So why do the cut off by height at all? Because it is actually also about height, about where the belts and bars hit a body. You can absolutely be even one inch shorter than safety standards allow on certain rides, depending on the safety mechanisms in place.

[FaithTrustPixieDust]

We went when DS was right at 40". He got different measurements throughout the day . . . it's so frustrating for a kid to be turned away from his favorite ride when he was allowed to ride it 4 times the day before!!

This year DS we were hoping DS would be 44". A few months before the trip, I measured and marked off 44" on my fridge. He measured himself every single day for 2 months! It was a FABULOUS motivator to get him to eat his veggies and drink his milk! He would measure, go eat a few more carrots, and then measure again. It also trained him to stand up straight and tall (and stretch his neck out a tad)!

And just to be on the safe side, dress the kid in some thick-soled athletic shoes!! :mickey:

[Ian]

Sorry, I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I want to throw in a story that is somewhat related.

A couple of years ago at Kali River Rapids a woman stepped out of a raft at the end of the ride holding a baby. I don't mean a young child or a toddler, it was a BABY! The height requirement at KRR is 38 inches. This woman somehow smuggled the child onto the ride beneath a poncho. Having cheated the safety rules, she laughed at us as she walked away.

I am certainly not saying that anyone here at Intercot would be that stupid. But this is an example of how far some people will go to get around the ride restrictions.Honestly, and some people may disagree, but I think criminal charges for child endangerment would have been appropriate here.

[Mendelson]

If they're about bulk, then why not allow people on by body weight?

And woe to the poor CM who has to tell women they have to weigh in!! :mickey:

[TheVBs]

Sorry, I don't mean to hijack this thread, but I want to throw in a story that is somewhat related.

A couple of years ago at Kali River Rapids a woman stepped out of a raft at the end of the ride holding a baby. I don't mean a young child or a toddler, it was a BABY! The height requirement at KRR is 38 inches. This woman somehow smuggled the child onto the ride beneath a poncho. Having cheated the safety rules, she laughed at us as she walked away.

I am certainly not saying that anyone here at Intercot would be that stupid. But this is an example of how far some people will go to get around the ride restrictions.

Wow. :( Did a CM see that? If so, was anything said?

[brad192]

Ride those borderline rides in the morning! It's a documented fact that people are about a quarter to half inch taller first thing in the morning, than they are later in the day. Your spine compresses that much while being vertical during the day. At night, when you're laying horizonally in bed, it relaxes & stretches back out. :)

[grwoolf]

If they're about bulk, then why not allow people on by body weight?

They cut off by height because it is easy to manage large amounts of people that way, not because it is the best judge of safety. If they could, they would weigh you, measure you, determine your age, give you a test for maturity, etc. to accurately judge what rides you should be allowed on. Instead, they choose height because it is easy and make statistical population assumptions about if a kid is over 40" tall with shoes, he is typically between x and y years old, x and y pounds, reasonably mature, etc. This is why there is so much safty margin built into the standards. They measure height because it's easy and a reasonble indicator of other factors, not because height is that critical to safety.

[BamaJenn]

Ride those borderline rides in the morning! It's a documented fact that people are about a quarter to half inch taller first thing in the morning, than they are later in the day. Your spine compresses that much while being vertical during the day. At night, when you're laying horizonally in bed, it relaxes & stretches back out. :)
Ok that's just hilarious. :D

[kakn7294]

Honestly, and some people may disagree, but I think criminal charges for child endangerment would have been appropriate here.You know Ian, I hadn't thought about that but since you mentioned it, I totally agree. So many bad things could have happened to that baby. I'll be she doesn't even know how lucky she is that the baby made it through unscathed.

[HiHoKermitTheFrogHere]

We will be at WDW with our 3 kids (DD 8 1/2; DS 6; DS 4 mos.) in a few weeks. DW and I have been debating this issue for months leading up to our vacation because DD is very short for her age. She is very close to 48 inches in her bare feet, but not quite. With shoes, she makes it. DD loves the thrill rides and this will be her first trip where she might be able to make it on RnRC (with her shoes on). DW is very conservative and has said that she won't let DD ride RnRC if she only makes it with her shoes on. But we thought about it some more and realized that one of the many reasons that we love Disney so much is that Disney is very safety-conscious. Therefore, we concluded that there must be a margin of error on the height requirements. I cannot fathom that Disney would set a height requirement where someone who barely meets that requirement is okay to ride while someone who is only 1/4" shorter would be at risk. This thought makes us (well, maybe me more than DW!) more comfortable letting DW ride RnRC if she isn't truly 48" but she makes it with her shoes on.

But then think about this........not all bodies of equal height are made the same -- DW has a very short torso and long legs. Think about it some more........you don't stand up in the rides -- you sit down. The restraints must necessarily be geared to the rider's upper body. So does your overall body height really matter? It would seem to me that it is only your upper body height that really matter. So does this mean that if DW barely reaches 48" that she isn't really safe to ride because her upper body height -- the part that really matters -- is disproportionately short? My conclusion is that I don't think so -- Disney has a bunch of smart designers and safety engineers and I'm sure they thought of this long before DW and I did. (Beyond that, as stated by other posters, the height measurement is very subjective -- different CMs measuring, different posture each time the rider is measured, etc. -- so again, some margin of error must have been considered by the safety engineers.)

So my conclusion is that if you make the height requirement, even with shoes on, there is no problem riding. But I certainly would never do anything to try to artificially increase the height of one of my kids other than through the shoes they are wearing.


Why can't they come up with a way to measure once and give the person (it's not always kids that are short) a wristband or card or some such device to show what rides they can go on? They could do this outside the main entrance - just past the ticket machines - or make a special line for measurements.

Say a green wristband for 40"+; a yellow wristband for 36"+; a red wristband for under 36"?

Then there would be no getting by the height requirements -- no wristband, no ride; wrong color, no ride.

I could swear that I read there was such a thing -- maybe in Town Hall or somewhere near there. I seem to recall reading that in another thread a while ago. I cannot point to anything concrete, but I seem to recall seeing something about this.

[WDWdriver]

So my conclusion is that if you make the height requirement, even with shoes on, there is no problem riding. But I certainly would never do anything to try to artificially increase the height of one of my kids other than through the shoes they are wearing.


The height requirement assumes that the child is wearing a normal pair of shoes. The CMs will not ask parents to remove their child's shoes for the measurement unless the shoes are unusually high heeled, thick soled or possibly tampered with.

And of course there are safety margins built into the height requirement. The problem is that those operating the rides don't know what those margins are - not the CMs doing the measuring and not even their managers. All they have to work with is the bottom line height restriction imposed by the engineers who designed the attraction. If a CM gives your child a break of a half inch or an inch or even more, is the CM endangering your child? Probably not, but we don't know what the limit is. What we absolutely do know is that the CM is putting himself, and Disney, at risk for a huge lawsuit if anything happens to that child.

[thrillme]

I believe at Disney Quest I saw something where the "GENIE" will measure you for a "wristband".

Buy him some GOOD thick soled shoes. Teach him to stand "straight".

If it were more than just 1/8 of an inch I could see that possibly being "dangerous" because the restraints aren't "designed" for anyone much shorter (I'd be willing to bet the REAL safety factor would be an INCH less just to give a margin of error. I also think that too there's a national average of height verses age of children that would enjoy verses be terrified of a ride. Who knows how they figure it all out.

Children grow WAY too fast. Chances are he's going to make that 1/8 by June EASILY.

[Maleficent's Dad]

They cut off by height because it is easy to manage large amounts of people that way, not because it is the best judge of safety. If they could, they would weigh you, measure you, determine your age, give you a test for maturity, etc. to accurately judge what rides you should be allowed on. Instead, they choose height because it is easy and make statistical population assumptions about if a kid is over 40" tall with shoes, he is typically between x and y years old, x and y pounds, reasonably mature, etc. This is why there is so much safty margin built into the standards. They measure height because it's easy and a reasonble indicator of other factors, not because height is that critical to safety.
This post is a joke, right? I mean, you must seriously be kidding when writing it...

[jarajam]

I agree, just prepare the child for the possible no. Last time we went we took our 4 yr old to the low thrill version of Mission Space.We told her we weren't sure if she was tall enough so we wanted to be measured. She measured us and said oh yeah,no problem. We got in line...another CM came by and measured her...she passed again. We got to the front of the line after waiting 45 minutes...she was measured again (twice) before being put into the final line...again no problem. But when we were to get into the ride the final CM said no,not tall enough. My husband was SOOOO mad! We would have been fine with it if we had not been in line for almost an hour and had been given the green light FOUR times! I am all for safety but that was a little ridiculous! I could have cared less bc it is not my fav ride anyway but the killed time and my daughters let down was a bit irritating.

[grwoolf]

This post is a joke, right? I mean, you must seriously be kidding when writing it...

Not a joke, but maybe not making my point well. The actual safety criteria of the ride are usually based on several factors (not just height). When a company certifies a ride they consider all those factors. One key factor is almost always maturity of the child, especially for rides with limited restraints. The best example I can think of is Splash Mountain. No physical restraints. The biggest danger is that someone stands up, jumps out, gets crushed. This has very little to do with height, but everything to do with maturity. There is no way to measure that directly, so the engineers have to make some statistical assumptions that a 40" kid is at least x years old and kids that are x years old are almost always mature enough handle the attraction without making a stupid decision. It's all statistics. So, height is all they can feasibly measure, but it's not always the key safety criteria. I've got a background in risk management and statistics, so I apologize for the boring detail on how these things are determined, but I actually find it pretty interesting. If people knew how the auto makers used statistics to balance safty features vs. injury and death rates, most people would be horrified. Disney (and all theme parks) have huge safty margins built in because serious injuries and deaths have an unbeliveable negative business impact (same thing for airlines).

[Mom2princesses]

And woe to the poor CM who has to tell women they have to weigh in!! :mickey::scale:


:funny::funny:

Too funny!

[Mom2princesses]

To us it is simple. If you make the requirement you ride if you don't there is always next time. I try to teach my kids that there are rules we all need to follow. Trying to figure out a way to get around these rules is not a lesson I want them to learn.

What is not fair are those situations that I have seen stated here that the poor kid gets measured several times before a ride and passes and then they wait for an hour and are stopped just before getting on. What is up with that? That is frustrating and unfair.

[Diz-Knee]

Not a joke, but maybe not making my point well. The actual safety criteria of the ride are usually based on several factors (not just height). When a company certifies a ride they consider all those factors. One key factor is almost always maturity of the child, especially for rides with limited restraints. The best example I can think of is Splash Mountain. No physical restraints. The biggest danger is that someone stands up, jumps out, gets crushed. This has very little to do with height, but everything to do with maturity. There is no way to measure that directly, so the engineers have to make some statistical assumptions that a 40" kid is at least x years old and kids that are x years old are almost always mature enough handle the attraction without making a stupid decision. It's all statistics. So, height is all they can feasibly measure, but it's not always the key safety criteria. I've got a background in risk management and statistics, so I apologize for the boring detail on how these things are determined, but I actually find it pretty interesting. If people knew how the auto makers used statistics to balance safty features vs. injury and death rates, most people would be horrified. Disney (and all theme parks) have huge safty margins built in because serious injuries and deaths have an unbeliveable negative business impact (same thing for airlines).


I didn't find your original post a joke and I think your point was very clear! Thank you for sharing your insight and I too find it interesting. The previous poster who also made the comments about being seated two people standing upright aren't necessarily the same seated height so there are certainly safety margins built in.

That being said I will follow the height restriction requirements for my son as well as keep his maturity in mind - for example he is on the cusp of 40 inches and may hit it when we are there in May, but I won't allow him to ride Dinosaur as it is just too scary for him.

69 Days, 18 hours and 53 minutes until our next trip!!!

[Marker]

I may be wrong, but my interpretation of the original poster's question is "How can we get around the rules". So, I'm going to give my opinion, and if my interpretation is correct, my answer is not going to be what you want to hear.

Those height restriction on not there simply to inconvience you. They are put in place for safety reasons. In my opinion, any effort to bypass the those rules, is akin to lack of concern for the childs safety. I know those limits are likely set by insurance company's risk management people, and are perhaps overkill, but nonetheless they come at least partly from injury statistics. So, what percentage of risk are you willing to assume where your child's safety is concerned.

What I'm saying is, if the child doesn't measure up, the child does not ride. And the child's reaction to it will largely be guided by the adult's reaction.

I also have to wonder, what lesson folks are teaching their children by taking such efforts to avoid the rules. Children learn from the actions of their adults. I would not be comfortable teach my children that "only the rules I agree with apply to us". This particular case my not be seem that critical, but it's still laying the groundwork for the childs character development and will someday be reflected in more critical situation.

But, that's just my viewpoint. As unpopular and "uncool" as it may be.

[grwoolf]

I may be wrong, but my interpretation of the original poster's question is "How can we get around the rules". So, I'm going to give my opinion, and if my interpretation is correct, my answer is not going to be what you want to hear.



I have a different interpretation of the OP's question. The rules are not 40" barefoot, they are 40" with shoes. There is grey area as far as shoe thickness, but that is up to the CM's judgement. Where did the OP every suggest that they are looking for a way break the rules?

[Marker]

I have a different interpretation of the OP's question. The rules are not 40" barefoot, they are 40" with shoes. There is grey area as far as shoe thickness, but that is up to the CM's judgement.

Put them in some nice glittery KISS platforms, and they could be 6' tall. :laughing:

Seriously though, I suspect we all know the rule is intended to regulate the height of the rider, not the height of their shoes. Wearing taller shoes in order to appear to meet the guideline does nothing to make them fit properly in the safety restraints.


Where did the OP every suggest that they are looking for a way break the rules?

Oh come on now. I only said, it was my interpretation, and I admitted I was probably wrong from the start. Simply voicing a personal opinion. But for what it's worth, even if that was not the intended meaning of the original post, it wouldn't be the first time the topic has come up.

Feel free to disagree all you want, but I won't fall into the trap of becoming argumentative about it. I much prefer to stay in a happy place.

[Diz-Knee]

So my question is, for those of you with kids who were adventuresome and who loved going on any ride they can, did you have any problem with your little one getting on any rides when they were right at the limit ? Were any of the measuring sticks a little higher than 40" ?

The original post had nothing to do with trying to bend the rules. They wanted to know if there was any issue with their child getting on the ride when they were legitimately 40 inches tall. His/Her son (sorry I didn't pay attention to the signature) is 40 inches with shoes on and likely will be at the height bare footed at the time of the trip. My interpretation was whether or not the measuring sticks were accurate. Apparently there have been situations where one CM allows a child right at the limit to go and another won't on the same ride.

[jcvalenti]

I may be wrong, but my interpretation of the original poster's question is "How can we get around the rules". So, I'm going to give my opinion, and if my interpretation is correct, my answer is not going to be what you want to hear.

I didn't realize there was any way to misinterpet my original post, but just to be clear, it absolutely is not about "getting around the rules". It's about what to do when your kid is on the borderline, but should legitimately be able to "scrape by" the 40" mark. We measured him again last night in the tennis shoes he wants to wear in the parks .... he was 39 3/4" this time. I'm caustiously optimistic he can put on another 1/2 to 1 full inch before June.

For the record, I'm a attorney specializing in civil litigation, so I understand the reason for many of the height requirements, and I understand the consequences of circumventing the rules if your child is then injured on the ride. I don't recommend or support taking extaordinary measures to get your child on a ride - it just isn't worth it. It's like very heavy people with heart trouble getting on Mission Space Red and then the family being "shocked" if they have an episode, despite the fact the ride is positively littered with cautions and warnings.

And by the way, as for the lady whose child was on Kali, I believe Kali has an unadvertised "baby seat" they can attach on the rafts when the child is close to the cutoff ... doesn't sound like the kid being smuggled in under the poncho would have fit even in that seat, but it does explain why occasionally you'll see some kid who is clearly under the cutoff on that ride. It is not usually available, and never during peak times, but my niece was able to ride it on a trip when she was about 36" tall.

[TheVBs]

To us it is simple. If you make the requirement you ride if you don't there is always next time. I try to teach my kids that there are rules we all need to follow. Trying to figure out a way to get around these rules is not a lesson I want them to learn.

What is not fair are those situations that I have seen stated here that the poor kid gets measured several times before a ride and passes and then they wait for an hour and are stopped just before getting on. What is up with that? That is frustrating and unfair.

I totally agree! If a child is being measured multiple times then absolutely every effort should be made to standardize the measurements and the CMs interpretations of them. Letting a child get through several measurements, an hour long wait in line, getting their hopes up only to disappoint them at the last minute is very cruel. If they don't measure up at the last stop, they shouldn't measure up at the first or any point in between.

[EeyoresBestFriend]

I guess I had oversimplified it for us. We all waited until the height requirements were easily passed by all members of our party.
The rules are there for the SAFETY, not convenience, of everyone enjoying the ride and if you can only 'afford' one trip to disney, then my suggestion is to wait until all are tall enough.:mickey:

[ibelieveindisneymagic]

I would be so frustrated if my DD was tall enough at the first (couple) of measurement stations, but then at the end was suddenly too short!

I wonder why that happens, is it the CM, or are the sticks marked slightly differently?

I'm so glad DD is 10, and tall enough for anything, I would have been so frustrated...they can't shrink/grow in line!

[SpecJoe Magic]

Ride those borderline rides in the morning! It's a documented fact that people are about a quarter to half inch taller first thing in the morning, than they are later in the day. Your spine compresses that much while being vertical during the day. At night, when you're laying horizonally in bed, it relaxes & stretches back out. :)

I was thinking the same thing. I don't suppose there would be anything wrong with that.

I know how much of a difference it can make from personal experience. A standard door frame in a house is 6'8'' tall. I'm just barely under that when I'm barefooted except for early in the morning. In the morning, I will actually bump my head on the door frame if I don't duck a little.:D

I realize that doesn't directly address the topic, but I'm helping brad192 prove his point.

[FaithTrustPixieDust]

To us it is simple. If you make the requirement you ride if you don't there is always next time. I try to teach my kids that there are rules we all need to follow. Trying to figure out a way to get around these rules is not a lesson I want them to learn.

What is not fair are those situations that I have seen stated here that the poor kid gets measured several times before a ride and passes and then they wait for an hour and are stopped just before getting on. What is up with that? That is frustrating and unfair.

I echo that. The only time we've tried to "negotiate" with the CM is when the kid rode the ride 2 hours ago, and is now being told he isn't tall enough. My pet peeve is people who think the rules apply to everyone else except them. :thedolls:

[jcvalenti]

I was thinking the same thing. I don't suppose there would be anything wrong with that.

I know how much of a difference it can make from personal experience. A standard door frame in a house is 6'8'' tall. I'm just barely under that when I'm barefooted except for early in the morning. In the morning, I will actually bump my head on the door frame if I don't duck a little.:D

I realize that doesn't directly address the topic, but I'm helping brad192 prove his point.


Wow. There must be plenty of rides you have a hard time with in Disney, being that tall. I'm 6'3" and between 260 and 300, and it's TOUGH to fit on some of the rides in Disney (haven't gone on Space Mountain since I was a kid) ... 6'7" would be impossible !

[grwoolf]

Wow. There must be plenty of rides you have a hard time with in Disney, being that tall. I'm 6'3" and between 260 and 300, and it's TOUGH to fit on some of the rides in Disney (haven't gone on Space Mountain since I was a kid) ... 6'7" would be impossible !

I remember reading somewhere about Shaq riding space Mtn. while at WDW. It stuck in my mind at the time becuase it is hard to imagine. Not sure if it's true or not, but he would certainly be pushing the limits.

[disneynarula]

I am hoping my little guy will grow 3/4/" of an inch before our trip. Unless it is absolutley clear that he is 40" (maybe a little bit over the line) I am not going to even try. I would hate for him to be measured at the front of the line and then denied at the end.

FYI I took him on Goofy's Barnstormer when he was just right at the line and I still thought he he was too short. We only rode once because he was sliding all over the place and the restraint did not hold him in all the way.

[Imagineer1981]

Remember that CMs are supposed to measure every child that looks too short, but sometimes people push by and smaller or close ones get by. Then you get the situation of "she just rode the ride, the other CM said it was ok, or hundred other reasons". The best bet is too just have the CM measure before you get in line. They will gladly do it for you even if the line is a mile before you get to the CM, just go up and ask

[SpecJoe Magic]

Wow. There must be plenty of rides you have a hard time with in Disney, being that tall. I'm 6'3" and between 260 and 300, and it's TOUGH to fit on some of the rides in Disney (haven't gone on Space Mountain since I was a kid) ... 6'7" would be impossible !

There are actually only a few attractions, such as Splash Mountain, that are tricky for me to fit into, but I always manage because I know just where and how to sit on every attraction. I have written lengthy posts on Intercot about it when people have questions about tall people at the parks. I rode everything even when I weighed 280 lbs. at this height. Now I weight 220 lbs., which does make things a little easier.


I remember reading somewhere about Shaq riding space Mtn. while at WDW. It stuck in my mind at the time becuase it is hard to imagine. Not sure if it's true or not, but he would certainly be pushing the limits.

I've ridden it many times over the years, and my guess is that it's true that Shaq can ride it based on how I fit into the ride. He isn't much taller than me and even though he is a lot more muscular and heavier than me, I don't think it's enough difference to matter as far as fitting into Space Mountain is concerned.

[jcvalenti]

There are actually only a few attractions, such as Splash Mountain, that are tricky for me to fit into, but I always manage because I know just where and how to sit on every attraction.

Got to agree - Splash Mountain is one of the toughest to wedge into. I always have to angle myself to the side.

I used to always ride with my older son, but now at 9, he seems to have inherited my height and it's getting to be a tough fit for both of us to get in the same row. I may have to ride with the little one this time around.