Mount Crumpit in Seuss Landing?

[TylerDurden]

Lorax, Grinch and Horton would all make for great additions to Seuss.. but idk if all of them can fit. Taking some of Poseidon's plot would be the only way.. and no major theme park in Orlando has a real frog hopper so I wouldn't mind one as a mini Doom counterpart along Sneetch Beach, provided it has a max height limit of 32" (preferably none)

eh I don't think so. Frog Hoppers still carry a cheesy carnival stigma, plus they are super low capacity, meaning lines would be outrageous. I don't think we're going to be seeing a Frog Hopper any time soon, and I still have my doubts on Mt Crumpit as well.

 

[mahnamahna]

eh I don't think so. Frog Hoppers still carry a cheesy carnival stigma, plus they are super low capacity, meaning lines would be outrageous. I don't think we're going to be seeing a Frog Hopper any time soon, and I still have my doubts on Mt Crumpit as well.

Yeah they are hard to theme! Well if they can't put a frog hopper, (here's me going blue sky again lol) maybe a mini-TOT style ride (themed to Yertle the Turtle) with a cave in the back side of the show building along Sneetch Beach for a mini-Horton dark ride scene for a new version of the Island Skipper Tours

It could be relatively low-thrill (32" height requirement) if they do it right (about the same as the average frog hopper) and would take care of one of the dead/empty areas of the park. Honestly, I know that some attraction of some sort will be in this location within the next 10-15 years. Might as well have an nice, indoor air-conditioned family ride that can provide an intro to freefall rides for little kids everywhere And everyone seems to suggest Grinch is winning out with Comcast execs due to his staying power and the iconic status of Mt. Crumpett

Personally I want a Grinch coaster more but that's the thrill maniac in me lol. If I want Universal to start legtimately competiting with Disney World, then the Lorax dark ride would be a better fit.. and maybe squeeze in a Mt. Crumpett coaster sometime down the road after they've added a few large-scale family rides (Lorax dark ride, SpongeBob dark ride, maybe Scooby or Mr. Peabody & Sherman, etc)

 

[Disneyhead]

I was in the first grade when The Lorax came out. I had it. It is very much in tune with the hip pop culture of the time.

[video=youtube;j7OHG7tHrNM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7OHG7tHrNM[/video]

 

[IzzyB]

I would be thrilled with anything well themed and having no height restriction. Can someone please tell me why the trolley has a height restriction on it? Sucks... my daughter can go on it, but not my son. Even though they are twins, my son is 4 inches shorter than my daughter.

 

[Nitro_230]

I would be thrilled with anything well themed and having no height restriction. Can someone please tell me why the trolley has a height restriction on it? Sucks... my daughter can go on it, but not my son. Even though they are twins, my son is 4 inches shorter than my daughter.

It's all about the manufacturer instructions (cant get insurance if you don't follow them), and that from that point the insurance companies requests (If you don't follow them, obviously your rates go up).

On that ride it has a lot to do with the lap bar (a smaller child wouldn't be restrained by it, could easily slip out) and it's height (if a child were to slip out it's not like CITH where they just stop the ride and all is well).

 

[IzzyB]

It's all about the manufacturer instructions (cant get insurance if you don't follow them), and that from that point the insurance companies requests (If you don't follow them, obviously your rates go up).

On that ride it has a lot to do with the lap bar (a smaller child wouldn't be restrained by it, could easily slip out) and it's height (if a child were to slip out it's not like CITH where they just stop the ride and all is well).

It is just strange, because things like Peter Pan you would think would have the same type of limitations. Uni seems to be stricter on their policies than Disney. Like Tea Cups as long as the child is facing forward they could care less if the child is sitting on their own or on their lap, bu Storm Force, you can't have the child on your lap, which I personally think is safer. Same with Cat in the Hat or really any ride on Uni. Like Disaster, which to me if like the backlot tour at studios, yet at backlot sitting on lap is allowed, but not at uni disaster. So while I understand manufacture restrictions and stuff, it just seems like Uni's policies are way stricter than Disney's policies for the same types of rides.

 

[Nitro_230]

It is just strange, because things like Peter Pan you would think would have the same type of limitations. Uni seems to be stricter on their policies than Disney. Like Tea Cups as long as the child is facing forward they could care less if the child is sitting on their own or on their lap, bu Storm Force, you can't have the child on your lap, which I personally think is safer. Same with Cat in the Hat or really any ride on Uni. Like Disaster, which to me if like the backlot tour at studios, yet at backlot sitting on lap is allowed, but not at uni disaster. So while I understand manufacture restrictions and stuff, it just seems like Uni's policies are way stricter than Disney's policies for the same types of rides.

Well I can make the lap sitting easy, it's not allowed at Universal on any of the rides.

A lot of the issues come from the fact that Universal buys off the shelf items in a lot of cases, where at best Disney buys pieces from common manufacturers (as they are set up to make the item). For a coaster at Disney for example, they buy the track and car chassis from a coaster manufacturer (as they already have the equipment to build it) but the design is Disney's, Disney installs it, the only thing the coaster company did is provide a part. For the same coaster Universal would bid out the coaster and have the manufacturer design, build and install the ride.

 

[Frank Drackman]

It's all about the manufacturer instructions (cant get insurance if you don't follow them), and that from that point the insurance companies requests (If you don't follow them, obviously your rates go up).

On that ride it has a lot to do with the lap bar (a smaller child wouldn't be restrained by it, could easily slip out) and it's height (if a child were to slip out it's not like CITH where they just stop the ride and all is well).

Wouldn't following the manufacter's specs just be about safety/liability? I would think a company the size of Comcast would self insure as opposed to carrying insurance.

 

[TylerDurden]

Wouldn't following the manufacter's specs just be about safety/liability? I would think a company the size of Comcast would self insure as opposed to carrying insurance.

still, why risk injuries when you can just listen to what the manufacturer says? Doesn't matter how much insurance you have, an injury is an injury, and I'd rather have kids not be able to go on stuff than have them be at any sort of risk.

 

[IzzyB]

still, why risk injuries when you can just listen to what the manufacturer says? Doesn't matter how much insurance you have, an injury is an injury, and I'd rather have kids not be able to go on stuff than have them be at any sort of risk.

Never said I didn't think they should follow what the manufacturer says or put kids at risk. I have always just been very curious why similar rides between two parks have different rules. To me you would think for liability purposes most parks would have similar rules for similar rides. My kids never rode jaws, was lap sitting ever allowed on that? Just curious since it was a boat ride and Disney has a million and one of those and always allow lap sitting.

 

[Nitro_230]

Lap sitting was not aloud on Jaws either, no Universal ride.

But again, although they are similar, the ride manufacturer Flight of the Hippogriff was built by Vekoma. Barnstormer was built by Disney immagenering and they happened to purchase some parts (track) from Vekoma.

 

[Kevin38]

I think the height restriction on that ride have more to do with maturity level than a safety hold down issue.
Yes kids can vary considerably but they try to make sure the child can follow and understand safety instructions.
Yes your child probably would understand instruction but they do it so 90% of kids riding are over a certain age .

As far as lap riding the detents in the ride are set for 1 person and may not set properly with 2 people

 

[natespf]

I think the height restriction on that ride have more to do with maturity level than a safety hold down issue.
Yes kids can vary considerably but they try to make sure the child can follow and understand safety instructions.
Yes your child probably would understand instruction but they do it so 90% of kids riding are over a certain age .

As far as lap riding the detents in the ride are set for 1 person and may not set properly with 2 people

Oh so I guess only more mature kids go to Disney, while the immature kids go to Universal? Wait no, kids want to go to Disney till they grow up and realize Universal is the place to go. You also can't tell how mature someone is based on their height.

It is more complicated than Disney and Universal just arbitrarily selecting a height. A big factor of the decision is based on who designed and built the ride. If Disney designs and builds a ride, the manufacturer is only liable if the parts they were contracted to manufacture were faulty. If Universal contracts someone to design and build a ride, the manufacturer is then open to more liability. Now if Uni goes against the manufacturers recommendations, and someone gets hurt or dies, they got a big problem on their hands.

 

[Nitro_230]

Oh so I guess only more mature kids go to Disney, while the immature kids go to Universal? Wait no, kids want to go to Disney till they grow up and realize Universal is the place to go. You also can't tell how mature someone is based on their height.

It is more complicated than Disney and Universal just arbitrarily selecting a height. A big factor of the decision is based on who designed and built the ride. If Disney designs and builds a ride, the manufacturer is only liable if the parts they were contracted to manufacture were faulty. If Universal contracts someone to design and build a ride, the manufacturer is then open to more liability. Now if Uni goes against the manufacturers recommendations, and someone gets hurt or dies, they got a big problem on their hands.

Exactly

 

[Kevin38]

Oh so I guess only more mature kids go to Disney, while the immature kids go to Universal? Wait no, kids want to go to Disney till they grow up and realize Universal is the place to go. You also can't tell how mature someone is based on their height.

It is more complicated than Disney and Universal just arbitrarily selecting a height. A big factor of the decision is based on who designed and built the ride. If Disney designs and builds a ride, the manufacturer is only liable if the parts they were contracted to manufacture were faulty. If Universal contracts someone to design and build a ride, the manufacturer is then open to more liability. Now if Uni goes against the manufacturers recommendations, and someone gets hurt or dies, they got a big problem on their hands.

I never mentioned "Disney" I said Universal is trying to keep under a certain age off the ride.Since you can't card a 3 year old .You have to guess what height "Most" of them will be.
Also the liability issue is much different between Universal and Disney. If someone gets hurt on a Disney ride Disney firefighters show up .If someone gets hurt on a Universal ride Orlando fire is the responder.

 

[natespf]

I never mentioned "Disney" I said Universal is trying to keep under a certain age off the ride.Since you can't card a 3 year old .You have to guess what height "Most" of them will be.
Also the liability issue is much different between Universal and Disney. If someone gets hurt on a Disney ride Disney firefighters show up .If someone gets hurt on a Universal ride Orlando fire is the responder.

To be clear, you understand that the respective fire departments would only be liable for their own actions (or inaction) and not responsible for ride malfunctions, right? So completely unrelated to the liability issue that I pointed out.

Also the discussion has been comparing the minimum height restrictions to ride at all for Universal vs Disney, which vary from ride to ride. Now it sounds like your talking about the minimum height to ride on your own, without adult supervision.

 

[Kevin38]

To be clear, you understand that the respective fire departments would only be liable for their own actions (or inaction) and not responsible for ride malfunctions, right? So completely unrelated to the liability issue that I pointed out.

Also the discussion has been comparing the minimum height restrictions to ride at all for Universal vs Disney, which vary from ride to ride. Now it sounds like your talking about the minimum height to ride on your own, without adult supervision.

There is a big difference if the responder makes written statements about what happened.Disney Firefighters are told not to make written reports and they do not.Orlando fire will make written statement about what happened. That is a major difference in liability.

 

[natespf]

There is a big difference if the responder makes written statements about what happened.Disney Firefighters are told not to make written reports and they do not.Orlando fire will make written statement about what happened. That is a major difference in liability.

Well thanks for further clarifying your just playing the semantics game. This still has nothing to do with the points I brought up.

 

[IzzyB]

I think the height restriction on that ride have more to do with maturity level than a safety hold down issue.
Yes kids can vary considerably but they try to make sure the child can follow and understand safety instructions.
Yes your child probably would understand instruction but they do it so 90% of kids riding are over a certain age .

As far as lap riding the detents in the ride are set for 1 person and may not set properly with 2 people

I don't know about this, I have met many kids that are the same height as my daughter (who can get on some of these rides) that run around like crazy and don't follow anything.

Also, many of the rides I am talking about not being lap sitting (storm force, disaster, etc) have no restraints. So again doesn't hold true.

But overall it sounds like Disney can get away with more since they design and build it and they respond to injuries. Where Uni buys the whole thing from a company and the city responds to someone being hurt. I was not trying to get my child on something that was not safe for him. I always complain when someone argues with a cast member as to why their kid too short can't get on a ride. I just always thought it was odd that the rules were so different between Uni and Disney and it made no sense to me. Me personally, I think it is safer (or feels safer for me) when my child can sit on my lap vs. not. More chance of her wiggling under the restraint if not on my lap. Now she has never tried to wiggle out, but you know as a parent I do get concerned at times. Only time I had a major problem was when my daughter flipped out on disaster and really wanted on my lap. I had the hardest time calming her down and I will admit after the ride started she crawled on and I let her stay until the ride ended.

It also sucks because my son is handicapped and of age to ride many of these rides and he loves to spin, but he can't go on some because he can't sit by himself. We have got him on some, because he will sit up straight for a minute, but not sure about storm force, don't think it would be safe him not being on my lap. He loves tea cups though.

 

[AK-Jake]

Back to the forums after being away for a few months. I've been browsing various different threads and it seems as though the Amber Mine coaster is looking more and more like the projected winner, likely at the expense of Mt. Crumpit (which is what I'm hoping for, personally...though both are awesome concepts).

Any word on the possibility of Mt. Crumpit coming to IOA, or is it DOA?