http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050614/...ey_world_death

He was under the height limit. Riding with mother and sister. Ride simulates 2Gs.

This report said he met the height requirement:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/14/dis....ap/index.html

Either way it's a terrible tragedy. I will say however that I do enjoy the attraction.

http://everythingtravel.blogspot.com/

What a tragedy.

Both of the articles linked above (essentially the same AP story) say that the kid met the height requirement.

Sorry. I misread. You are right - he did meet the height requirement. It is such a tragedy.

That is terrible. We did the ride once and both got sick in the stomach. A woman in front of us walked directly to the garbage and was ill as well as I got a neck ache. A little too realistic a ride, I guess. Perhaps the park sould rethink this attraction but it cost so much money to build. $100m according to the article.

It's a horrible outcome of a supposedly entertaining attraction. I have a couple of opinions:
1. I agree that the entire attraction, or at least its severity, needs to be reevaluated.
2. Although my sympathy and condolences go out to the parent(s), I wonder why any parent would allow a four-year old child to participate in such a ride. This ought to be a warning to others to take a second look before putting a child through that kind of stress.
3. There are clear warnings about this ride and others, that you are taking them at your own risk. Still one would hope that the people who design these things would reconsider the levels of stress they induce.

Sounds like the ride is far too vigorous for many normal human bodies, and I'm not at all clear on why being under or over a certain height should make that much difference. Is it supposed to relate to body size/density and somehow that equates to strength to endure the punishment of the ride?

But then, I don't really "get" extreme-thrill rides in the first place. Life is often too much of an extreme-thrill in the first place.

So terribly sorry for the family; and think finger-shaking/blaming of them is way out of line.

well, maybe not WAY out of line -- should be a warning to other parents and also Disney, I'd think.

But to clarify my original point: the poor child didn't die of being short, as far as I can tell. Something cerebral or cardiac, mebbe?

According to the articles cited, the height requirement for that ride is 44 inches, which is unusually tall for a 4-year-old. Perhaps kids that age aren't strong enough to withstand the ride, even if they are tall enough.

Why is it neccessary to have such an extreme ride in the first place?
Simulates 2 G's!

And I got sick on that teacup!
Poor baby and his parents..breaks my heart.

I agree. It appears that the problem is the stress on the body caused by 2g's of force. Small children and the elderly have experienced problems. I don't think height is a measurement of stamina or strength but a minuimum height limit can weed out small children who can't withstand the forces exerted by the ride. Obviously, a height requirement is not an accurate measurement. Any way you look at it, it is a tragedy. I wonder if the posted warnings are more direct on that ride than others given its history of problems with riders. Don't know.

I agree that this is a tragedy on many levels. I do hope that no lawsuit comes out of this. From the information provided, it seems to me that Disney did what was appropriate to inform people of the risks.

Of course that does not detract from the devastation of losing a child. I just feel that corporations, no matter how big or small, can only do so much.

Just speculation... they're going to find some underlying medical condition involved.

2G's is significantly less than experienced in most looping roller coasters (some of which are as much as 3.5G's)

It is truly a tragedy. I don't know why they have to press the envelope on these attractions. There is a certain level of trust that a ride will be safe because of all the happy marketing.

BTW, I hated the now-defunct Alien Encounter at WDW because it was too intense to be fun for the family, too.

Of course the commentary mostly overlooks the fact that this could be just a strange (and tragic) quirk that has nothing to do with "force" on the body.

As one post pointed out, 2G's isn't that drastic. And as far as I know, the height requirement is to make certain the person fits correctly into the safety gear (straps, bars, etc.) and has nothing to do with "stress."

j_999_0 is correct. The height requirements are related to whether an individual will fit in regards with the safety gear, not age. If height requirements related to age, then how would that affect seniors that have problems? Also, there are person who are dwarfs (is that still the correct term??) who may not meet the height requirement but are certainly old enough to go on the ride, but won't be allowed on the ride simply because they cannot be secured.

I'd be willing to bet my paycheck that the poor child had a pre-existing blood vessel or other condition that was not apparent or ever discovered by check- ups.

There was a 15 year old girl who died very similarly by us on a local carnival roller coaster. It was a genetic blood vessel abnormality that broke upon descent.

Of course that doesn't make the matter any less sorrowful for the poor family- but honestly, you can not blame the ride. You can have an aneurism or similar condition, even a solitary blood clot,not know it and it could be fastly lethal. We had a case where the young mother reached for a phone and dropped.

2G's is really not much stress.

<<Just speculation... they're going to find some underlying medical condition involved.>>

My thoughts exactly when I heard the news. And the other posters are correct about the height requirements being there to make sure the riders can be safely secured in their seats.

It's upsetting to me to hear anyone say that the parents are partially to blame for allowing a young child to go on the ride. They would have no reason to think that his safety was at risk as long as he met the height requirement. The warnings for this ride are geared toward pregnant women and those with existing health condiditons. And they warn you to not ride if you are prone to motion sickness. But motion sickness never killed anyone. I'll be very surprised if this poor child didn't have an unkown pre-existing medical condition.

My heart goes out to this little boy's family.

I can understand those who say the parents should not be blamed for the tragedy. But one reason why a child only 4 years old could be a risk is that we don't always know or find out the physiological problems in a child until he/she is old enough to explain his condition to someone like a parent or a doctor. Even if the child had a pre-existing condition, which is a good possibility, it is likely that his parents had no knowledge of it.

That doesn't mean that if he were a year or two older, the presumed condition would always be found. It just seems to me that it's more likely that such things become better known as a child grows older.