'I'm size 22 and tried Alton Towers' rides to see if I could fit in their seats'

[Nick🎢]

Losing weight is hard, there’s more to it than simply eating less

This.

That is one of the hardest parts about it. There is so much misinformation out there, often pushed by bigfood and those with special interest. Equally the whole eat a bit less move a bit more is based on a "well" person. In the west that is the minority these days. Most people are to some degree metabolically broken - insulin resistance, leaky gut etc.

There is a wealth of information out there these days but it's useless if people don't want it - and ultimately that is everyone's choice.

 

[WillPS]

I wouldn't say they're all useless. Some will either lock and have a lever to release them afterwards or have the LEDs to indicate whether you're able to ride or you can ride but have to use the "big boy" seats. It'd be great to have more "ride accurate" locking mechanisms featured on them. However, in this day and age the issue is that once you start featuring actual locking mechanisms on test seats, a staff member is pretty much required to operate it, they often can't just be left to self operation. That in the current climate of barely being able to staff rides at times is a difficult thing to achieve.

Exactly. I'm not saying there is no way that they could be useful, but in reality they are useless. I think the Air one used to have a locking mechanism, back in the days where there'd be a member of staff at the queue entrance to measure/help etc.

Another problem is that simply locking is sometimes not enough - Galactica was the one attraction I was bounced from last week because I didn't have enough 'clicks' apparently (the op didn't really try and push it further but ho hum). I had sat in the mouldy test seat and got the restraint to the point the plastic part over the waist was flush with the plastic either side. Again not insurmountable, the park could have lights as you say to indicate, but I have never seen such an indicator and if I'm honest I don't think I'd trust it to be accurate more than a few weeks after opening; it'd never be a maintenance priority.

There's a lot said about the "big is beautiful" movement in the press. And I fully agree that being overweight shouldn't be defined as being ugly, far far from it. However, it shouldn't mask the fact that you do carry a much higher risk of health problems and be used as something to prevent that discussion taking place, which in some places I've seen happen. The two topics are not one and the same, but I've often seen that be the case.

I agree the conflation is unhelpful; regardless of your views on models being bigger and whatnot the basic fact should remain that everybody has a right to be respected for the person they are at any time. Of course there will be times when physics mean things are possible for some but not others; sometimes that can be defined (as in weight/height restrictions) but where it cannot all you can go by is shared experiences (like those in this thread) and be respectful.

 

[Skyscraper]

I think the Air one used to have a locking mechanism, back in the days where there'd be a member of staff at the queue entrance to measure/help etc.

That's correct, I remember using it a few years ago long before I found the courage to ride Galactica (Or Air as it was known back then).

 

[Sambiasso]

@Craig Apologies for posting the article without offering anything to the discussion.

As a big lad myself there's always an air of anxiety when visiting a new park as I'm not sure if I'm going to fit on a certain ride or not. Whilst i've never had to do the walk of shame I've seen a few people this year have to do it who I wouldn't view as massively overweight. Wickerman & Colossus are the 2 main rides I've notice it happen on.

Air I always seemed to get stapled in and locked/unlocked with the ride ops special key.

Should I ever have to do the walk of shame it would totally prompt me to shift a bit of timber.

 

[Nick🎢]

air / Galactica was always an "op jumps on you to click it in" for me. I suspect its a first of its type and reflection of the times thing.

Try googling a term like "high street 1990s" and go on the images tab. You can then see the market that B&M were making this model for!

I don't want to go off on a complete wild tangent but there are some great talks by evolutionary biologists on how much the environment has changed in 20 odd years and the impact it is having on us. The obesity epidemic is one of the consequences of environmental changes.

Edit: Just in case anyone gets the wrong end of the stick, by environmental I mean "everything around us" not the ice caps melting. e.g. availability of hyper-palatable foods, built-in labs to be addictive, the movement from physical to sedentary jobs, technology, serotonin overdose etc.

 

[Tommy85]

Just in case people aren’t aware, the Smiler does have bigger seats but only on row 2 of one particular train. My mate needs them so when we get to the front we just ask for a bigger seat and the host asks us to stand to one side until the train arrives. No embarrassment or anything. People behind don’t care as they are getting on one train sooner. Naturally the train we need has always just been dispatched so we have to wait 3 trains to get on. Law of sod lol

 

[WillPS]

air / Galactica was always an "op jumps on you to click it in" for me. I suspect its a first of its type and reflection of the times thing.

Yeah, it was actually one I never had problems with previously, even when I couldn't fit on Smiler/Oblivion. My waistline isn't actually that big as it's distributed across my torso, so Air was always a generous fit for me as the vest section flexed to fit.

I was told they weren't allowed to do what you describe as "they might break it"? Dunno, I was having a good day anyway as I'd fit on several rides I didn't pre-pandemic (and I'd gained then lost a load of weight during the pandemic). No point getting upset in the circumstances.

 

[Skyscraper]

air / Galactica was always an "op jumps on you to click it in" for me.

They do that on Spinball as well, don't they?

 

[Alsty]

I always explained and asked before pushing the harness down further, then checked with the guest that it was OK afterwards. It's rude just to push it down without asking.

Occasionally we were unable to accommodate larger guests but we never thought anything of this. Certainly no judgement from the part of the operations crew.

Never heard of this "don't push, you might break it" nonsense though.

 

[WillPS]

Never heard of this "don't push, you might break it" nonsense though.

It sounded like tosh at the time tbh, slightly regret not challenging. Just one of those where you either push it and make a scene or just get on with what you're there for.

 

[Pawkins]

I've lost 32kg in the last 15 months. I went last week for the first time in a few years and I fit on more rides than I expected to given my previous experience.

Fair play on the weight loss, keep it up!

Wickerman can be a little unforgiving on the bigger guest, I'm a few doner kebabs away from not fitting myself!

There's something to be said about a bigger guest on Spinball too, last year I had a very large gentleman sit behind me, the operators stopped the car and actually got down on to the tracks in an effort to secure his restraint, he must have been just small enough to fit as they managed it and despatched, I nearly greyed out on the helix the ride was so intense.

I haven't been on it since in fact! The staff do their best to accommodate, I've certainly witnessed this, but they can't work miracles.

 

[WillPS]

Wickerman can be a little unforgiving on the bigger guest, I'm a few doner kebabs away from not fitting myself!

This is the problem, every body is different and it's very hard to advise. Even when I was younger and relatively slim Ripsaw was always an 'only just' or 'not quite' as my shoulders would prevent the OTSR from descending adequately to meet the failsafe.

Lap bar restraints however are never a problem for me, although I did need the bigger seat on Icon when I was at my biggest.

Fair play on the weight loss, keep it up!

Thank you for the lovely complement. In my case the major gain was a side effect of a medicine I was prescribed, for two periods. It's not a totally linear curve and you can't get a good result every month, it's overall trajectory which is important. This is why I find comments from people saying that fat people should just lose weight so offensive, it involves changing behaviours which have been built up over many years. Worse still when said comments imply they are somehow doing fat people a favour by suggesting it.

 

[Pawkins]

This is the problem, every body is different and it's very hard to advise. Even when I was younger and relatively slim Ripsaw was always an 'only just' or 'not quite' as my shoulders would prevent the OTSR from descending adequately to meet the failsafe.

Lap bar restraints however are never a problem for me, although I did need the bigger seat on Icon when I was at my biggest.

So you're saying I should stop hitting the kebabs. Message received!

I did try out the back seats on Icon recently, not because I needed too, I had just not tried back row yet, it didn't feel any bigger honestly, those trains are some of the comfiest in my opinion.

 

[James]

I thought that was quite a positive article. It seems the staff were accommodating and sensitive to that person's needs, all round good job I would say. That person was able to have an enjoyable day so if anything it shows people who may have anxiety or worries over their weight, that it is possible to have a good day out, and Towers staff are professional and friendly about the matter.

I think out of all the rides at Towers, Spinball has always been the most unforgiving. If you have any form of fat in the belly or thigh region it's going to be an experience getting the bar down.

 

[IanB]

The only thing worse than the walk of shame, is when your daughter tells everyone that daddy was to fat for the farting ride, and she had to go on it by herself.

I think Craig's post earlier summed it up, and I would suggest that rollercoaster manufactures having seats for larger guests is a good solution. There is only a certain size they can go to before those seats become dangerous for guests not as large. I assume the larger seats were standard back in 1994, which I think was quite forward thinking for the 90s? It also sounds like the newer rides are better for larger guests, although it could just be the different manufactures.

Overall, I think the article is very positive, and shines a good light on Alton Towers. I am starting to struggle on Air now, and although my daughter likes to make fun of the situation, the ride hosts were great about it.

It does make me more conscious about my weight as while I don't mind missing out on a Frog Jumper, I don't want to be missing out on the big rides.

If only losing weight was as easy as putting it on.

 

[Matt.GC]

If a similar article was posted about the experience of a massively underweight person, I wonder if the discussion in this thread would have gone down the same route?

 

[tayspru]

If a similar article was posted about the experience of a massively underweight person, I wonder if the discussion in this thread would have gone down the same route?

It would be the same situation really, however restraints can close extremely close to the seating which is why this doesn’t happen. It’s also demonstrable that there are far less underweight people than overweight people, so it’s a less likely scenario that really shoudknt be factored in to a mass offered product.

If someone is physically not suited to the ride then it isn’t the manufacturer’s responsibility. Ergonomics is a huge industry and the first principle is to cater to the 5th-95th percentile, not to the small number of outliers to the extent it makes your product redundant for the majority

 

[pluk]

If a similar article was posted about the experience of a massively underweight person, I wonder if the discussion in this thread would have gone down the same route?

That doesn't exist as a ride safety issue though, does it?

If a similar article was posted about the experience of an especially tall or short person though I think the discussion route would have been similar, in that we pretty much have to acknowledge that anything will have safe operating parameters that will always have to be adhered to, and that they will always be designed to accommodate the widest section of society at its upper and lower limit.

Of course, a tall person can't get shorter and a short person can't get taller, so that's far more final and less 'fair' than the restriction of access to the majority of overweight who ultimately over time can amend their size to one that'll fit.

As someone who's done the walk of shame previously (Vortex and Colossus on the same day), it's not great, but it is absolutely a necessity.

 

[Matt N]

On a side note, I must admit that it never fails to surprise me how much larger people often seem to struggle with Wicker Man. It’s only a simple lap bar, so surely logic would dictate that the chances of being rejected are lower due to only one part of your body being restrained rather than multiple? (What I mean by that is that a lap bar only really covers your stomach and thighs, whereas an OTSR covers your whole body and can be affected by your upper half as well as your lower half).

I always think the same about things like B&M Hyper Coasters. I always thought that those clamshells would be pretty accommodating, but they can be surprisingly restrictive in some cases, apparently.

I agree with the poster a few posts up about Spinball likely being Towers’ most restrictive ride. The seats are fairly small and the lap bar fairly tight, so it likely doesn’t have much tolerance. It should also be noted that the ride technically has concrete restrictions on both height and weight, which no other ride does:

• It has a 1.95m (slightly below 6’5”) maximum height restriction, so realistically, anyone above 6’4” barefoot is likely to be barred seeing as you’re measured in shoes.
• It has a 111kg (roughly 17st 7lbs according to Google) maximum individual weight restriction, so many overweight people would technically breach the restrictions anyway whether they fit or not. I’ve never seen this being enforced, mind, and I’m not sure how they realistically could enforce it…

I can’t say that Spinball being restrictive compared to the others would exactly surprise me; even as someone who’s thin and not exactly tall, I think that the cars/restraints are quite tight and the seats are quite low.

 

[Craig]

So on Wicker Man and other GCIs the issue is a combination of your height and larger thighs. On GCIs, if I have my feet flat to the floor, my thighs aren't flush to the seat and there is a gap between. Because my thighs are larger, the restraints won't lock. To get around it, I have to cross my legs, which puts my thighs closer to the bottom of my seat and the restraint locks no problem. It's why you'll often see people who are perhaps larger than me but shorter (I'm 5'11 so not some towering giant) get on with no issue, yet I have to do the leg cross thing. Interestingly Wicker Man was notoriously awkward to get on before it opened when I did the press preview event. Thankfully they appear to have made changes, as there were a lot of taller people who struggled then.

B&M hyper coasters quite frankly are some of the absolute worst to get on with larger thighs, even if you're not that "large" overall. I would get on Silver Star at my current weight, however it's incredibly uncomfortable because my legs have to be absolutely pinned in. Even when I was a few stone lighter years ago it was still a squash. It was the same with Steel Dragon 2000 and its B&M trains - I only did it once since it just wasn't enjoyable. Newer models such as Mako do appear to have made some steps to be a little more accommodating however, so some changes have been made which demonstrates their are some modifications made.