Arlo recently went to the doctor for his three-year-old check-up, and all were suitably impressed with his vigor and development. At 41 inches tall and weighing in at 36.8 pounds, he officially qualifies as a Big Kid. To be precise, he exceeds the 97th percentile in height, and the 90th percentile in weight. (I know, you can just see my chest swelling with pride, right?)
Anyway, this got me to thinking. Arlo is only one inch shy of the height requirement for just about any run-of-the-mill roller coaster.
I KNOW! IT'S CRAZY! But here it is, from the Adventureland web site: "Guests must be at least 42" tall to ride the G-Force, the Tornado, the Dragon, the Outlaw, Himalaya, or Falling Star, and 36" tall to ride the Raging River and the Frog Hopper."
Is a kid too young to handle a roller coaster at 3-and-a-half of 4 years old? Every time the Adventurelan commercial comes on the T.V. (honest to God, EVERY time), Arlo says, "THAT looks like fun!" and then also proceeds to make a "splassssssh" sound when they show the footage of the raft ride hitting the big splash at the bottom of a drop. He does, however, concede, "I need to get a little bigger first."
What do you think? Should we be including this in our plans for next summer?
Posts
2 comments:
Man, I always hated roller coasters. That's cool that Arlo's excited about them, though. I did like the log ride.
Gabe rode them this summer. He got off the tornado and immediately said, "That was awesome! Let's do it again!" (he was 4)--Olivia (at 6) on the other hand, trembled and screamed the entire way and heard her brother's comment and started bawling, "NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOO!"
Post a Comment