Jump to content

Gordon Bombay

Members
  • Posts

    8,133
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Posts posted by Gordon Bombay

  1. I think such a conversion only happens if each ride gets a major overhaul/rebrand as a “new” attraction, but at that point with the cost of installing LSM’s (not that I have any idea what such a cost is), are you better off just buying a new coaster from the ground-up? It’s a great question, though, @SonofBaconator.

    • Like 1
  2. 3 hours ago, DispatchMaster said:

    From a business perspective, it's always better to sell one item at $1,000,000 profit rather than 1,000,000 items at $1 profit/each. In other words, amusement parks should be aiming for the highest-spending guest as much as possible, even if it inconveniences the "regular" guest.

    Should print this out and post it in the guest services office. 

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  3. 6 hours ago, disco2000 said:

     

    Look at Dragster where they ran one loading station for FastLane and the other for the regular line.  You cannot tell me that doesn't increase your wait time...

    Or Firehawk back in the day when the “Fast Lane” line became the “slightly less long wait line compared to that other long wait line.”

    ”Premium Experiences” certainly aren’t anything new, but what’s your bottom line worth once you start to reliably inconvenience the “regular” guest?

    • Like 5
  4. Hi, @jzarley, thanks for taking the time to write this up and share. I’ve been very curious about the reintroduction of the “stand-up” experience and reading your review gave some great insight in ways clickbait YouTube videos just don’t. Really appreciate it and glad to hear that this coaster is a good experience. 

    • Like 1
  5. 28 minutes ago, silver2005 said:

    I still want to know how Premier came up with 2k/hr.

    I mean, for all we know, this may have been a “theoretical” capacity. Keep in mind, they were trying to market and sell these things that were brand new. In theory, maybe they “thought” it could’ve had 2k per hour if you’re running four trains under perfect conditions. 
     

    As another example, I recently saw the now defunct Wicked Twister listed as a 1K/hr capacity and there’s no way that was right even under the best of conditions. 

    • Like 2
  6. 34 minutes ago, silver2005 said:

    There's no way FOF has 6 block sections. 

    I don't remember the exact placements, but I believe it's at least five* (six if there's two sets of brakes before the unload station and also I believe the track between unload and load is a block). The ride was designed to theoretically operate with four trains and I believe had four delivered, but only ever ran three. 

    There are actually three trains today (or were as of a few years ago). However, while two run throughout a season, the third is rehabbed during the operating year. Conversely, (also at least as of a few years ago), Kings Dominion ran all three of their trains while KI only ran two. 
     

    • Like 3
  7. A few other Italian Job/Backlot things came to mind that I need to put out into the world. 

    1) The weird “fence thing” atop the station roof.  (@CoastersRZ, looking at you here for your architectural expertise)

    (P)KI and (P)CW’s versions of the “Italian Job: Stunt Track” debuted in the same year, 2005. They were so similar that even their budget cuts were identical. Both feature this weird, steel structure that looks similar to a fence atop their stations. 

    (P)KI:

    44145657-1E07-41D2-B752-308E43974122.jpeg
     

    (P)CW:

    86B33484-2A32-4A21-BA53-5D947BA2FB58.jpeg

    I’m not sure what purpose this part of the station serves or if it was meant for something else. If anyone does know, though, I’d love to find out.
     

    Interestingly enough, when (P)KD got their version of the ride the next year…the weird, fence thing wasn’t built:

    2131D6FE-F940-4423-B203-52787D63D3CC.jpeg

    WHAT IS IT!!!!

    And hey, while we’re talking about the Kings Dominion version…

    2) Remember when Paramount announced it as “Italian Job: Turbo Coaster” but later changed the name to “Italian Job: Stunt Track?”

    E6F24C45-D3FA-4706-A6A3-FFB1A485324C.jpeg

    Event after they changed the name on the billboard, turbo coaster was still mentioned…

    483D9325-EEFC-4F63-9746-052EFB04B483.jpeg

    And ultimately it was just the same ride anyways. 

    • Like 4
  8. 19 minutes ago, BoddaH1994 said:

    They wanted it to be prominently in the "middle" of the park. Turned out to be a GREAT decision. 

    I mean, even if it had EVERYTHING promised in the promotional artwork and video, it still would’ve been a mid tier short ride for that regime. How they didn’t place an action movie themed ride in the area of the park known as “Action Zone” (who’s loose theme was action movies and sets), will always boggle my mind. 

    Also, reading back a few pages, CBS gets a lot of flack for that ride being “budget cut,” but I believe CBS wasn’t fully in charge until early 2006. And IJ:ST would’ve been in planning stages a bit before its 2005 debut. I think Paramount/Viacom was just always cheap. 

    • Like 5
  9. 22 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

    Anybody remember Top Gun brought to you by Gillette?

    They even had a lift hill announcement: “Gillette Mach 3 hopes you enjoy your ride.”

    Also, when they redid that billboard at some point (it originally showed a Corsair 2 on a carrier deck I believe), they added the image you shared, @disco2000. It features land based F-15 Eagles from the USAF which are not carrier capable nor used by the Navy. 

    In regards to Backlot’s billboards—I think the idea of doing sponsors is super creative, but I think it’d be better if you let the person behind the “ads” on Kings Mills Antique Autos re-do them. Could be nice Easter eggs.

    • Like 7
×
×
  • Create New...