Jump to content

BeastForever

Members
  • Content Count

    2256
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    14

BeastForever last won the day on November 10

BeastForever had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6661 Excellent

3 Followers

About BeastForever

  • Rank
    KIC Double Platinum Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmYL_bExOqwqJ0L04GRcu6Q

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Cincinnati
  • Interests
    Tennis
    Table Tennis
    Summer
    FUN
    SIX
    Intamin
    B&M
    Premier
    Werner Stengel

Recent Profile Visitors

14175 profile views
  1. I'm thinking the biggest reason against that idea simply is that such a retrofitting process would be far more difficult than any one of us may think...
  2. Let's just say I won't truly worry until at least one of Iron Dragon, Ninja, Vampire, or Vortex (CW) is removed. But until then, I'm fairly confident in the ride's forseeable future.
  3. I'm thinking KD's choice to go with a wing coaster might indicate that they want their next next coaster to be as different as possible from their other B&M looper (Dominator - floorless). Conversely, this is why I think B&M dive makes the most sense for KI, in that it'd differentiate from Banshee more than a wing would. As much as I enjoy Floorless coasters (and I even like Rougarou), I think I like Dives even more, and it would cross off the 90 degree box the park is missing, and potentially tack on another 200 ft+ coaster. Most dives have floorless trains anyway, so you'd have two marketable gimmicks in one. (Note: I don't say "gimmick" in a pejorative sense here. I think both floorless trains and vertical drops are actually just really fun elements)
  4. I'd have to agree with this. As intriguing as it'd be to see a Gerstlauer come to the park, even if just to change it up a bit, I also think it'd be best just go with B&M for the dive. It'd fill the space better, be about 50% higher capacity than an Infinity, and probably, would just be a better ride anyway.
  5. I should have clarified. It was Superman at SFGAdv. While I would admit Tatsu, Manta, and their flyers overseas look to be great rides (and probably are superior to three flying dutchmen), I still just don't think I would want a B&M flyer at KI, for the simple reason of the fly-to-lie configuration. One of the most uncormfortable experiences I've ever had on a ride. Once, I got stuck on the brake run for a good 10 minutes at SFGAdv, felt like I was going to pass out Meanwhile, I never had any problem with Vekoma's lie-to-fly. I guess I'm in the minority on that. I'll take the risk of a sunburn over all the blood rushing to my head... Yes, Nighthawk is very rough (I've heard/read), but I always found Firehawk to be smooth. Batwing, I've heard mixed things reagarding its smoothness... All I'm saying is that the one Vekoma Flyer (Firehawk) I found to be much more enjoyable than the one B&M flyer (Superman) I've ridden. B&M flyers are better capacity than Vekoma's, but still not nearly as good as B&M Dives, Wings, Floorless etc They also seem to have a fair amount of downtime as well (although perhaps still not as much as Vekoma flyers) If a custom B&M flyer were to come KI, or another CF park sometime in the future, I suppose it would be a welcome addition, but holistically speaking there are just so much better options to be had IMO.
  6. If I'm being completely honest, (and forgive me if this comes off a little negative, especially this late in the game), what we're seeing right now is precisely why I was never on board with the whole "you won't notice 13ft" argument. With the elevation disadvantage, paired with its placement in the back left of the park, I think were beginning to see that it really could have used all the height it can get in order to appear more imposing onto the rest of the park. Or at least, its a slippery slope. I would say that it was never so much about 13 ft as much as it is about 20-30 ft, given the expectation that it was going to clear 300 ft by at least some amount, even if by just 5-10 ft. Having it at 300 flat was kind of pushing it to begin with, but take away an additional 13 ft? And yes, I do think it results in a noticeable discrepancy between this and previous gigas... However, on the other hand (and this is positive), I'm starting to think that what is lessening the ride visually (placement), will end up enhancing the ride from an experience standpoint. Come to think of it, I never wanted this to be a parking lot coaster anyway, so I'm actually glad to see it break from Fury and Leviathan in that regard. Sure, it won't be as immediately noticeable at the front of the park, in the way the aforementioned B&M gigas are... But if better night rides/seclusion come at the slight expense of imposition onto the rest of the park, then that is an A-ok tradeoff in my view! Think about it. Would you rather be riding past a mundane ocean of concrete, traffic lines, and car light glare, OR flying through the trees and foliage of the dark Ohio woods after sundown? I think you know my pick...
  7. I don't think we're going to see a new flyer come to any CF park in the forseeable future, B&M or otherwise... They tend to have some of the slowest dispatch times, cost more to operate, less reliable, and for a lot of people, are just plain uncomfortable. While I enjoyed Firehawk, I can't say I particularly cared much for the B&M flyer I've ridden. Starting and ending in the flying position I found to be incredibly uncomfortable, and not rerideable in the slightest. One of those rare times that a Vekoma greatly outshines a B&M...
  8. ^That just may be the greatest set of metaphors I've seen used to describe anything ever... Well done, sir.
  9. *Somewhat big post* So I think what's worth noting here (as it is in all discussions regarding ride removal) is that whether something is a "bad" or "good" ride doesn't hold much relevance so long as guests are still riding it - that is, enough guests to justify the operating cost (which can vary greatly depending on what type of ride it is. There is a reason why so many SLCs are still operating. Sure, they may be terrible rides. But so long as people, out of their own free active will, are choosing to ride them despite them being such "bad" rides, then they shall remain open. Unless tthat is, the ride is giving riders such bad experiences that its putting the park at literal liable risk (Son of Beast). But otherwise, no, getting a headache from riding Vortex or Invertigo is not putting anyone in imminent danger. ---- On the other hand, however, a ride being "good" does not automatically save it from the chopping block, such as Firehawk. If not enough peeps are riding due to low capacity combined with too high of an operating cost (cost/per rider), then it has a viable case for removal. I'm afraid Flight of Fear might fall into that realm. The consensus is that its still a very good ride, but its ridership most obviously suffers from low throughput, and with it being launched I can imagine the operating cost is at least somewhat greater than the average chain lift coaster. But reasuringly, none of its sister rides in KD's FOF, Joker's Jinx, Poltergeist, and Crazy Cobra (overseas) have closed yet, which I think can be considered a good sign. And I think the fact of it being indoors certainly may help in extending its longevity The only high-profile Premier to have a service life much shorter than expected would be the Chiller, but even that I'm willing to dismiss for being the one-off protoype model it was. ----- As for The Bat? Yes, I do wonder how long it has until unrepairable metal fatigue sets in (which I believe will be reason when it finally goes, after all its ridership is still very good due to great throughput) For reference, these are the five remaining Arrow Suspendeds: And these are the defunct ones: I think it would be relevant to look the reason of closing for each defunct Arrow Suspended. Original Bat - Thats obvious. Prototype, too many design flaws etc., you know the story.... XLR-8 - The park it was in went under so don't know how much longer it would have lasted after that. Big Bad Wolf - While they certainly buffed out all the major errors associated with the 1981 Bat, on their 2nd/3rd go it at. I think this still suffered a little from an overly intense/ambitious design. It had trims going down both drops, and even then it looks as if they put a significant amount of stress on the structure Eagle Fortess - its said here that a reason was never explicitly stated by the park, but I would imagine it nearing the end of its service life, paired with being placed on such an adverse terrain, the park saw it not worth operating. Hayabusa - similiar situation. No statement from the park, except it was closed after an incident in 2005, never to re-open. ---- Having said all that, the fact that Iron Dragon is six years older than The Bat and still running is good news. But at the same time, just like with Corkscrew, the ride is significantly tamer and not on as big a scale as its counterpart at KI, which might make major repairs less difficult/costly for Iron Dragon. ----
  10. And so there you have it. The track record becomes eve more unbreakable, if that comes into fruition. And if you're discluding topper track, that'd leave them with... ...just 4158 ft of truly wooden track between Viper and Little Dipper. Which brings me back to my point, nothing will be required of KI to maintain their standing as the leading wooden coaster park. In fact, it will become even more distinguished the more other parks convert existing coasters As a side note, I would envision the Boss getting RMC'ed sometime in the forseeable future, however something tells me SFStl just isn't high enough on their respective corporate totem pole to receive such an investment. Who knows, we'll see...
  11. Which is why I specifically said "by track length". I understand that what you might consider to be the "best" wooden coaster collection might differ significantly from simply who has the most amount of track, since that is entirely subjective and up to one's opinion. But what I'm trying to get it as that KI already does distinguish themselves from any other in that regard. Note that the track record was emphasized greatly MT's announcement. So I am arguing based on that, I would say Cedar Fair feels they've already accomplished the goal of making KI known as the "premier" wooden coaster park.
  12. But are we really in any danger of losing that distinction anytime soon? If ever? Unlikely, I would say. With so few new wooden coasters being built in general relative to steel, I'd say the track record is safe as ever, unless HW goes with another wooden coaster, which I don't see hapening considering how full they've got their hands right now with keeping their current woodies in acceptable condition. And even then it would have to be a monster 5800 ft wooden coaster to surpass KI Herhseypark at this point is more likely to RMC an existing woodie (Wildcat), than add another. And like HW, they're not really that close to KI's track record either. Six Flags Great America is the only park with a truly plausible chance to (re)capture the record with another woodie, but I just don't see it happening. For reference this is the tale of the tape currently for the leading wooden coaster parks by track length (topper track included for convenience. I know, I know I dont think theyre truly wooden coasters either but what the parks say goes I guess...) Kings Island - 18,804 SFGAm - 16,558 Hersheypark - 13,329 Holiday World - 13,284 As much I like wooden coasters, particularly the ones we already have, I would have to agree with the sentiment that receiving another one, whether it be from GCI, RMC, or otherwise would be redundant and unnecessary.
  13. While I think both styles look cool in their own right, I picked other being Steel Dragon, which appears to be even more imposing than Millennium Force due to having even more trusses and latices make up the support structure. The Arrow and Morgan hypers always seemed the most awe-inspiring for this reason, and Steel Dragon just takes it to whole different level. Just look at this thing.
  14. And while I can't speak on the veracity nor really comment as I'm not all that into the minutiae of Universal, I believe there's quite the strong rumor out there that the true reason for Dragon Challenge's removal wasn't much past simply JK Rowling demanding its removal. She hated the ride existing in her land, supposedly (and the licensing would give her that much power I guess?) But at the same time, its said here that popularity had decreased substantially ever since the dueling aspect was rid of in 2011. So I think that could have been the main factor. I never rode the ride, and it certainly looked like a lot of fun, but Hagrid's appears to be a proper replacement, in my view.
  15. Anectodal evidence is not data, but... In my one day visit to CP earlier this year Raptor went down multiple times in that same day, and neither closing was wind-related... Really, I think the issue here is that were conflating "rarely" breaking down with never breaking down. I would say rides at your home park are always going to seem to run into more issues than their respective peers at other parks, because you'll hear about it every time they do. Who knows? Does Nitro, Raging Bull, Behemoth, Intimidator etc. really have any less downtime than Diamondback. Or is it just that when they go down we don't hear about it, since most of us do not frequent those parks as much as KI. Certainly, I suppose anything is possible, since at the end of the day, their all just machines, like any other ride. But given the level of quality control that goes into these rides, paired with the fact that they're not "one-off" coasters really in any way, I just have a hard time believing Diamondback is somehow any less reliable than its counterparts. But like I said, maybe it is. But if it is, then one would most certainly have question why?
×
×
  • Create New...