Jump to content

Decoding 2020


fryoj

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, XBeastGirlX said:

Here is a comparison of April thru now. First photo credit goes to IndyGuy and second photo is mine. Ravine is definitely being made deeper than it originally was 

 

 

Looks like they are just cleaning it up and shaping for drainage. In case anyone gets any bright ideas, that won't affect the drop height. Too sharp of an angle. 

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, sixohdieselrage said:

@XBeastGirlX Great comparison!

Speaking of pictures... As soon as the first public riders are on this new coaster, would you all like me to upload every aerial photo I took? All the way from Firehawk being torn down, to a public train on the coaster. Kinda in a timeline type.

Yes, but why not start now?

 

 

EDIT: (so I'm not double posting): found this on YT. To my surprise, it's not the standard Hitler video, but still funny!

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, russell_dale said:

Maybe I've missed something, but if the lift is going to be 295' tall then by definition it's a hyper coaster not a giga. If it drops 400' into a tunnel it's still only a hyper coaster.  Am I wrong? 

The classification of coaster is based on the height OR drop. For example: BGW considers Apollo's Chariot a hyper even though the lift is less than 200 feet, but the drop is over 200 feet. Same with Phantoms Revenge at Kennywood. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I've missed something, but if the lift is going to be 295' tall then by definition it's a hyper coaster not a giga. If it drops 400' into a tunnel it's still only a hyper coaster.  Am I wrong? 

Giga can include the main lift hill having reach 10ft but a 300ft dropcbc09fa8f3f3b321d31eaac8c77e3a70.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also no matter what (unless its a new coaster type) B&M will call it a hyper model, as is the case with Fury and Levi. Giga is a term by Intamin when Millennium Force was built. B&M just refers to their coasters by what their mode is. For example, multiple dive coasters are over 200’ but they are not called “hyper coaster” they are called “dive coasters” because that is their model.

 

As for Kings Island, they can call it whatever they want. If they wanted to call Diamondback a giga, there’s nobody stopping then. Yes enthusiasts would be upset because we have an idea of what a giga should be (300’ height and/or drop) but to the average person, they don’t know the difference between a hyper, giga, or strata.

 

Kings Island will almost definitely market it as a giga because a. By most enthusiasts definitions it is considered a giga, and b. the term has become fairly well know around here due to the all the hype surrounding KI getting a giga for years. KI will do what they think is best to get the most people in the park.

 

Edit: Didn’t mean to put that emoji lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all we know, the height at ground level below the apex of the lift is 5' below the zero height listed on the blueprints.

In order to have a 301' lift AND drop, the ground at the base of the drop needs to be around 10' lower when considering footers/supports/height of track off ground. We can see that the grade changes at least this much in the land clearing pics.

Lift height has always been conjecture. I maintain that come announcement time, stats are going to reflect a 300'/301' lift. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, russell_dale said:

Maybe I've missed something, but if the lift is going to be 295' tall then by definition it's a hyper coaster not a giga. If it drops 400' into a tunnel it's still only a hyper coaster.  Am I wrong? 

You'd have to submit your inquiry to the international board of roller coaster classifiers.

In other words, giga is a made up term so there's no one to define what counts. 

1 hour ago, aj74205 said:

For all we know, the height at ground level below the apex of the lift is 5' below the zero height listed on the blueprints.

In order to have a 301' lift AND drop, the ground at the base of the drop needs to be around 10' lower when considering footers/supports/height of track off ground. We can see that the grade changes at least this much in the land clearing pics.

Lift height has always been conjecture. I maintain that come announcement time, stats are going to reflect a 300'/301' lift. 

Actually, we know the footers at the apex of the lift are about 10 ft higher than the ones at the station. That's where the whole 285/295 height thing is coming from. The top of the lift will be 295 ft above the ground at the station and 285 ft above the ground at the peak itself. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, fryoj said:

You'd have to submit your inquiry to the international board of roller coaster classifiers.

In other words, giga is a made up term so there's no one to define what counts. 

Actually, we know the footers at the apex of the lift are about 10 ft higher than the ones at the station. That's where the whole 285/295 height thing is coming from. The top of the lift will be 295 ft above the ground at the station and 285 ft above the ground at the peak itself. 

Where does data about the height of the footers come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, fryoj said:

Actually, we know the footers at the apex of the lift are about 10 ft higher than the ones at the station. That's where the whole 285/295 height thing is coming from. The top of the lift will be 295 ft above the ground at the station and 285 ft above the ground at the peak itself. 

The thing is though, "height" is very subjective. What are we measuring "height" by? Is it the joint that connects the support to the track? Top of the rail? Floor of the train? Height of the seat? Eye level for an average rider

There's lots of ways they can fudge the numbers to pick up that extra five feet without really lying. If KI decided to measure height based on eye level of the typical rider, the height will likely come out to 301 or 302 feet easily. The drop of 301 though, is definite because no matter what the point of reference being used to determine height is, as long as it's applied consistently, it will always be 301. If the heights on the blueprints are the bottom of the track, 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, homestar92 said:

The thing is though, "height" is very subjective. What are we measuring "height" by? Is it the joint that connects the support to the track? Top of the rail? Floor of the train? Height of the seat? Eye level for an average rider

There's lots of ways they can fudge the numbers to pick up that extra five feet without really lying. If KI decided to measure height based on eye level of the typical rider, the height will likely come out to 301 or 302 feet easily. The drop of 301 though, is definite because no matter what the point of reference being used to determine height is, as long as it's applied consistently, it will always be 301. If the heights on the blueprints are the bottom of the track, 

Oh I've said all along they will call it a Giga and claim 300 ft. They could put a 10 ft flag pole on top of this thing to get the official height if they really wanted. The documents have the "top of lift" height listed but we really don't know where they's measured from. I'd assume rail height, but there's a hand rail there that it could be calling the top. It's something we'll likely never know. For now, all we have is footer heights and "top of lift" to go off of. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody see this?

It took 50 CDX block kits to build The Beast. That's over $2,000 model.  I made Teaser suggestion they should use CDX kits to randomly build the new coaster for 2020 and put it in 1 shop but do not say anything about it.

 

It would look awesome seeing it setup somewhere.

20190615_203043.jpg

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will it really matter if it’s not a “true” giga? It’s based on an arbitrary form of measurement that the public won’t care about, and visually, it will still look like 300 feet. If it was measured in meters, it’d still come close to the giga measurement. I just don’t see why it matters?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ethancoaster said:

Will it really matter if it’s not a “true” giga? It’s based on an arbitrary form of measurement that the public won’t care about, and visually, it will still look like 300 feet. If it was measured in meters, it’d still come close to the giga measurement. I just don’t see why it matters?

It doesn’t at all, but the topic has become so dry that it’s all that people want to discuss. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, homestar92 said:

For Cedar Fair parks, they usually go vertical in late July or early August (their recent B&Ms have gone vertical shortly after the official announcement) and are finished with the track several months before the season starts - Banshee's track was completed in mid-January.

Now, if you're Six Flags or Kennywood, you start in October and finish track construction halfway through the following season, it seems.

Or if you're SFMM you start vertical construction a month into the main season you announced that the coaster would be new and opened.

On the music topic, Adventure Express had some Indiana Jones music playing during the Paramount era.  Also, Flight of Fear has it's own music playing in the spaghetti bowl.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • malem locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...