shark6495

thanks terp. I was only wondering because I know back in my radio tv days we had a light at about the 150 mark (the tower was a 300 ft + tower) and for some reason I assumed it would need one. Now does Drop Tower (or whatever it is called) need one, or is that just beneath the magical mark?

Yea those would be the lights PKIboy. When I passed by the park I didnt see the Drop Tower lights..... plus wouldnt SOB need some sort of light since its a tall structure? jw

I understand the lift lights being off but dont they need some sort of air controller light required by the FAA?

Hey if this is in the wrong spot I am sure it will get moved to the right spot.... while I was driving by the park tonight (around 645) no lights were on. The lights on diamond back were on and so was the flight light on the eifel tower but nothing on drop zone and SOB.... shouldnt those lights be on or at least flight lights? I know on radio towers we had to have some sort of flight light on at dark and there was one at about 150 feet..... does the eifel tower light constitute enough flight lights for air traffic?

Well I would do a bunch of research and find a date The Bat was running, then go on that day, it was a ride I always wanted but never got to. And stop reading now if you dont like the idea of time travel theories. If you go back in time you will be changing the whole world. No such thing as going back to just enjoy the atmosphere. If you ride a ride, you are forcing someone else to ride at a later time, then that persons life may never get back to what they should have been, or you could force someone to meet someone else and then bam you are no longer alive.... time travel= back to the future when marty starts to disappear....

nice stories guys, heres mine I guess. I hate heights, even though I go repelling, but I remember I was at Ceder Point and the family was getting on Iron Dragon, well I must have been no older than 8 or 9 and I cried the whole lift hill.... well after than I was able to ride rides but still that first hill gets me like looking over the edge of a climbing wall. My stomach hits my throat and I just hold on haha

I enjoy this new skin, but the only thing I do not like, and maybe its just a transfer thing or what not, is the fact its hard to tell who was quoting who in some other topics. It seems in this forum its easier but in the others not so much. But besides that keep up the good work ladies and gentlemen

There is nothing psychological about people's opinions. The opinions are documented for the public to view. If the ride was well liked, it would receive good reviews, since it is not well liked, the majority of the reviews are negative. We can only go upon the information provided and found, and in that information, it is clear where the majority stands. You seem to misunderstand the point. What I mean is, you cannot look at a collection of reviews on websites and say "See, Son of Beast gets a 3.5 / 10 on average, so ha." That's not how it works. What you COULD say, is that, out of all of those people who rate the ride on roller coaster rating websites, an average of 3.5/10 emerges. It would be ridiculous to say that the community who has enough passion to create an account, log on, and scientifically arrive at a numerical representation of the ride's quality is representative of every single person who has opinions on the ride. That would be insane. (And besides that, I imagine that a number of people on these rating sites assign the ride either a ten or a 1, if only to combat others who they think unfairly assigned the ride either a 1 or a 10). Whatever you draw from amusement park rating sites is precisely that - a number drawn from an amusement park rating site. There are doubtlessly those who consider Son of Beast a 10/10, and those who genuinely consider it a 1/10 (and every decimal place in between), but who never take the time to create an account at these websites you frequent. As such, the only "consensus" you can draw from such a compilation of information is what a very very specific group of folks thinks of the ride. It's neither representative of the general public, nor of a majority of park goers. It doesn't claim to be. Be careful not to confuse that. Some of my friends love the ride, some think it's okay - none went online to express their opinion. The only review you're getting in the long run is the review of those who are enthusiastic enough to get online and rate it - that represents a very minuscule amount of Son of Beast's total ridership, and shouldn't be thought of as being anything other than that. I'm not saying Son of Beast is the best ride, and I would agree with your conclusion that most people probably don't like it as a whole - I'm simply pointing out the flaws in your method of arriving at that conclusion. I am glad you had the time and energy to write that all out so elegantly. During my undergrad I had to do surverys and explain the flaw in the gathering of the material and surveys and you make a great point, not everyone has the time/energy/or want to go online and fill out a survey. Also people do try to counter what others have said. "Well Jim said this ride was only a 2 so to prove him wrong I will vote 10 even though I feel it is only an 8." Wooden coasters are rough, no doubt. How some of you can say that you have experienced rougher rides on racer and Beast is beyond me but hey roughness of a ride is all in perception and not scientific measurement so I believe you. The only part time I have a rough ride on Beast is going into the Helix. On racer I never have had a rough experience on that ride, using rough as painful and jerky. On SOB though I do feel the pains of the ride. But to each their own I guess...

That would never work on this slide, as the rider may pass the mark but still not clear the loop. That can only be done on 100% downhill slides. looping ride = possible tragedy

gotcha, thanks. I have been to a park before though, it was in florida (I forget where so my apologies if no one believes me) but the guard in the pool would hit a button which would (later i found out) turn a red signal green at the top of the ride... so that could be done.....

well I have never been to a park that just uses a timer, but usually there is a life guard in the splash down pools. That person usually signals up to the guard at the top of the ride to give an all clear. I am sure they do the same thing on the looping rides....

Disney does have some great deals out there, and even after they are done with their promotional stuff it still shouldnt cost too too much. I am looking to go there for a honey moon with the fiance in about a year and a half should be fun....

I don't have to pick anyone. Choose any coaster, travel, or information site and read the comments on SoB. It's clear where the majority stands. agreed. I was not calling you out as either believing SOB is smooth or unsmooth. I just used your name because you were the last one to post before me so it was hypothetical....

so they look at filing a chap 11 or something similar (what ever the equivalent of a company bankruptcy is) and then look to eventually expand? I need to open a company to mismanage millions of dollars EDIT: So why would a company buy other parks located with in their geographic region? ( I ask this not to get an accurate answer but more an opinion) If I owned a company and there was a competing company that was stealing my dollars I would buy em and then force them out eventually.....

so what happens if a company defaults on a loan such as this. I know if I default on my loan, my car is gone, and if I default on my college loans, my car can be taken as some sort of payment, but what about a park? would the company be forced to sell of assets?

some how that does not seem to be the best way to get rid of debt....

sort of like asking the bank for a freeze on your loan for a few months, they tack the month to the end of the loan while still charging you the interest? just on a much larger scale?

so you have some very good points terp, which brings me to my question what is the exception and what is the rule. For example Paramount Parks was profitable, but could it be they were profitable because they brought a sense of factory parks, by which I mean all the parks receive the same upgrade at the same time. or are parks less profitable when owned by big corporation. And to be fair Paramount had a very big pocket to put money into their parks and for advertising dollars to push their parks. Where you get a ceder fair type company, who has deep pockets, but not the multimedia reach.... Just looking at park ownership through an outsiders point of view..... EDIT: Thanks coastersRZ, I posted that before I read your post.... Thats sort of what I was getting at are smaller parks able to keep a better eye on their profit.... just trying to learn

can you forget something you never knew?

oh I didnt mean to infer BEC was in trouble, but I meant it shows that some company owners can see a park line as being a never ending circle of dollar chasing, versus a company finding its sweet spot and keeping it there for a few years. If a park stays "status qou" it could quickly fall out of favor with the general public very quickly. If a beverage company gets to status qou it does not have to actively upgrade its products every year. Plus if I am right, Busch Gardens (both Williamsburg and Tampa) are open year round. it just seems the seasonal parks are harder to maintain with large profit models, when multiple parks are being owned. No doubt the certain company who bought 5 regional seasonal parks, was doing well before the acquisition, but it just seems that the more parks you own the harder it is to create a profit for the mother company. if you own lets say 3 parks. and you do a "fix a park" every three years, meaning every year one of your three parks gets a new upgrade. it would seem its easier and more profitable on the small scale. When you own, lets say 7 regional parks, you would have to upgrade 2-3 parks a year, and some parks are not as profitable as the rest.... just an opinion that I am refining as the night goes

is it just me? I have never heard any one who has gotten rich from a chain of theme parks (ok current, not people who originally created the park and sold it) What I mean by this, it seems the parks who are seasonal have harder times keeping the parent company in the black. As parks continue to spend money it does not show a greater population boom, but more of a leveling process. Again i state this with out researching the numbers but look at Six Flags, the debt Ceder Fair is in, Busch Gardens being sold (which was a way of saying they were cutting losses while the getting was still good).... Can a company survive owning multiple parks? Can a company survive with out owning multiple parks?

The problem with majority is, its never a true majority. I could hand pick ten people and the majority of those people will not like SOB. Then Browntggr could pick his own ten people that have a majority opinion that SOB is good and smooth. Plus the spinal discussion steel versus tooth picks, take a basic Anatomy and physiology course and see how fragile the spine actually is. Now mind you, you may not be affected by SOB because of your age (the younger you are the better your body is at absorbing spinal traumas), body fat composition/fitness level (if you are in shape your muscles will be better at holding the spine in place versus weak back muscles that allow the spine to move, along with where you sit and how tall you are etc. So the ride could be a good ride for the few who are young enough and small enough that the forces of the ride dont hurt you. But then again if you are too small you could be bounced around like a rag doll.

well i think we have all learned that website up keep is not the most important issue to CF, or more locally to KI.... So to be honest I would not be surprised if one day you go to the website and see, "we are very excited about opening up in 2009 with our new ride...." so yeah the website is reliable only if someone is updating consistently... no consistency then no reason to take much note in it...

the SOB thing reminds me of an older car. A car that is showing some rust, heater doesnt work, emergency brake is stuck, and you dont care too much for the car but it gets you from point a to point b.... then the engine goes out... do you spend 5-6 grand on a new engine (but still have the previous issues) or do you just trade it in and get a new car with no new problems.... it all depends on the other issues of the car and how much you enjoy it... so they have to way their options....

I would disagree with you on this one.... if it is to reopen it will be its 10th year of operation... so SOB ten years of records? Incorrect. Should Son of Beast open, it will be its 11th year of operation (or more correctly, its 11th year of operating at least part of each): 2000 1 2001 2 2002 3 2003 4 2004 5 2005 6 2006 7 2007 8 2008 9 2009 10 2010 11 This is a VERY common error. The tenth anniversary would be the 11th year of operation. Terpy you sound like my grandfather.... "today is your 15th birthday" but grandpa I am only 14 "you were born on your first birthday wernt you?" and you are right it is in its 11th year... so never mind no fan fare... lol