Kenban

I might be wrong on this, but I believe it was the addition of seat belts. There are a number of rules and everything from head rests, seat dividers, and even something as simple as assigned seating prevents the ride from qualifying. I believe the rule in this case was you are required to be able to slide from side to side.

Landmark designations by ACE are permanent. It is purely to highlight the coasters historic importance. Parks can modify the coasters or even remove the coaster and it’s designation will not change. Big Dipper at Geauga Lake joined the list after the park was permanently closed but before the coaster was torn down. ACE also has a coaster classics list which can be rescinded and is intended to highlight rides which operate in a classic manor. Woodstock express used to qualify and it has since been rescinded.

The bottom of the drop occurs inside the tunnel. If you move that point to be earlier in the tunnel the drop becomes more steep and you enter the tunnel lower, but the total height of the drop effectively remains unchanged. Either way unless something more is done to the tunnel or the lift height the total change has to be negligible due to the limited space to move the track. It is always possible the trim could move or be removed. But based on the post and specifically calling out the changes are not intended to change the rides speed or thrill makes me assume the trim will remain. I would love for the ride to receive the work necessary for all the trims to be removed, but I don’t feel like that’s a priority of the people who make the decisions.

My guess is me neither, the angle of the drop does not change the speed gained, which is a product of initial speed and difference in height. The trim is there to reduce speed. I think this is a really important quote from the post by Don. It reads to me that all they are doing is trying to make the ride smoother and likely reduce future maintenance. I know there has been speculation that these changes are being made to remove trim brakes. The trims have been there since day one, and I think people do not realize the top of the lift hill to the bottom of the turn up towards the second lift hill is a total height difference of 201 feet. Without trims the train could be going close to 75 miles per an hour or more at that turn. I just cannot see the trims ever being removed without much more significant changes being made to the ride.

I think your misunderstanding the problem. It’s not the amount of sway, it’s that it is not consistent. The rigidity of the bents is changing in this area causing the bents to move different amounts. The goal is not to reduce sway, it’s to make it so that it sways together a similar distance which will produce a smoother ride. I think you are correct they are separating the structure but I am still confused about exactly what the new design will look like. I really do not understand what the line about “the lower bents will be upper bents until the tunnel” means.

Parks rarely comment on bans publicity, since the individuals are minors it’s even less likely. I doubt we will ever really hear much about what lead to this. I guarantee there is more to this story then what was published.

This is common when resetting the route is difficult and running the parade more then once is needed. For instance the Disneyland Christmas parade runs at 3 and 5:30 this year. The first showing is forwards, the second is the same route but in reverse. Not sure the attendance at Kings Island can justify running the parade twice a day, and with how many performers are also performing in shows around the park it would limit the parks ability to put in shows.

It’s not just getting through the gate, and I am not sure all of the ones people are mentioning are big enough without removing trees or parts of buildings. You also need space to park the floats. Ending the parade at a gate large enough for the floats with a behind the scenes parking lot would be better. The route already passes a location like this. Eliminate the last stop, and never even make the turn down the second side of International street. Between the restrooms at the entrance to the park is a large gate. There is a small employee parking lot located here which is easily large enough to temporarily store the parade for a few hours. Just reset the parade after the park closes. It would not be that expensive to build a storage structure here either, I believe it would be roughly 20 parking spaces which would be lost.

I have to go from facts to rumor and speculation here. But I have heard that there are differences between the 4 and 3 bench trains that could not just be cut off. For instance I have heard that the steel is thicker on the 4 bench and that means The Beasts trains weigh more and are stiffer then a regular 3 bench PTC train. I have tried to get an answer to this before. But, I have never been able to get a straight answer. It’s also possible, none of the people I asked, know the answer. I remember one time the answer was basiclly the cuts were very careful and they made sure they got the geometry correct. The problem is that does not really answer the question of what differences remained between the modified trains and a train that started as 3 benches. It might be that only PTC knows the answer. How different are the trains then a standard 3 bench PTC? Are those differences causing more damage to the track, or do those differences lead to a worse experience for quests? If so they should really be replaced. I will say this, I have heard that something is happening. Replacement? Rebuild by PTC? We might find out when we hear more details about the retracking.

It’s not a rumor. I know it was discussed by Jeff Gramke at Coaster Stock, and I am sure it’s been publicly discussed at other times. The trains that ran on The Beast this summer, are the original 4 bench trains from 1979 when the ride opened. It originally had 4 trains, each with five 4 bench cars, for a total of 40 passengers. During the rides first off season so before 1980, the park rebuilt the cars and chopped the cars chassis from 4 bench to 3 bench. They broke up the 4th train and added an additional car to the remaining 3 trains. So 3 trains, each with six 3 bench cars, giving each train a capacity of 36 riders. The park never has bothered to fix the loading area which is why the gates do not line up with the trains rows. The lead car from the 4th train was shorted to I believe a single row, and then given to an employee who retired as a gift. Which if you do the math leaves one final car which I have no idea what happened to. I am sure PTC would be willing to work on the trains, I am not sure if they would demand to replace modified items which would include the chassis. My opinion is that it’s time for the trains to just be replaced, even if it is just new PTC trains, it just feels like the current trains have just been modified too many times. Although a total rebuild by PTC would be nice if it includes them upgrading components. Foot pedals to unlock restraints instead of the nails. Upgraded restraint hardware so the park can do away with the 2 click rule and have similar policies to the rest of the chain.

The plans are shown on the news website linked earlier in the thread. It appears to be a multi-launch coaster. You can find no limits creations based on the plans on YouTube. But it’s only around 60 or 70 feet tall if I remember correctly, and the park stated in the planning permission requests that it would be a family coaster. So do not expect anything too crazy. Not enough details to figure out manufacturer, or type of train. I am kinda hoping for a Mack spinner like Time Traveler. But the layout looks more like an Intamin motorbike.

He acknowledged the photos but also basically stated the park is not ready to discuss anything about retracking work, and would share more information later. Gravity Group did a presentation and they confirmed they are working on The Beast but said nothing about what they are doing on the project. Overall not a lot.

I am at the ACE holiday party. Don has confirmed that the park is planning on going retro with the paint on Racer, it is planned to be red, white, and blue.

The paths into the helix are not large enough to permit heavy equipment access. If there is a need for something larger then what can fit through the existing opening it is normal to take down a section of a helix temporarily. The work in the helix looks like that to me, they want to get something larger then what can normally access the helix.

I suspect we will learn more information about this project on Saturday. The regional ACE holiday party is happening this weekend at Great Wolf Lodge and the park will make a presentation, which traditionally is a discussion of changes occurring for the next year. Also I would not be surprised to see gravity group send a representative. I have been hearing rumors about this project for months. It sounds like it is Gravity Group doing the work and I have heard they are using the engineered track that debuted on Racer this year. More then likely this does mean they will reprofile the sections they are working on. It will likely be similar to the changes to Racer. Scan the existing ride, model it in modern design software and clean up the track location with small tweaks to improve the ride without changing the overall design too much. This sounds slightly more then a couple of inch nudge but I expect at the same time the ride will still look and feel mostly the same just smoother. I have also heard rumors that something slightly out of the ordinary is going on with The Beast trains this winter. Before anyone jumps to a conclusion, whatever crazy thing your thinking of, is likely wrong.

Rule 901:9-1-01 (C)(1) https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-administrative-code/rule-901:9-1-01 Is there a way around this? I have no idea. I have never visited a scene 75 early January to know if the coasters are operating.

Wicked Twister closed at the same time it has for years, the end of the regular season. It has not operated during Haunt in a long time. Closing when it did is normal for that ride.

The HUSS of old did go out of business, and it did happen like the year after building the topple tower rides, but it was several years before the Dollywood lawsuit. The lawsuit had nothing to do with the bankruptcy. The current HUSS bought the remains of the company in bankruptcy and is the company that Dollywood sued. I believe the only reason Dollywood was even able to sue the company was a service contact between them.

Weight restrictions on water slides are normal and is the typical way parks handle safety. Even the biggest companies can get the design wrong and force tighter restrictions then originally planned. The original design for Punga Racers at Universal Orlando’s Volcano Bay had a 150 lb restriction at one point due to injuries. Since then the slides were rebuilt with a new manufacturer which allowed the park to raise the weight restriction to 300 lbs. Unfortunately since weight determines who can ride safely if a park wants or even needs to enforce these restrictions, riders are stuck with scales.

These types of projects rarely get built. The problem is typically financing. Designing and building is the easy part. Finding the money is difficult. I took a look at the website. The developers do not appear to be putting any money into the project. The design was even paid for by $250k from Middletown. They plan to pay for the project with $1.1 billion in bonds. I am on the fence about this projects chances. This group has successfully built projects in the past. But nothing on a scale even close to the size and expense of this proposal. I suspect they will have a difficult time issuing the bonds.

https://mcusercontent.com/b8edaed9d386fc047dcd5cc35/files/8dd9d8d5-51e1-bd62-238a-34b463c038ff/131_Glenwood_Caverns_HMD_accident_report.pdf Try this link instead. On Orion and many other coasters where the belt is a backup it is an automotive style belt. The belt locks due to sudden movement. You can pull it out slowly, but give it a quick tug and it locks.

Here is the official report. I feel it’s important to point out two different ride ops physically checked the girls belt. The first pulled on the tab confirming it was locked. The ride generated an error even indicated exactly what seat had a problem since the belt never cycled. According to the report this ride operator proceeded to recheck the belts on all of the passengers and attempted to dispatch multiple times (it never says how many times), ignoring the fact the controls told them exactly which seat had an issue. Then a second ride operator arrived, manually unlocked the belts, pulled the belts locking rod out, and immediately reinserted it. All without either noticing the girl was sitting on top of the belts. History time, Lightnin Loops at Six Flags Great Adventure had a death due to a guest being in front of the restraint. This caused Six Flags to change to using orange OTSR restraints on Arrow coasters, and is also the reason loops were added to the front of the restraints. glenwood-caverns-accident-report.pdf

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/09/24/glenwood-caverns-death-child-ride-operator-error/ Well investigators know exactly what happened, and why. Frankly it reminds of the Smiler accident. The operators made mistake after mistake. I get the feeling they had zero clue how to correctly operate the ride and obviously had no idea what to do when they received an error.

The Ohio state Supreme Court ruled on this in 2015. Private police forces in Ohio are subject to open records laws. Makes no difference how they are funded. This includes colleges who were not successful in defending their opinion that they are not required to comply.

The Freedom of Information Act only applies to the parks security because of the fact that they are actually a real police department, the Cedar Point Police Department. They are actual police officers with the ability to arrest individuals, write tickets, etc. They are subject to many of the same standards as regular public police departments and are required to respond to FOIA requests. If the park did not want to be subject to public scrutiny then it would have been as simple as not having an actual police force and instead just being park security. There is no point to waiting for an investigation into the accident to end, or anything else to occur. The only information that can be requested is what is generated by the parks police, which likely has nothing to do with the on going investigation. Their work on the accident was basically done the day of the accident. This kind of work by Newspapers and other media organizations is how investigative journalism is done. You might disagree with this specific case but in the future what happens if they are investigating a serious crime? Oversight of police departments is important and confirming the right for news organizations to have the ability to request documents and information is important. I do not have an issue with having this fight now and confirming the parks responsibilities under the law instead of waiting for something else. Like I said before if the park does not want to have to respond to these types of requests in the future then it just needs to no longer have a real police force. I cannot imagine any decisions about corporate headquarters take into account the local newspaper. I have spoken with people before about why they are located where they are in the chain. I hear a lot about how Cedar Fair is giving people the option of where do they want to be located, the problem is everyone is making the same choice, Charlotte. Jason McClure for instance when he was promoted from general manager of Cedar Point to regional Vice President of a number of parks including Kings Island, Cedar Point, and Carowinds, moved to Charlotte. Honestly I get the feeling that the headquarters in Sandusky is little more than a building and to claim it is in Sandusky. The move while still unofficial has already happened. I do agree that personal details should only be published if the victim or their family consents.