SonODiamondback Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I know this might not be popular with a lot of people. But would it be a bad thing to RMC the high stress areas of The Beast I read on RMC site that they can use their topper track on high stress areas on a wooden along with the wooden track. I think if done right it would decrease the need for the braking areas along the track and really let The Beast shine. The only section I see that Realy needs the braking is coming down the 2nd hill into the helix. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Topper track is apparently very expensive. SFOG started doing, and announced it was completely doing, The Georgia Cyclone. After about 60 percent was done, and Melinda Ashcraft retired, they stopped. I rode it this summer. Once my favorite wooden coaster, it is now in the bottom quarter somewhere. Slow, shuffling and painful. Sigh. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrill_Biscuit Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I wouldn't change a thing on the second drop and double-helix. In all it's glory, it's the icing on the cake that is The Beast. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 And Cedar Fair has done a fine job maintaining The Beast... 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindingSon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Most rides dream of the finale Beast has. Beast is not my favorite overall coaster but I'll be darned if its helix doesn't make me feel like it should be just about every time. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrill_Biscuit Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The joy of riding The Beast, for me, is when some fellow riders, often on their first ride of said legend, vocalize the ubiquitous misunderstanding about the ride upon which they're soon to be surprisingly schooled. As the train clears the top of the second lift: "This coaster isn't as awesome as everybody says. It just goes straight and turns ...hey, this track is at an angle and... oh, wow! This is fast, oh my gosh that tunnel's too small for my hea- what the- aaaaaaaaaggggh! Thi-i-i-i-i-i-s-s-s-s- i-i-i-s-s-s-s a-a-a-w-w-w-e-s-s-s-o-m-m-m-m-e!" Somehow, that has never lost its gratifying high degree of satisfaction! 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonODiamondback Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 So the topper track would slow it down and make a rougher ride then. Wasn't sure of how the topper track worked. Just an idea I had after reading about it. Not complaining at all about The Beast just thinking of of ways to improve on it. I like to think like that it could be the perfect coaster like the Diamondback and I say that was awesome but what if they did this. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I don't think the Topper track slowed it down or made it rough. I think SIX cheaped out when the project went over budget (and expended all the budget for only 60 percent of the project), then quit. To keep the ride even slightly rideable, they slowed it down even more. Most Six Flags woodies, in my opinion, are being allowed to go to pot so that ridership will decline and an RMC conversion will be well accepted by the locals. See especially Comet at The Great Escape, a member of the Six Flags Theme Park Family. Expensive at first, cheaper over the long haul, and easily marketed as NEW! (and wood, sigh). But see Rolling Thumder. Or Thunder Road. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrill_Biscuit Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 This is as great thread. It is what makes KIC the great site that it is. I really didn't know much about RMC until the speculation for Tropical Plunge had us all guessing about, as Greg Scheid put it, "The Ruh-." SonODiamondback's question has made me want to further research the topper track a little more closely, so that I can understand more about the wooden coasters I enjoy. For all that I know about coasters (which doesn't hold a candle to a lot of others on here), everyday there are ten new things that can be learned. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonODiamondback Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 That's how I feel. Like I said if it's done right. The Beast is awesome but just imagine if it ran full speed the whole way that would be over the top. But I repeat if done right not like SF has done to their woodies. New isn't always a bad way of thinking about things. I have no idea how a coaster is designed or builded there is a lot of math mumbo jumbo that goes into. I just know if people never took chances we wouldn't even have The Beast. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Actually The Beast was designed in an era when few chances were being taken. Airtime was considered a huge potential liability. Enthusiasts at the time, and some since, criticized the coaster for being rampy and having no steep drops other than the first, which was braked. Brakes on a first drop. Oh, the horror! The Beast was almost totally different than any coaster before it. Remarkably, it remains the longest wooden coaster to this day. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindingSon Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 And arguably, The Beast hasn't been the biggest risk in wooden coasters in the park. Oh the poor misguided son, where did you go wrong? Nay. The question is: Where didn't you go wrong? 11 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thrill_Biscuit Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 I guess, aesthetically, Son of Beast wasn't such an eyesore (at least back when there was hope for it.) After its stigmatization, though, it became a sad, sad monument to what it could have been, and seeing it in pictures and old videos kinda reminds us to breathe in a sigh of relief (especially given the supremely superior replacement in its fading footprint). 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The biggest mistakes there were direct results of corporate mandated cost cutting. From not using the specified SunCor wood, to not using the specified polyurethane wheels, to taking over as the general contractor and doing so late in the project, to OSHA violations, to what the state called a "Band-Aid approach" to repairs... Again, Cedar Fair made the right decision. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB1 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Please do not give me that mental image, I simply cannot Bear it. The Beast is good as is, it is a record breaking coaster that still (to a lesser degree) holds true to what it is and what it will be for future generations to enjoy true, classic, 70s style coasters that still pack a punch. The wood makes The Beast, a Beast. Wet wood allows for a totally different experience than dry wood, making it a different kind of coaster on different days. RMC should never touch this magnificent being unless if they were to just touch up on the preexisting structure I e add new wood as needed. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 ...the park doesn't need RMC to do that. 10 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honorarius Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Why spend the money to mess with what's already great??? Spend the money and try to improve some of the wooden turds in the chain... 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonODiamondback Posted August 30, 2015 Author Share Posted August 30, 2015 Again I'm not talking about a complete retracking of The Beast I'm only talking about the high stress areas. I love The Beast. The layout and how it goes off into the woods and rumbles through the covered helix. But if there was a way to engineer it to go faster without destroying the legend that it is I say do it. Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeastForever Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 If it's not broke... 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 You let RMC anywhere near that thing and all bets are off. Just leave it alone. Let them go butcher something else! 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KI Guy Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Actually The Beast was designed in an era when few chances were being taken. Airtime was considered a huge potential liability. Enthusiasts at the time, and some since, criticized the coaster for being rampy and having no steep drops other than the first, which was braked. Brakes on a first drop. Oh, the horror! The Beast was almost totally different than any coaster before it. Remarkably, it remains the longest wooden coaster to this day. Your Six Flags theory of letting their woodies go to pot theory is interesting. I never considered that possibility, and I wouldn't be surprised if that was the case. Was airtime a big liability mainly because of the less restrictive buzz bars? They seem pretty safe on Cornball Express and Hoosier Hurricane which both have good airtime. One thing that would be interesting with The Beast is changing to Millennium Flyer trains. I would believe that they would deliver a better overall ride, but obviously I can't say for sure. Brakes could also be lessened up as I would imagine that the GCI trains world be less harsh on the track. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 That and seat belts were essentially unheard of--as were seat dividers, head rests, automatic braking systems and hard polyurethane foam. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shark6495 Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 When The Beast was built (but before opening) wasnt there a story about how one the creators/engineers/park execs said this thing needs brakes? As in the ride was built, and could handle the stress, but it was just too much so some more brakes were added (old school skid brakes).... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Correct except for the "...and could handle the stress...". Where that idea came from, I have no idea. This was before computer simulations, etc. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KI Guy Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 Many thrill rides today would probably be considered too much by those standards. You can do a lot more while still being safe. Also I'd say people have generally higher tolerances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 The ride could not handle the stress. In fact, the four bench PTC trains the ride debuted with were soon cut down to three benchers to reduce track stress and train weight. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browntggrr Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 No reason to change a legend. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KI Guy Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 So Millenium Flyers are heavier? Does that mean that GCI makes their coasters more robust than what is traditional? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Interpreter Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 GCII coasters are designed with GCII trains in mind. At least they are now. At first, PTC trains were used, and note that some of those coasters have not survived. Note also that GCII train cars are shorter. Way shorter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KI Guy Posted August 30, 2015 Share Posted August 30, 2015 (edited) It's truly amazing that no one has undermined PTC. I know the market is extremely limited, but those things are rolling dinosaurs on modern twisters. In the original configuration with buzz bars, and without seat dividers and head rests, they're pretty comfortable, if not pleasing to the lawyers and regulators. With all the safety add-ons they are quite uncomfortable to many. Edited August 30, 2015 by KI Guy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.