This seems to be bothering me > If the 5 foot section broke, couldn't it happen to other parts of the ride at any given time??

Well that's what the engineering analysis is for.

I'm not sure I trust it either. If one section can crack, another section could as well. I have never felt the ride was right, and I doubt I will be getting on it ever again. Although, next year I'll have health insurance........

LOL

What an Advertisement.

Son of Beast......Make Sure Your Health Insurance is Current.

But honestly, ya probably don't need to worry about the meds as Cedar Fair would end up paying the medical bills and then some.

kwindshawne, I understand what you are saying. What I want to know is...are the state inspectors only concerned with the one section or has the whole structure being inspected to make sure no other part of the ride has that same mis-hap?

I am concerned that only the broken section is being focused on. I am not an engineer, but I don't trust the structure of it.

kwindshawne, I understand what you are saying. What I want to know is...are the state inspectors only concerned with the one section or has the whole structure being inspected to make sure no other part of the ride has that same mis-hap?

Well if you thought of checking the whole structure, I'm sure the people in charge of inspecting it did too. Anyhow, I'm still placing my bets on design flaw and not bad maintenance or bad wood, and if that's the case, the whole design would be checked....which would take awhile, hence not opening until next year.

True-I think that is the problem anyway....

If design was the problem, wouldn't they be suing Werner Stengel since it was his company that designed it? I still say design is not the problem.

You assume, perhaps incorrectly, that the ride was actually built in strict accordance with his design. . . That may or may not be true. Also, Mr. Stengel is not a resident of, nor can he usually be readily found in, the United States of America. To sue someone, you must get what is called "service of process." You also must allege they did something wrong. . . and that that something has caused you injury of some sort. As of this point, none of those things seem givens, given what we know.

How do we know, that Paramount didn't alter the original design plans for SOB?

How do we know, that Paramount didn't alter the original design plans for SOB?

One thing is for sure. Mr. Stengel KNOWS. And CBS/Paramount Parks and by now Cedar Fair all know, too. If alterations were made (and they are widely assumed to have been), the next question becomes whether those alterations affected what happened thereafter. I seem to remember the coaster was closed for modifications on several occasions, and that is even assuming it was built in accordance with the plans to start with. If you remember, Paramount Parks took over the general contracting on the ride early on.

How do we know, that Paramount didn't alter the original design plans for SOB?

One thing is for sure. Mr. Stengel KNOWS. And CBS/Paramount Parks and by now Cedar Fair all know, too. If alterations were made (and they are widely assumed to have been), the next question becomes whether those alterations affected what happened thereafter. I seem to remember the coaster was closed for modifications on several occasions, and that is even assuming it was built in accordance with the plans to start with. If you remember, Paramount Parks took over the general contracting on the ride early on.

I don't know how alter SOB is but if you look down while in line you can see some footers that where not used. I think I have a picture of the SOB model PKI showed off in 1999.

Yeah, post it please. I am interested to see it. So, then if they don't sue Stengel, then it has to be whomever altered those designs. Would Stengel still want to take credit for a coaster whose design was altered from what he submitted? Because he is still claiming SOB on his web site.

Suing Stengel is like committing your park to a lifetime of dull, park built, or Vekoma designed.

Don't bite the hand that feeds. (Specifically if you want a B&M)

Harvester, I was just saying that if it is a design flaw, then the designer would be the one being sued, unless someone altered those designs. It's not a matter of biting the hand that feeds.

SOB was not constructed properly, that would be my guess for the root problem, not design, but build and quality of build, hence the problems, glitches, malfunctions, disfunctions, and SBNO.

Also the malfunction of the trains. They are so freaking heavy and make the circuit at such a high rate of speed, it isnt surprising the wear and tear the structure has taken over the years. I think newer and lighter trains would make a great improvement.

Harvester, I was just saying that if it is a design flaw, then the designer would be the one being sued, unless someone altered those designs. It's not a matter of biting the hand that feeds.

I was out of state while Son was being built, so I missed all the news and lawsuits during that time. All I can rely on is what I can read here and on the history. Intentional or not, I think Son's construction looks kinda shoddy-I mean look at Beast and look at Son-some of the timbers in the track look almost criss-crossed, and some even look like they were thrown in the air and allowed to land and be nailed where they landed. Does anyone else see that-and were the beams intentionally put to look that way for theatrics?

The coaster was one of the very first completely designed in CADD. The support structure doesn't look like other coasters', but that in and of itself does not mean that it isn't stronger and designed to do what it was meant to do. That does not necessarily mean it was built as designed, however.

Yes, having worked in an architectural office, you`d be surprised how many things are built not as drawn on the plans! I`ve had to go back and do as built drawings, which essentially make the drawings look like how the building was actually built by the contractors. (Recently, I`ve had to redraw the same detail about six times, because the contractor still wasn`t building it the way it was drawn).

Those extra footings by Son of Beast relate to a change in the station design. Not sure on all the specifics, but there apparantely was some design alterations made to the ride after construction on the footings had commenced, and hence the unused footings. I seem to recall that the changes ommitted a block section, which is also the reason why KI never runs three trains on it (they don`t want a train stuck all the way out at the midcourse brake run).

Not only doesn't PKI want to have a train stopped in the midcourse breaks all the time. That would totally kill the ride.

Which no doubt is why the midcourse brakes are not firmly applied on Beast, Vortex or Flight of Fear!

Flight of Fear you nearly stop on the break run.

Hence the smiley. I think you know you also darn near stop on Beast and on Vortex, as well. On NONE of these rides did you do so when the rides opened.

And it's BRAKE run, not break run. If something breaks on that run, you got real problems...

Yea The Vortex does go pretty slow but The Beast? I never seen that sucker stopped or really come close to stopping.

That makes sense railrider, that it was a flaw in construciton, not in the design itself.

Yea The Vortex does go pretty slow but The Beast? I never seen that sucker stopped or really come close to stopping.

In the shed before the second lift, the coaster slows to a near stop, now doing so all at once with the magnetic braking. When the coaster first opened, it barely slowed in that shed....

Yea The Vortex does go pretty slow but The Beast? I never seen that sucker stopped or really come close to stopping.

In the shed before the second lift, the coaster slows to a near stop, now doing so all at once with the magnetic braking. When the coaster first opened, it barely slowed in that shed....

Never thought about that, but you're right.

The brakes in the shed do not stop The Beast any more than in the past. Instead of a gradual slow down, it now just catches it right at the end.

Flight of Fear is incredible when the mid-course brakes are off. Flying through those turns at the end of the course is nothing less than amazing.

Yeah, I've only had two laps on FOF where the brake was on. It ruined the whole last half of the ride.

Yeah, I've only had two laps on FOF where the brake was on. It ruined the whole last half of the ride.

Then you must not have rode FoF very much since 2001. From 2001 thru 2004 the mid course brake has been turned off. I believe they started using it again in 05, for what reason's I don't know.

I'm assuming when you guys mention the brake runs on Vortex, you're talking about the ones before the corkscrew. It seems that people think brake runs were added AFTER the ride opened. I rode Vortex the year it opened (yeah, I'm that old; I also rode The Bat and Screamin' Demon) and the brakes have always been in place. I think the brakes put less "wear & tear" on the ride.

Yes, they've always been there...no, they have not always applied the brakes on that brake run to the extent that they currently do.

As an aside, you will NOT find the midcourse brakes to be applied anywhere near as drastically on the Great American Scream Machine at SFGAd, for example (though many wish they WERE!).

Well, I hav'nt seen anything either, but I'm hoping that it will re-open because it is usually where alot of the PKI guests are and that means less of a wait for everything else!

^Good point. If for no other reason, thats a good reason to open it back up!

^Good point. If for no other reason, thats a good reason to open it back up!

And one that's not all too accurate.

Did anyone really notice any increases as a result of SOB closing?