A.J.

I mean, regardless of whether this was spoken about in an interview or not, you'll never know which parks are interested until they're announced...

From what has been said in the past, it's not really a place for enthusiasts or the GP but a place where parks and companies can come in and exchange information and see what innovations are coming out in the industry and get an idea on what they want to buy for their parks. Not just get an idea - there was still legitimate buying and selling going on through Friday morning. Lots of meetings happening behind closed doors.

Blazing Fury will never die.

Bumping this now that Planet Coaster is launching. Stop making me have to actually work!

Tell that to Mack.

It looks like they really don't want you putting your hands up like you can on Thunderbolt. Ironic considering the photo right next to the car.

I've had an unhealthy obsession with this attraction since it was revealed several years ago. It's called No Boundaries, and it's made by WhiteWater Attractions: From what I understand, the idea is to have a single monumental play area where both harnessed and non-harnessed participants can climb and play at the same height. Non-harnessed participants play on the climbers, nets etc in the central core of the space while harnessed participants play on the typical ropes course obstacles on the outside, culminating in a Cloud Coaster-like zip track ride from the top to the bottom.

Let's play Devil's Advocate! What about U-shaped shuttle coasters like Intamin half pipes, impulse coasters and that weird coaster in China? What if they for whatever reason were powered by tires like the Skywarp? I think you could likely argue that the Skywarp at the very least could possibly be maybe considered as somewhat of a powered coaster.

I wouldn't count this as a "coaster credit" because we don't count Disk'O coasters as "credits" either. Pretty much every vertical attraction is powered by gravity at some point. That being said, I could see many smaller and coastal parks getting one of these in their current form. Though, wasn't their original pitch something much larger? A double-sized one of these could be really interesting in a larger park or in transportable form at a European fair.

Skyline Attractions has produced a full reveal / marketing video for the new SkyWarp attraction, just in time for the opening of the IAAPA Attractions Expo this year. Check it out! Excerpt from the press blast: More here: http://www.skylineattractions.com/?p=press&i=20161114-affordable-and-thrilling-roller-coaster-offers-visibility-and-capacity-with-a-small-footprint

You're right, it honestly has everything to do with height restrictions. Apparently the "average" height of a 9-year old child is 52.5", 10-year old is 54.5" and 11-year old is 56.5"-56.7", That would mean that a 9-year old could ride most larger Intamins, a 10-year old most big B&Ms and an 11-year old everything else, including Mega Lites. So you're definitely correct in assuming that most (but not all, mind you) younger teenagers would have already been riding for several years. That being said, not everyone is a daredevil - part of what makes a "family coaster" family-oriented is that it's not intimidating.

I like your concept Yin, but I feel like they would want to keep Fujiyama as the tallest coaster in the park.

Hersheypark didn't remove Canyon River Rapids because a raft tipped over and killed people...

lol, I knew you would have some response like that. I mean, he's correct...

Go home.

I mean, they wouldn't do it if it weren't at least somewhat profitable.

Based on all the flat rides featured in the video it looks to be another "Zamperla Land". Good for them.

It was Intamin. All of the rides have some form of scenery, but it's how the ride interacts with the scenery that makes it so impressive. What scenery? Three-quarters of the ride is darkness and / or giant screens.

I mean, I don't necessarily blame the neighbors, if I weren't already a roller coaster person I too would likely be upset that I now have a noisy roller coaster outside my front door. But, at the same time, the park is only open until 8:00 PM at the latest during the summer of 2017, so it's not like Wildfire would be running while I'm trying to sleep. Perhaps Wildfire will turn into Balder in that regard. I've always seen the two-lane road when looking at satellite imagery of the park, but I didn't realize that the road was seriously having a Knoebels problem (being backed up for miles due to parking lot traffic). I could see why that would drive some people nuts. Thanks for your insights!

Four or five years ago I definitely would have agreed with you. The problem is that smart devices and the desire to be social in that sense are now so ingrained into first-world society and culture that NOT having access to one is seen as unusual. The difference between a metal detector at the entrance to an attraction vs one at an airport security checkpoint or the entrance to a park is that you get your stuff back immediately at the airport. At Universal Orlando, there's the expectation that your stuff has to be put away BEFORE going through the detector and you're stuck without it for however long you're stuck in the queue.

So, I see both sides of this. First thing, Universal Orlando has to move people. Allowing for bag drops on the platforms would slow operations down, and make for longer queues. Also, many of Universal Orlando's attractions have separate load and unload areas, including Dragon Challenge. A counter system could theoretically work but it would require reconfiguration of nearly every queue in both parks! Walt Disney World has an advantage here - you have very few rides that actually use bag drops there because ride motions are tame enough for you to take your stuff with you and not lose anything. In terms of "trusting" their guests, they shouldn't, in my opinion. Most guests certainly aren't malicious, but people leave their brains at home when they go on vacation. Eliminating the problem before it occurs is a smart decision, even though the implementation isn't particularly spectacular. That being said, I don't like the whole system. It's a pretty big inconvenience especially considering that I occasionally carry a backpack around. While the units are always clustered -near- an attraction, you always have to hunt to find them. Queues are boring. There isn't always a clear set of instructions - sometimes people try to enter the attraction, are turned away, and then enter again. Metal detectors are imperfect. The list goes on.

I mean, doing a reconstruction for two coasters with track lengths close to that of The Incredible Hulk (3,200 ft each vs Hulk's 3,700) at once? Dueling Dragons lost its "iconic" status as soon as it became Dragon Challenge, even when it was still "dueling". As good as both coasters are, Dragon Challenge is nothing more than "a ride in Harry Potter land" for most people now. Is that even worth it, especially considering the imminent appeal of "insert attraction / land based off of the Fantastic Beasts franchise here"? They've got a prime slice of real estate that's about to become potentially vacant...

Hooray for backstage / guest experience improvements!

Unfortunately, unless you build on a designated or former brownfield site, any theme park development is going to have at least some form of negative environmental impact, be it short-term or long-term. The only thing even close to a "environmentally-friendly" theme park that I can think of is a little amusement park in Wales, GreenWood Forest Park, which has very few actual rides. Maybe the BillyBird "parks" in the Netherlands too. Theme parks are, by their very nature, power-hungry developments made from steel and concrete, though Kolmarden Wildlife Park used to be a zoo exclusively. I do feel like Kolmarden is at a disadvantage here considering the circumstances, but I don't think Wildfire will be torn down either. I'm all for environmentally friendly theme parks (man), but if people are suddenly so concerned about the environmental impact, I feel like they would realize that the "damage" has already been done, and that going through the process of demolishing Wildfire would make an even more negative short-term impact. I feel like the worst case scenario for people like us (and the park itself by consequence) is that Wildfire is forced into closed / SBNO status while the process is going on. One thing though - is this strictly a legal thing, or are there ulterior motives at work here? If this were in the U.S., I feel like whomever would have originally opposed the coaster's construction would have thrown a large sum of money at someone to try and have the case opened back up again.

I hope not. Playgrounds are already scarce enough in U.S. theme parks.