Electerik

I haven't ever worked on a Flyer, so I can't really address that side of it in any detail. But the problem with the stand up coaster is the adjustable height seats, which must be lined up correctly for each rider and then locked, all at once, from the control booth. Since the guests tend to naturally "test" the seats and "bounce," at least one of the guests in the train will probably have put themselves into a position they should not be dispatched in (squatting down or standing on their toes, say) between the time the ops signal for the seats to be locked and when the button is actually pressed. The row that guest is in then has to be unlocked, and you try again--hoping no one else screws it up now that they're once again free to. If you ever get a chance to watch the load procedure for a B&M Stand Up, hang around for a couple of cycles. It'll make you want to tear your hair out. Just from watching, the Flyer does seem a bit more labor intensive for the ops than a standard coaster, in terms of the restraints--but once the guest is in, they're pretty much in.

Since you've stumbled upon one of the very few areas of my expertise, let me just point out that Mine Ride is mostly gravity powered. Yes, the trains are electric, but for the vast majority of the ride, they coast (powerlessly) downhill. It's just kind of hard to tell when you're on it. /Not that I count it, mind you. I'm just saying. //Okay, really I just like to talk about Mine Ride.

In my view, there are good reasons that no one has built a Stand Up in almost a decade. During the 1990's, parks were adding lots of coasters, but there weren't all that many different kinds out there. Lots of parks added Stand Ups simply because it was something they didn't already have. Now, though, parks are adding coasters less frequently, and there are more coaster type options. Since the Stand Up brings with it an extra level of capacity related headaches (due to the nature of loading a Stand Up train), why choose that over the many other options now available? I would imagine that the trains would have to be more expensive than a standard Sitting Coaster, as well. And as for the ride experience....well, there's no Stand Up in the fantasy park that exists in my head. How about the one in yours? /Could still be a Stand Up. //But who in their right mind would want one?

^ I think they're just thinking that they want to save the ride. (And they probably got a good deal on it.) In the article, they mention that it's a 2010 project at best. I interpret that as "we're not doing anything with it until we're sure we're done with Flying Turns."

I hope you all appreciate the extra effort I put into the Terminator red eye effect theming. Oh, and my other hand is holding the camera. You people have dirty minds! /Maybe that's why I like you so much.

Okay, I did it. But I'm not proud. /

Well, my research ability is really lame. So I just plugged "X" into RCDB and discovered that there's a park in the Philippines called "X-Site Teen Amusement Center." I don't really think it has anything to do with this new coaster, but if this park is anything like how its name sounds, then I'm moving to the Philippines! /Screw the coaster. //Er, I mean....

True enough. In which case, Robb--with his evil stringing of us along even though he knows what it is!--is tipping his hand with this: In which case: Robb did it, with the Floorless Coaster, in the ______ room! /Oops, still don't know where it's going! //Quit denying it, Robb. We all know you're smarter than you look!

So, if we assume that all designations are only two letters long, and that the first type built got first choice of lettering (i.e., Flying couldn't use FC because the Floorless had already taken it), then logic would dictate that this is a Stand Up, since B&M built a couple of those before any sitting coasters. Admittedly, a lot of assumptions there.

An interesting idea. Merchandise kind of fits into that, as well. If they sell a T-shirt with Batman on it, they have to pay DC (or whoever) a cut. But if they can manage to sell a T-shirt with Mr. Six on it, they get to keep all of it.

I liked it. So far, they seem to be going with the "you can't change anything" approach, which I like. I kind of thought we might see Locke run into a previous incarnation of Jack or Kate or somebody, though. I mean, how many times in the first two seasons did he just pop up in the woods looking suspicious? Speaking of time travel: My personal wacked-out blue-sky fever dream "I hope my home park gets a new B&M" favorite idea involves the very first scene of the first episode, and why Jack wakes up in the woods far away from everyone else....

No mix-ins?? But isn't that the whole point of the business? The "cold stone" is the slab they mix it all up on! Egads! That's outrageous! /SFMM remains dead to me. //Oh wait, they're putting in a real one, though. ///Nevermind.

Nice idea. Doesn't B&M call their hypercoasters "Speed Coasters," though? Lots of "SC" possibilities!

Yes! Goliath 2! I hope it's as good as Goliath 1! /I actually really do like Goliath. //But this Terminator thingy looks pretty fun, too.

I tend to be pretty forgiving of bad theming, simply because I appreciate the attempt. Plus, "cheesy" is usually fun in its own right. And even WTF theming usually makes me laugh. Still, for pure cheap-out-theming-from-a-company-I-expect-better-from, "Sounds Dangerous" at Disney's Hollywood Studios is a 4D type attraction that mostly involves sitting in darkness while you listen in on Drew Carry's undercover cop, who is supposedly wired for sound and (inconsistent) video. Exactly how this allows the entire audience to get wet by being sneezed on at the end (ala Honey, I Shrunk The Audience) is still a mystery to me. But, in any case, the whole thing is one big pile of cheap badness.

Er...what about that big tall thing between the "-second hill into ravine:2" and "-hammerhead"? Or did you mean to say that the trim is on the fourth hill? (Which is why you couldn't find it on the third hill.) I'm so confused.

Well, that being the case, perhaps flipping the names would work better after all. "CoasterTube: Theme Park Review's Video Extravaganza!" After all, "TPR" is shorthand for us converts. It's probably not going to mean much to someone just surfing around for some coaster footage. (Whereas "Theme Park Review" actually does kind of describe itself.) /Forgive me for muddying the waters. Not trying to go backwards.

And that's bad...why? I really like the idea there. (But, obviously, I'm not Robb.)

TPR TV: CoasterTube VideoLube /You're welcome.

Loving the TR so far. Keep 'em coming. /Can't get enough of DisneySea.

What I think is really interesting about this thread is how may US parks we don't think it could be going to. Kind of says something about the state of the industry. But just to join in the craziness fun, I'm going to say it's a "Hollywood Dream" coaster for USH. /Oh wait, I forgot about Transformers. //Almost makes sense, otherwise.

The iPhone changed my life in much the same way Jesus didn't. I surf TPR on mine frequently--but just the normal site, not anything special.

Lots of slightly curved yellow pieces. Looks like Dominator's getting a bigger loop for 2009.

This is the greatest post ever. Your patch jacket is in the mail.

I would just add: If you are an employee of a park, you may very well have signed paperwork that states that you will not share any information that you are privy to as a result of working at the park, which usually includes "back stage" photos. Of course, if you know that you're not bound by any such rules and/or have special permission, nevermind. But please be aware that this can be a very tricky area for park employees. /Enjoying the thread. //Not trying to be a wet blanket.