Tanks4me05

^Which equals going from average launch accelerations of 2.74 G's to 3.27 G's. O__________________________________________O

^It was definitely Blue Streak. That was solved more quickly than I was expecting. Not surprised you'd be the one to answer so quickly.

It's something that's been annoying me for this whole morning. I remember seeing aerial postcards of a wood coaster that's long been gone. Here is what I remember: -It was a terrain coaster, mostly out and back -It existed some time in the first half of the 20th century, I'm almost positive it was around at least in the 1920's - 1940's. -It might have had a double down early on in the ride. -The most notable feature was that there were two drops about at the end of the ride that went down a ravine, and they were absolute monsters, and made it the tallest coaster in the world at the time (somewhere in the 120 - 140 foot range, IIRC around 130 feet.) These drops were gently turning without banking, kind of like the first drop on the Coney Island Cyclone but a bit more pronounced. It definitely wasn't Kennywood if anyone was thinking that it might have been. -The park that the ride was at is also long gone. I think I may have seen pictures of it in either Scott Rutherford's "The American Roller Coaster" or Robert Coker's "Roller Coasters: A Thrillseeker's Guide to the Ultimate Scream Machines" but I got rid of my copies of those a long time ago and I don't want to buy them again just to recall this coaster.

Except the lift starts significantly closer to the old station building, cutting at least 50ft off your maximum estimate. Kärnan likes to have a word with you. Whoops. Forgot to account for those. (Hey, I've been sick for the past three days. Gimme a break. ) After doing some more digging in this thread, I came across this: It uses four fewer bents at that end (36 less feet of horizontal travel). Also, after more carefully counting the amount of bents used in the pictures I already looked at, the actual current height would be 190 feet with a split lift, or 243 feet with a single 45 degree lift, which makes a lot more sense. However, in order to account for the fact that the lead-in and the lead-out of the lifts will make my results a little taller than expected, I'm gonna say about 240 feet, so that it still just barely gets the title for tallest coaster with inversions. About 26.57 degrees, as opposed to the new lift at 45 degrees. (The horizontal component was very close to, if not exactly twice as much as the vertical component of the lift.)

Thank you so much for the sorta-profile picture. Now I can estimate how big this thing's gonna be. After looking carefully at the picture, it appears that they are using the same number of bents for the lift hill as the original Mean Streak, which means according to Google Earth, the horizontal component of the lift's length is about 307 feet. Taking a look at the track in place at the lower right hand corner, I noted the "pixel coordinates" from one bent to the next in Paint, and after invoking the mystical powers of trigonometry, I calculated that the current height of the structure is 225 feet tall, so it's already going to be the tallest coaster with inversions in the world. (And knowing CP, I'm gonna bet that they are going to have at least 4 inversions to take the record of hybrid coaster with most inversions, and Mean Streak easily has enough space in its layout to do that.) If RMC is going to go with a split lift with the second half being at the angle of the rest of the yet-to-be-built ledgers for the lift, it will stay pretty close to that. If, however, they are going to stick with a single lift at 45 degrees, we are looking at a 307 foot tall monster here, and it should look like B&MIntaminGCI's paint job: However, given the size of the speed hill right after the first drop, I'll put my bets on a 225 - 230 foot tall split lift, but since I don't want to spend the time to recreate the first two elements to check the G's, it could still go either way. Either way, dis gon be gud.

A Mondial Inferno is finally now on my continent. And even better, only about 4 hours away. I never thought that this would happen.

Actually, I think you kinda have the right idea, albeit backwards. The station's probably in the right area, but the launch and brake runs are probably switched, and travels in the opposite direction. My line of thinking is based on the really tight turn at the bottom of the "tornado helix" as I'll call it for now, and that the ride will accelerate as it spirals up the hill and then brakes going down the straight drop into the S-bend. Without having access to the schematics, either of us could be right, though.

No wonder why you thought that Storm Chaser was so nuts; you guys had the blue train. The wheel configuration that the blue train has makes it MUCH faster; I was there a couple weeks ago and they only ran the purple train, and tested the blue train after the park closed because the maintenance guys said earlier in the day that it was going so fast it was tripping the E-stop. It was still *REALLY* good in the purple train and definitely was not anything close to what I would call slow, but IMO one of the weaker RMC's. (To be a bit more specific on that, I'd rank it in order of increasing intensity as Lightning Run before the bunny hops --> Storm Chaser --> Lightning Run's finale.) Do you think that they actually listened to your ride suggestions?

I'm heading to the park for the first time on 7/20/16 as part of a three week graduation trip. Is it feasible to ride all the coasters (with some re-rides on the better ones), the larger flat rides, the train and Eiffel tower in one day, or is that only possible with purchasing a fast lane plus?

^No way I won't. I'm super aware that they have one of the best (if not the best) package of flat rides in any North American park.

I'm heading to the park for the first time on 7/11/16 as part of a three week graduation trip. Is it feasible to ride all the coasters, (with re-rides on the better ones) the larger flats and the train (for photography purposes) in one day without a flash pass, or not? If I need a flash pass, is it feasible to do what I want with a gold, or is it really best to get a Platinum?

^I'm going with one other person, who's joining for the entirety of the trip (another TPR member, actually.) As I said, I'd prefer to get on all the coasters, and re-rides on the better ones. I usually stick to front and/or back seat, sometimes I do second row from the front or back if the line is significantly shorter. I'll also want to hit up Giant Drop, the train and observation tower for the sake of photography (a huge hobby of mine) and I might do the enterprise, Troika and Top Spin. I generally avoid water parks because there is often not a lot of variety from park to park. I also bought a season pass as it's more economical (we're also going to SFSTL, SFOT and SFFT.)

I'm heading over to the park on July 6th for the first time as part of my three week graduation trip, and I'll be there the whole day. If I want to ride all the coasters and re-rides on the better ones, would it be advisable to get a flash pass? If so, would it be feasible to do what I want with just a gold flash pass, or is that really only possible with a platinum?

I'm heading here on July 2nd as the start of my 3 week graduation trip. The last time (also the first time) I visited was in 2008, so I've already been on everything except for the stuff that has obviously been added since then. My memory is therefore fuzzy on the operations, so even though I know all the coasters aren't top notch, I still like to ride everything anyway. So, for that reason, would it be feasible to get on everything in one full day on the day that I'm visiting, or is that only possible with fast lane plus?

My speculation as to why the main factors that contribute to the intensity of the ARM/Larson models, are as follows (in no particular order): 1: They use very powerful eddy current brakes. Not only does the rapid slowing down add some extra thrill, but this also means that a greater percentage of the tower's height can be used for free-fall. The Funtime drop tower looks promising, but one of its main advertising points is that it can assemble quickly without a large crane, which this is much more of an advantage for a traveling fair owner who has to take apart and put back together the ride every couple of weeks, as opposed to a permanent family fun center that would need to put it up once, possibly a few times over the course of a few decades for occasional major repairs. Combined with this and the fact that the tower is 230 feet tall, that may make it seem out of place and unnecessarily expensive for a family fun center. 2: The small ride vehicles minimize drag, thus allowing the ride to accelerate faster than a larger vehicle with higher capacity (and thus a higher surface area, thus a higher drag.) This is another reason why I suspect that Funtime's drop tower might not be quite as intense as the ARM/Larson model, but there's only one of those in existence traveling the German fair circuit while I live about three hours east of Niagara Falls, so I can't say for sure whether or not it's more intense. 3: Gravity only dropping--this is more specifically compared to S&S towers, which use compressed air. Since the compressed air chambers that the pistons are in aren't made a pure vacuum, there is noticeable drag slowing down the descent from a pure free-fall. The Fabbri drop tower shows promise in that it is launched down, but again I don't know of any that are in the continental United States for me to verify this. I would also assume that given that you're a family fun center, you probably don't have a huge amount of funds. Without knowing the prices, I'd guess that Intamin and S&S are the most expensive, while ARM/Larson is one of the cheaper models. (It would be a good idea to validate this speculation by asking the prospective companies for a price quote.) However, S&S's Double Shot is generally only around 80 ft tall or so, and combining that with the less intense launches might actually be in your favor if you want the ride to cater to smaller, not-quite-so-brave guests. The name also properly describes its typical ride program, so providing two shots makes a more lengthy ride experience. However, it still uses compressed air. I just don't know enough about the Funtime and Fabbri models, so I'd say that they would still be in the running for consideration if I were in your position. I also don't know about the reliability of all the models. In short, the ARM/Larson drop tower is by far the most intense of them all (excluding the Fabbri and Funtime models, because I have no idea about them) and from an enthusiast's point of view that's what I'd recommend, which I do so vehemently. However, I'm also aware that the enthusiast is not the only opinion out there, so I'd think it would be best to call up all the prospective companies, ask for price quotes and ask them to see which of their drop towers are closest to your park so you can go out and visit them to try out the rides yourself and talk with the managers to see their own experiences.

^B:TE was improperly disassembled from SFAW. It's unusable. They probably still have it because I bet it can still be used as a tax deduction regardless of its physical condition. Once its value is fully depreciated to zero, then they'll probably sell it for scrap. Four or five pieces of green and blue (boxy) track, and only two supports in the maintenance area? Sorry to burst your bubble, but that just sounds like Rolling Thunder is being taken apart to get looked at for something. (RT has six track pieces and only two supports.)

^ and ^^: Yup, the Turbo. Chance made it in the 1970's IIRC. I just got word that there was one operating at a fair in Ávalos, Mexico (just east of Chihuahua) last year, and there might be another one at some other park in Mexico and possibly one in Panama. There's also one or two being restored right now, but those are the only ones I'm aware of (they originally made a few dozen of them.)

Cool, I can put my knowledge of metal bands to use. I'm gonna suggest any of the songs from the group "Týr"; not only are the Faroese (which though those islands are self governing they are part of the Danish Kingdom so they technically are Danish) but the lyrics are almost entirely about Norse mythology. If I have to suggest one song from them, though, it would probably be "Evening Star":

From my perspective, it seems to be from the enthusiast point of view that clones are "lazy," and that they want to have something unique that no other park has, though this can be mostly offset if the clones are a great distance away from each other, yet the primary issue is the cloning of lesser quality coasters. Which honestly, after riding eight Boomerangs, five SLC's, two Volares and a ZL42, I think another issue is that while they aren't the smoothest in the world, I actually enjoyed most of them because they really aren't that painful (mostly) and I think a lot of it is that many enthusiasts tend to be (IMO) excessively intolerant to roughness; I'm consistently reading TR's that essentially say "If it's not glass smooth, it's garbage." Now, with today's design and manufacturing techniques, I do agree that a smooth coaster should be more or less expected, but I never really found most of the "crap" coasters to be that bad. Cloned coasters technically are cheaper, but not by a huge amount because most of the cost comes from the manufacturing. The real advantages are that first and foremost the time savings: A fully custom coaster can typically take a year and a half to three years because you have to design the whole thing from scratch, yet a clone can take something closer to five or six months because not only do you not have to worry about all the design iterations that a custom coaster might need (Cheetah Hunt had over 50) but all you have to do is make sure the ride fits in the area, possibly change up some existing infrastructure, maybe make custom foundations depending on the local soil/climate, maybe tweak the layout and supports here and there in case you're really trying to squeeze it into a tight space, maybe a custom station and queue and you're good. Also, since a lot of parks have made bad investments on risky prototypes, I can see that they have extra appeal with clones because they know EXACTLY what they are getting, so it's therefore a safer investment. Also, as other people have said, few of the GP are as well traveled or knowledgeable in regards to the amusement industry as enthusiasts; since the former is the overwhelming majority of the parks' customers, it'll be a totally new experience for that particular park's customer base, so for all their profits care, it's a whole new ride.

Day 2: It's a 6.5 hour drive from Atlanta to Busch Gardens Tampa; that park can be done in one day, so it would be more feasible to just do Clearwater Beach in the afternoon/evening. Day 14: It's only about an hour from Orlando to Daytona Beach, so to actually allow a full day at Carowinds on Day 15, it would be best that after your credit run there to just drive straight to your hotel at Carowinds, as that leg of the trip would take about 7.5 hours barring any traffic. As others have said, everything in the Orlando/Kissimmee/Disney area is pretty close to each other, so it's best to just stay at one hotel. Which one is up to you as I don't know your preference. If you want to primarily focus on the Orlando area and are able to handle the massive drives at the beginning and end, then it's okay. However, on your way down from Shelby Township, you're missing Dollywood, Lake Winnepesaukah, Six Flags Over Georgia and Wild Adventures. On your way up from Carowinds, Kennywood isn't super far away from your route, either.

^^My guess is because it's only 2/3 the weight and length of a full train, making it that much easier to pull it through the course. If it's for that reason, then my guess as to why they just don't use one car for a pull through is that the trains might be front-heavy and need at least two cars attached to each other for the sake of alignment.

Every time Skyrush slows down at the top of the lift hill I cry a little on the inside, mourning what once was. Except for the fact that I couldn't notice even the slightest difference in the rest of the ride (except for the lift slowdown itself, of course.) IIRC that particular modification was done not to address rider complaints, but because the wheels' axles were getting fatigue cracks way earlier than they should have. Also, something I noticed is that they changed the restraints on only one of the trains to the softer padding (train 2, I believe.) Bizarrely, the increased discomfort from the restraints themselves seemed to make the ride a more intense experience. (Train 2 could also have had a bunch of new wheels that were slowing it down because they weren't worn in, now that I think about it.) And, if your memories were of riding the coaster earlier in the morning, you have to also factor in that all coasters take time to warm up: When they've been sitting overnight, the wheel lubricants cool down and their viscosity increases to something like peanut butter. After enough runs, the friction generated from the trains, the oil is warmed up by early to mid-afternoon so that it's running at full speed. (The colder it is, the longer it will take to do so; and it's usually colder during the beginning and end of the season, where operating hours are shorter which means the coaster runs fewer times to warm up.)

I had to read this post two or three times to make sure I was watching the 100% speed link. The second hill looks absolutely ridiculous.

Not much more. Goliath had to go in Iron Wolf's old spot; that means, trying to shove a record breaking wooden coaster into a land plot of about an acre and a quarter. Maybe they could have stuffed in a helix, inclined loop, or non-inverting loop (a la Shock) right at the end before the brakes, and that's a BIG maybe, but other than that, they used every bit of space that they could for that ride.

WOW. I was not expecting them to go so gung-ho with this across the board. I'm stunned (in a good way). Even more so that they seem to be including some hypers in there. I'm literally at a loss for words, so... just... wow. They're probably doing it at so many parks because the headsets probably aren't that expensive when compared to the cost of an entire roller coaster. Never having been a part of their design/business team to do price evaluations, I probably wouldn't put an out-of-my-butt price tag of more than maybe $2,000 per headset. So fully outfitting all those coasters will only end up at around $1 million, which is basically a kiddie coaster's worth of money. I would say way less than that considering the consumer headset itself is only $99 http://www.samsung.com/us/explore/gear-vr/ Wow. (I didn't have the time to find the data; had a smart materials exam I had to take.) Well, when accounting for an S7 Edge that brings it to $800 per set, and then brings it down to around $400,000 - $500,000, so about as expensive as a single medium-to-large flat ride. Certainly a heck of a bargain.