willthethrill

It looks like they did a fantastic job bringing it up to date while still maintaining that classic log-ride feel. The new scenes really show that they didn't spare expenses or cut corners with this refurb. Can't wait to check out the details with my own eyes.

^ I feel that somehow the radius of that turn has an effect on that "bouncing". I'm totally not smart enough to figure out why though.

^ thanks? I haven't been on it in a couple seasons but it seems like that design may be as close to perfection as can be obtained outside of using some crazy expensive composite materials on future installations. But those rides are already expensive enough so I don't really see that type of investment being made. I can handle one or two go-arounds per visit, still worth a little pain for me...

The rack and pinion system is mechanical and therefor is subject to wear. As the train ages and the cycle count increases, the composite metal gear teeth will wear down thus increasing gap size between connecting components which will result in a less smooth rotation especially at speed. This is not an issue that can be resolved easily because even if the rack and pinions are brand new you cannot have the gear teeth fit perfectly; the train speed and seat rotation speed are much too quick in a system like this so initial gap tolerances must exist to avoid the chance of grinding or jamming of the gears. Additionally you have to have tolerances compensate for temperature induced changes in the third rail. Don't forget, just as with any metal the third rail is subject to expansion and contraction as the weather changes which can greatly alter the dynamics of the system. (I suspect this may be a reason these types of rides have only been built in parks with a relatively moderate climate.) As mentioned earlier even a gap of half a millimeter at the gear teeth will be amplified greatly as the distance increases through the seats and out to your extremities. This is why you can rock your chair even at a standstill.

The discussion was never (or shouldn't have been) about how many trains they will run. That answer is clear; no more than 2 (which makes sense for this ride). But I cannot fathom the rational behind building a multi-million dollar ride and not buying a third train when you KNOW for. a. fact. from past experience (RRv, Apocalypse) that you should have three at your disposal if you're marketing yourself as a world class roller coaster destination. Screw the damn buses - buy a few new roller coaster trains for your rides and I'd bet 3/4 of your complaints from park goers vanish overnight! (not to mention taking a lot of stress off you're maintenance and operations crews)

The fact that this park only has 2 operable trains for the majority its coasters is absurd. It's just plain asinine. I guess its SOP now for them to just use prayer as a means of maintenance during peak season to ensure both trains are available thru the Summer months...

Let's all be honest, there's no way another train is launching that quickly; they could rock you back and forth a few times and it still wouldn't matter cause the track length is so short... hmm that just gave me a nice idea. They should have used that tunnel launch to rock the train a few times before boosting totally over the top-hat. We'd get some nice fall back airtime a-la Montezuma's revenge.

I'd recommend posting SFMM related things in this forum: helpful SFMM thread is helpful

Exactly, they have 19 roller coasters or something obscene like that now. They don't all have to be 2500 pph human gobblers at this point. Why do we all forget so easily that this park builds far more coasters on average per decade than any other by a wide margin? As long as the capacity you add equals your expected annual increase in gate attendance then all will be fine.

Not what was said

This thread really does get unbearable sometimes. The park builds a new roller coaster which hasn't even gone vertical yet and we get posts like this one ^^? History repeating itself would be closed rides, trashed landscaping, crumbling infrastructure, deplorable operations etc. The park has made huge strides in improving itself in just the last few years in addition to removing obsolete, unpopular, costly rides replaced with shiny new go-fast machines and that still isn't good enough? When was the last time any of you complainers even rode Jetstream?

I never understood the reasoning behind not discussing "what's next" after an announcement is made... I mean, who cares? Who is supposed to decide when its ok to start talking about the future?

No it doesn't. Not even close. Perhaps I'm mistaken but aren't Maverick trains braked to a slow roll in the tunnel before the second launch? Perhaps "same" should be replaced with "similar"? Essentially a "breather" element...

Put me in the excited category. A few reasons: 1. Finally gives us a modern launch (3 actually) 2. Dive loop looks pretty sweet as does the mega-loop 3. Lap bars! (seriously guys, this should be a big deal for us at mm) 4. Airtime 5. What appears to be a near vertical drop after tophat 6. Yes, its a bit shorter than we expected (our bad) and even tho some are complaining that the stop in the tunnel is unnecessary and "gimmicky", it adds time and length to the ride. Maverick does the same thing and you don't hear people complain about that. Besides we all know that backward launches are actually pretty cool. Overall, (except for the colors) me like; this looks quite re-rideable, very dependable, has broad appeal, and will add fantastic visuals to the skyline. And yeah, with 18 coasters the park needs to worry less and less about capacity with each addition. If I could ask for anything more, it would be one last airhill and a return overbank before the break run.

Last time I checked we're all posting on a website called "ThemeparkREVIEW". If I have a negative opinion on a park or a ride or a parks asinine timeline to open a publicly hyped ride, this would be the place to do it. It is my opinion, along with many other's here, that this park f@%$ed up in this particular instance. Yes, life will go on, and yes in the grand scheme of things this won't matter more than a pimple on my hairy ass, but we post here cause we want to discuss such matters, both good and bad. That being said the park stood me up on our date and I'm pissed, but I'll probably end up putting out later anyway cause I'm a whore like that.

^^Its not about us, WE know better than to plan our trips around an opening date. Six Flags, as a business, chose to set a date and planned an event to open their ride. They failed, and people have a right to feel pissed and vent their frustrations. Its simply not good business in a highly competitive market.

To you people saying "being there for a ride opening is 'annoying'", believe me, the park as a business WANTS people planning trips from around the country to come ride. That is the point of opening new rides and having an advertising blitz centered around that date. You think people are going to keep planning those trips when this nonsense keeps happening? $#!+ happens, agreed. - But when you have a neighboring park down the road that is able to get a $1 billion, 4 year expansion project opened precisely on time (with 2 "year-round" parks operating) even a one week delay just plain looks BAD. I realize the comparison is apples and oranges to us, but for your average so-cal resident, it matters especially when people start questioning the rides safety as I'm sure they will now. (Remember, this is a Six Flags drop ride after all - people still remember Kentucky) We're not talking about your local mechanic telling you your '98 Cavalier will be in the shop another week, this is a multi-million dollar company that drives their revenue from exactly this, opening new rides on time and reliably for summer crowds. Really quite shoddy to be perfectly blunt - I don't care how much of a fanboy you are. One time is excusable, but there is a very apparent pattern here with this company.

Is it just me or does it sound like that girl in the video screamed because she thought the ride was going to crash into the ground?

^^^^ Yes, "I'm serious"ly entitled to my opinion concerning the visual appearance of the tower. Would you not agree the ride would be that much more intimidating visually if the gondolas were dropped from farther up? Holy crap, why is it such a big deal to some people that others have different opinions about how a damn drop tower looks? Here, is this better? OMGODZZZ Luthor is goin 2b the shiznit nowutimsayn?!!1!! lolz EDIT: watching from the angles in the videos above makes a difference...

Going to be an awesome drop ride but label me in the crowd that thinks the visual impact is a bit underwhelming now that we see where the ride actually drops from. That is closer to 50 ft from the top than 20 or 30ft...

Actually it was their overzealous expansion overseas and in the midwest after Premier aquired the brand in the years right after 2000 that bankrupted the company; not investing in popular roller coasters at their 2 flagship parks (both of which have been among the most consistently profitable for them the last decade).

Painting rides and refurbing buildings is called maintenance, and really shouldn't be included when talking about cap expenditures. But just from simple math, Tatsu was $21 mil in '06 ($23.5 in today's dollars). I couldnt find specific amounts for 2011 installations but we can est Term, GL, and Superman EFK were all around $10 mil each (EFK prob a bit less than that). So their last flagship ride, Tatsu, was alone 80% of all their cap "improvements" from 2007 to 2011 (5 seasons). I'd say they're due.

It actually makes a little sense to expect a pretty huge installation when you think about it. The last major project was Tatsu back in '06. The rest were overhauls and Terminator and GL; fairly "small" rides for a park like Magic Mtn. known for going big every couple years. I'll agree that while plauseable, this fresh rumor seems a bit far fetched with its scale and location.

Well, I guess it has been almost 2 whole weeks since this has been brought up...

^ Agreed. It's a classic coaster with a classic layout that still has some kick left in it. I can see the layout unchanged, but the profile updated and restored; steeper lift, taller first drop, banked turns, and maybe a mid-race crossover for good measure. I'd be very pleased. And for the love of all things holy, get rid of that damn midcourse.