MrSum1_55

Fixed.

^Actually, I feel that Seattle/Portland could more desperately use something like this. Both cities have pretty lively downtown areas, even in spite of the weather, and there are zero real full day parks in the area. The nearest full-day park is Silverwood, a five or six hour drive away. Also, Portland seems to be rapidly trying to construct more modern structures. Seattle may have the problem of one of these looking too much like the Space Needle, so one of these with just the coaster component may work better there. Vibrant downtown areas combined with little competition with parks could spell success.

I do not think it is that unique to hate on Titan/Goliath. After I ride a coaster, I like to think of how I would have designed it differently. For example, I would replace El Toro's trick-track finale with a few ejector hills. (The rest of the ride is perfect, but it really loses its pace after the end helix). However, Goliath is one of few coasters in which I would have a more difficult time coming up with a worse layout. (At least for a hyper coaster). I would like to know whose bright idea it was to put one airtime hill in a hyper coaster, and design the first drop so it does not provide airtime. However, both Giovanola hypers now have RMC's next to them, so neither park is short of airtime now. But the coaster I really hate is The Beast. Again, it is another coaster of which it would require real effort to come up with a worse layout. However, I will say that it is a really great coaster at night. Riding in the black of night is the only time when I would deem it worthy of its top-ten status. However, a truly great coaster should be great no matter when you ride it. I know that different rides can be better at different times and at different points in the season, but when I board a top-tier coaster, I should be expecting a pretty good ride even when it is running at its worst. The Beast is not one of those coasters, so I rank it in my lower half of wood coasters I have ridden.

Cheetah Hunt and Powder Keg were marketed as family coasters, and these designs are in some ways more intimidating than most GCI's. Additionally, Powder Keg was an addition to a park that was not particularly known for its coaster selection at the time, and it was still marketed as a family ride (as awesome as it is). Compare this to Kings Island, who has added a flying coaster, a hyper coaster, and a giant inverted coaster all in the past ten years. Additionally, they already have one of the most legendary wood coasters in the world. So, it makes sense to have a standard GCI marketed as a family of smaller coaster. Also, I believe WOF to be a offering comparison with Prowler. Yes, they had a hyper coaster and a large invert when they marketed Prowler as their next thrill coaster, but WOF is a smaller park that did not already have a wood coaster as well-known as the Beast. Also, their hyper is far older, while Diamondback is still new-ish. The ride itself will be good, but this seems like a bit of a strange addition considering the rest of the lineup, unless they go for the family vibe.

Laser Beast Banshee on Fire? But in all seriousness, how would you think KI would market this? Assuming it is a GCI, I would assume it would be barely over 100 ft, as almost every other design they have made. While a high-end GCI may be the best ride in a park with fewer coasters, I cannot picture this as being a marquee attraction at Kings Island. Even if it is one of the better GCI's, it would probably still not be considered a top three ride in the park by both the GP and enthusiasts. Would it be possible that they would market this as a family-oriented coaster, even if it is one of the better GCI's? I am not saying that every new ride has to be giga coaster, but I am saying that it seems a bit odd for a park that added Firehawk, Diamondback, and Banshee back to back to back would decide to throw in a standard GCI (assuming that is what this is). I am saying that it is possible that they are going for a more-family oriented vibe, as advertising a new family coaster would make sense after the slew of highly thrilling coasters. The only other situation that seems similar to this was Tatsu and Apoc at SFMM. They added Tatsu, which was a great fit for a park of its size. A few years later, the giant B&M was followed by a small GCI. It is interesting that Kings Island seems to be doing a similar thing.

If Maurer exits the coaster business, would it be possible that they sell their parents to other manufacturers? Though, I feel that Premier's coasters are basically X Car coasters. Even though Maurer makes superior layouts, the newer Premier LSM's are very similar in concept, to the point of which many people thought that S:UF at SFDK was a Maurer when it was first announced.

^Eh, SFMM has Twisted Colossus now. Yolo was a dissapointment at the time of its announcement, but now they have one of the best roller coasters in the world. TC more than makes up for Yolo's dissapointment. But also, an Xcelerator renovation seems to have a few impracticalities. If it received an extension, then I would hope that they found a way to modify the launch system and make it more reliable. It seems more reasonable to buy a new coaster that is more reliable than it is to extend your most unreliable coaster. It has been a while since Knotts has recieved a large new coaster, so it would not be too surprising if they were planning one. Yet, the idea of Ghostrider being great again excited me more than the idea of getting some cookie cutter B&M.

^^I would be all for the Shriki retheme! Since Disney might lose its Twilight Zone liscence, I would have totally welcomed the Shriki conversion. I am just worried that this retheme would cause the amazing architecture, as well as the atmosphere of this ride. I would like to say that this gives them a chance to make a ride with more details and better effects, but I do not even completely trust Disney on this anymore after the Test Track conversion. I really hope that the other ones either to untouched or get a retheme that allows them to maintain their current atmosphere (like Shriki). Again, I am biased because this is my absolute favorite ride at both US resorts. I have also ridden these so many times I can recite the entire preshow and narration for both rides off the top of my head. I know there had to be some corporate reasoning behind this, but goddammit I am feeling so emotional right now.

Well, looks like the Guardians of the Galaxy conversion of Tower of Terror has been semi-confirmed. http://www.screamscape.com/html/disney_california_adventure.htm#Guardians I might be incredibly biased in my view, but this is the saddest announcement I have seen in the amusement industry in a long time. The original Tower or Terror was one of my most favorite rides of all time, and I just loved every bit of the theming. If this is permanent, I will truly miss looking at every detail of the architecture, and how it fit into the time era of the late nineteen-teens. I also write recreationally, and many aspects of the theming have inspired some of my writing. Additionally, the theme fit the new vibe of DCA quite well. Even if they do an amazing job with this conversion, I will be really sad to see this go in its current state. And I know that I am not speaking alone as a whiny enthusiast, as my Facebook wall has also been exploding with many of my GP friends complaining about the loss of the current theming. Thoughts?

There are quite a few factors here. All of these would impress any GP, but not all of these would necessarily impress and enthusiast. 1. Size. All dive machines in the US are over 200 ft tall, and the majority of parks do not have a coaster that tall. 2. Noise. The B&M box track already amplifies noise well, so the loud B&M roar does help intimidate people. 3. Floorless. Having no floor adds to the intimidation factor. The three US dive machines are also the three tallest floorless coasters in the world, so that has to count for something. 4. Uniqueness. There is nothing else quite like these rides, so seeing something different can often intimidate people. For me, dive coasters are not quite my favorite ride type, simply because I would much rather have a coaster that gives a good ride all the way through, as opposed to a coaster that gives only a couple of great moments while the rest of the ride is pretty basic. And personally, I actually like the (admittedly not as graceful) diving sensation on GIB's better than on dive coasters. I actually like the thrill of being pulled facing down from the bottom instead of going to the top forwards and being hung over.

The ride selection should be: A Vekoma SLC themed to rough BDSM A B&M flyer named 'Doggie Style' An Intamin Accelerator painted pink

Separate unload platforms work very well if and only if there is a surplus of trains on the track, and at least one more train than can fit on the circuit/ single station at a time. For this reason, an unload platform on TC would actually slow down dispatch times. This is because, in order for it to race, the following train cannot stack on the final block for very long. That time would only be lengthened if it had an unload platform there. Now, if they were to put in an unload platform, AND also decided to run four trains instead of three, that would be perfect. Millennium Force is the perfect example of when an unload platform works. It was designed to run three trains, but there are no mid-course blocks, so the next train cannot be dispatched until the previous train is near the end of the course. You would expect a coaster like this to run two trains. But, it has a third train so one can unload while another is loading. This works well then they are running three trains. However, when they are only running two trains, the unload platform can slow down the loading, because it takes the coaster longer to unload and load than a single station would. Basically, unload stations work great, but only if there are so many trains on the track that a train is guaranteed to stack for an extended period of time even if the ride is running at full capacity. So, an unload station would not help on TC unless they added an extra train. Now an unload station might help on Full Throttle. In theory, this seems like a very bad coaster to put an unload station on, as these are almost never helpful if the coaster runs only two trains. However, dispatches on Full Throttle are usually so slow that an unload platform might help. An unload platform would also help on Xcelerator, if it actually ran two trains. (But the last time I saw Xcelerator run two trains was October 2013, so that would not help at all).

I have ridden all four in the US, and my order goes reverse order by height: Stormrunner: This ride is so awesome! Powerful launch, unique inversions, good airtime over the top hat, (and has another good unexpected moment of airtime). This ride packs so much into its short length. Xcelerator: This one has the most powerful launch of the four, and the airtime over the top hat is good in the back rows. It is short and sweet. Top Thrill Dragster: I love how the launch on this one seems to go on for so long. The view at the top is the best of any of the accelerators, and one of the best on any coaster in general. Sit in the back few rows for a bit or airtime at the top. The airtime is not that strong, but a small lift off your seat while facing down at 400 feet is insanely exhilarating. Kingda Ka: This is not only my least favorite accelerator, but I think this is also my least favorite big Intamin coaster. It is inferior to Dragster in almost every way, including the restraints, the nasty rattle during the launch, and the view (it is a parking lot). I do not really get excited about riding this when I plan trips to Great Adventure, and I really only plan on riding this once or twice. It suffers from that "nice, but there is a prefab right next door!" view. Kanonen and Desert Race can relate to these problems.

^^Not only that, but don't other, larger GCI's also have a lower restriction than that? Isn't Joris en de Draak a 42" ride? I mean come on, 48" is the height restriction for El Toro and X2. So, to ride this you have to be almost as tall as you would need to ride two of the most extreme coasters on the planet. It is already bad enough that they have one family coaster with the same height restriction as these extreme coasters.

If it is your first time visiting, I would recommend four days, maybe five if you feel a need to look at everything and see every show. On repeat visits, I have comfortably been able to fit in everything I wanted to see within three days, but that is with seeing only a few shows, and skipping rides like Toy Story (which always has a long wait, and I can already ride it in California). I should say, it IS possible to ride every E-ticket attraction in a single day. I do not recommend doing this, as there is more to see at WDW, but I just did this as a personal challenge.

I actually think I would like the design better without the twists. I feel like the twists distract you from realizing how high you are, and I would just prefer a straight freefall or 90 degree twist.

Honestly, why is everyone complaining? They are OPTIONAL. If I ever get the chance to visit a park not close to me with one of these, I will be sure to try the ride both with and without the headset. The only park somewhat close to me is SFMM, and I will be sure to try the New Revolution many times both with and without this. My analogy is this: There is a Greek restaurant near me that has a lot of food items that I really love. But, I also dislike olives. So, I simply do not order a menu item with olives on it. If they add another menu item with olives, but do not subtract any of the other menu items, why should I do on the internet and complain that another item got added to the menu of my favorite restaurant that has olives? I really do not know if this will offer a better experience or not, but I will ACTUALLY TRY IT before I judge it. As long as it is OPTIONAL, I find no reason to complain even if it really does suck. The only worry I can understand is whether or not this would reduce capacity. Also, putting it on an already awful coaster like Ninja at SFStl does seem like an awful experience. But other than that, I will not complain about it until I try it.

^It is still surprising to see a coaster that opened just seven years ago get that bad so fast, even with those quality trains. I am very glad that SFMM has TC, but sometimes I feel like it would have been better if Apoc got the RMC treatment instead of Colossus. Truthfully, Apoc needs some work now a lot more than Colossus did at the time of its closing.

^^ I actually have seen Xcelerator go 60-70 second dispatches with 2 trains running. However, seeing dispatches that quick are rare, and having two trains running is even more rare. In fact, it so rarely runs both trains that some people are unaware that it can even run two trains.

Here are my rankings: 1. SFoT: I was really surprised by this park. I was expecting something more like another SFMM, but this park was surprisingly nice. It actually does have some theming, and it almost felt more like a bigger version of Knott's. The coaster selection is very solid as well, and everyone knows Texas Giant as one of the best rides in the country. By biggest con with this park is the operations, which leave a lot to be desired. 3-4 minute dispatches plagued many of the rides when I was there. 2. SFGAdv: The coasters here are amazing, and this park has my second-favorite lineup behind Cedar Point. Overall, I would say that the operations here are the best at any SF park I have been to, with some very fast dispatches on El Toro, Nitro, Kingda Ka, and Green Lantern. However, Bizarro double stacked on most cycles, the Batman crew was only average for any Six Flags Batman ride, and the Superman crew was even slower than the Tatsu crew usually is. There is not much theming at this park, though anyone on thsi site who goes here is probably just going for El Toro. 3. SFDK: This was originally an animal park, before Premier/Six Flags expanded on it. It really does show, as the front looks like a generic Six Flags park, while the back is quite nice. Operations are far from great, but they have improved in recent years. While the coaster lineup may be small, the addition of Superman a few years back and the concept of getting a new RMC will boost the rankings of the lineup a lot. 4. SFMM: This park also has an amazing coaster lineup, but there is really almost no atmosphere here. DC Universe is nice, and I like what they did with the area around Twisted Colossus. It is great that they are restoring Revolution, and TC is truly one of the best rides in the country. For the most part, this is where my positives end. This park needs to improve quite a bit in terms of its overall cleanliness and operations. It probably gives the least well-rounded "park experience" of all the Six Flags parks I have been to.

Silver Bullet, in '06 or '07. By now, I have ridden most of the inverts in the US, so Bullet feels weak by comparison today. However, at the time of my first ride, the largest coaster I had ever ridden was California Screamin. So, my first ride on a B&M was pretty much the greatest experience of my life. This was the coaster that converted me to being a young enthusiast. I would honestly rather relive that moment than my first ride on El Toro.

It should become a new challenge for coaster nerds to have sex on as many ferris wheels as possible. Unfortunately, the last seven words of that sentence were unnecessary.

I think I read something a while back that the option to RMC SoB was considered, but by that time it would have coasted over $20 million. So basically, the structure was in such bad shape that it would cost as much as a new coaster to convert it. With that logic, I can see why they just built a brand new coaster. Still, I like to imagine how amazing it really could have been if it were either built as an Intamin prefab, or did get the RMC treatment. But, the end result was a terrible coaster with an incredibly uninspiring layout meeting its demise.

A coaster should be like a woman's skirt: long enough to cover everything, but short enough to leave you wanting more. What I mean is that a coaster should ideally be as long as possible, but not so long so that it starts to lose steam at the end. An example of a coaster that loses steam is Alpengiest, which sends you through a very slow helix at the end. Phantom's Revenge is too short to me, because it feels like it could go on a lot longer with the incredible speed it builds up. I think that Kumba is just the right length, because it has a fairly long track length, but it keeps its pace all the way up until the very end. To me, keeping up a constant pace can make the difference between a good coaster and a great coaster, so a coaster should not go on longer to the point that it's pace would be lost.

Phoenix. It has airtime strong enough so it would be insane without restraints, but not too strong so that I would be truly afraid of death (El Toro)