rcjp

It would be nice if more parks did like BGT which bought one more train than they needed for kumba so that they could always run it on full capacity. Sadly we know things aren't like that.

^I would consider IR's inversion a zero g roll. According to wikipedia (and this is referring to airplanes) a barrel roll is: On roller coasters, this sounds more like a corkscrew (always positive Gs) than what we usually call barrel rolls (which have negatives). As to the others, what I would say is: Heartline rolls are (like you said), inversions where the centre of the rotation is around the rider's heart. Zero G Rolls are basically a combination of a parabolic zero g hill with a heartline roll so that you experience weightlessness while twisting. An inline twist/roll is an inversion where the centre of the rotation is the track itself which means that, if taken at the same speed, it will result in higher negatives than a heartline one (which is -1Gs). So: and Zero G Heartline Inline

In the road that connects the place where I live to the closest beaches there is a sort of airtime hill which, if travelled at a decent speed, gives you some air and because it also turns a bit you may get some laterals too . I remember once asking my mom to speed up and, as I was sitting in the back, I flew from one side of the car to the other! It was quite fun.

^Well, that matches the colour scheme

^That's what I thought too. It doesn't really look like a solid single piece of track. Now: will it roar?

Wow That's . . . . interesting.

True. There are no parks here so technically no off season The person below me can speak more than two languages (even if one is not so good).

The fact is I got some pretty shaky rides on gatekeeper closer to the back. Yes, I know, I could just sit near the front then, but you shouldn't need to do that with a brand new ride. It might not have been RCCA rough (or anything near) but those rides were way rougher than 20 year old raptor standing nearby (which I thought was silky smooth, like the BTRs I've been on). It wouldn't be so bad if the restraints weren't so tight because they seem to glue you to the seat and so you vibrate along with the train which gave me a mild headache (something I had never experienced on any other B&M). So they might not be very rough but certainly not as smooth as most B&M (some of which are two decades old) that's why I find it odd. If you look at the B&M rattle poll done recently you could see that, given their age, wing coasters weren't doing so well. I mean, I didn't agree with every single thing those results showed but I guess this must say something. Out of curiosity, in the 90's, did any B&M apart from the standups have any sort of rattle when they opened?

^Yeah, I suppose it makes some sense. The problem is that there isn't a lot to compare them to. The only intamin wing coaster is very rough and it uses a single beam that holds all seats. B&M went for a more complex solution but it still doesn't seem to work perfectly.

I'm hungry. (not true, actually)

^I wonder if there is some sort of problem with B&M's wing coasters as the roughness reports on those ones seem a lot more often than on other types (given how new they all are).

Well, I guess that does depend on the coasters you've ridden (and perhaps even the time when you rode them). Based on the ones I have, I'm not surprised to hear people saying B&M is the benchmark for smoothness. Sure, I have ridden some smooth coasters from other manufacturers (storm runner, for example, was very smooth when I rode it) but B&M seems to be more consistent. All BTR I've been on were as smooth as possible and so was raptor at CP (although I've heard some saying otherwise) and those were built when manufacturers like arrow were still making coat-hangers. That being said, I do think that, in terms of smoothness, I'm not that impressed by their newer rides as they seem less smooth than their older ones, for some reason. So perhaps if you consider rides being built now, B&M doesn't stand out like they did before, I guess.

So are you suggesting B&M should stop catering to its larger market base, the General Public, and make all of their roller coasters to please a small percentage of the population? I don't know about you, but B&M seems to be looking pretty "strong" to me right now. Intamin builds very fun roller coasters, but how many did they build this year? No, I'm not saying what B&M should do. Just saying that it is understandable that some people find it frustrating that B&M built their "best" (in most enthusiasts' view) coasters when they were young and now they have changed. It is undeniable that it is what we call the GP that matters to parks but, in reality, did most guests ever complain about older B&M because they were too intense? Some enthusiasts are whiny. Some of us love super intense rides and others hit their head on the restraint one time or hear a slight rattle and it's the end of the world. I've heard people complain about Batman (which I consider to be one of the smoothest coasters ever) being rough (and if you don't believe me go do a search and you'll be amazed). Some of us love awesome B&M coasters like Kumba and Batman that rip through every element with ridiculous intensity and speed but there are plenty of other people that complain about Batman being rough (lol) or Kumba's corkscrews being rough (lol) and that drives down their overall rankings. Batman I think also falls victim to being a clone which for some reason causes it to be overlooked even though without fail it's one of the best rides at every park that has one (in my opinion it's the second best coaster at Great Adventure after El Toro and the second or third best at Magic Mountain after Tatsu and Apocalypse if they actually re-track it). I agree about the BTR clones. All I've ridden were super super smooth and, yes, I do also think they are overlooked because they're clones. I even notice that with myself sometimes and I wonder how high they would rank if there was only one in the world.

Wow this really is happening! Great!

Glad to see they are using the old restraints.

^A top gun is more like a zero g that stops spinning for a while when you're upside down.

True. It's amazing how they got it right on the first try back in 1992 at SFGAm only two years after their first coaster. And that's what makes people here so mad, how they started out really strong (kind of like RMC now) and are now making "GP friendly" tamer rides. Out of those coasters, Skyrush, for example, isn't really cutting edge. It's definitely an awesome ride but it has no super advanced technology. It could even be done with a chain lift hill that B&M uses. So we know they could do it if they really wanted. It's just that, right now, I (and nobody, really) see them doing something like that.

True. The person below me has no driving license yet.

August 2013. When was the last time you saw line jumpers?

^Yes! And on top of that you'll be shaking like crazy as the wheels will be hitting the bolts on the track!

^True. Comparing some skyrush POVs from 2012 and now (and even counting the seconds the ride takes to hit the brakes) there is nearly (if any) difference. The only part that seems affected is the first drop. That being said, I have only ridden it after 2012, so maybe someone who has tried both versions will be able to clarify this.

Yes indeed. After a while you learn to be not so exited when you look a something like this and just think: "Well, it would be nice if this could happen."

^I guess it depends. When I went with some friends to portaventura this year the number of people riding each coaster would decrease as the height of the ride went up. We were 11 and we all went on stampida, 9 rode furius baco, then 7 rode dragon khan and only 5 tried shambhala (even though I told them that those who had already ridden the other two big coasters would have no problem with a hyper like that).

^I think the sheer height of these rides puts more people off riding it than inversions would.

You know, I have always wondered why. Why are designers staying away from inversions, or even a single inversion, on hyper/giga coasters? Designing a ride 325 feet tall with plenty of inversion sounds like tons of fun (and can be equally safe)! I know, right? I have been dreaming of a looping hyper/giga (or even strata) coaster for a long time but it almost feels like there is a law that says: "once you go above 200 ft you can't have inversions". Yes, I know, there are the dive coasters and the S&S 4d ones but the first barely go over 200 ft and only have one inversion and the second ones, well, they're a special case. I have always imagined a B&M floorless, sitting or inverted coaster scaled up to a hyper or giga with a colossal loop after the drop. I suggested this question for the 2012 IAAPA B&M interview when Robb allowed us to ask questions to the manufactures and this one got selected. Walter Bolliger's answer was: "I do not want to answer that question.". At the time I thought that could mean a ride like that would be coming in the future but unless there is something for 2016 that doesn't seem to be the case.