Dave Id

Agreed. I, by no means work construction, but have some buddies that do. I believe that when the company seeks out a construction company they meet with a project manager and tell the project manager the time line in the meeting, with a goal date typically ahead of the "go live" date to allow for any unexpected events (weather, etc...) I don't know if a company would really be able to succeed if they just said "Eh, let's finish it whenever we get the chance, if not this year, hey maybe next year we will get it." It will usually be pretty specific as far as project timeline. There will be an Owner/Contractor Agreement, which stipulates a Notice of Commencement date...starting at this date the contract will stipulate an amount of time, (usually in days) upon which a Contractor will achieve substantial completion. Sometimes but not always, written into the contract there may be penalties for days after the set completion date that a contractor does not complete the work, that the contractor will have to pay a penalty for each day beyond the set date. This is usually due to lost revenue due to the project not being completed, such as in the case of rental units (or possibly a ride which will draw guests and increase revenue) On the other side of that, there is also sometimes a bonus for work completed ahead of schedule. The schedule will typically shift due to weather or owner directed changes, but typically there is always a set date of completion. Hope that helps.

The 'recent future'? Can we take a moment to think about that phrase?

Typically, construction projects will have a "Contingency" line item included within the budget. This is for unforeseen costs associated with the project. This can range anywhere from 2% to 6% or higher depending on the project, and risk associated. For a project of this type, and being a first of its kind, I would expect the contingency would have been on the higher range. Also, for each item within the budget, and for each subcontractor, there is a retainage withheld which is typically 5-10%. This can be held back until the subcontractor delivers the product as it was intended to be. At the time the project is completed to the satisfaction of the owner and inspection, this is released to the subcontractor. Beyond those items, there is usually a completion date written into the contract. Sometimes, there is a daily penalty for each day that a contractor does not deliver the product beyond the completion date. This can be pretty high and is usually directly related to lost revenue for the owner. Hope that helps.

Also, you have to keep in mind that most of Arrow's designs were done prior to computer aided design and manufacturing. They didn't have No Limits, RCT or even Disney Coaster, let alone a CAD program to allow them to design in 3D space. Just a coat hanger and a piece of paper...designing a complex thing like a roller coaster with a 2d piece of paper is not an easy feat. So, for their time they were pretty innovative....and I assure you at the time that the mega loopers like Shockwave, GASM and Viper were built, they were jaw dropping in comparison for their day. I still miss the intensity of Shockwave at SFGAm.

I guarantee you more than one person used that element way before NL2. Wait...you're saying he should have gotten credit for taking two of their original elements...that had never been used before, the outside banked turn (Outlaw Run) and the wave turn (Outlaw Run)...combined them (on a game)...and RMC should pay him? The other side of that argument would be that his design was derivative of an original RMC design in the first place. Just remember, for every design that we see from RMC, whether it be virtual or built, they probably have tens or hundreds in the computer and filed away that didn't get used. (But hopefully will some day)

I'm pretty sure that's just the back/side of the seat you're seeing, not a vest restraint. Looks like the same lap bar type restraint that is on the other Mack coasters.

I'd be curious to know how hot it was when these pictures were taken, and if this isn't just an optical illusion caused by heat waves. If the track was actually that far off of tolerance, I doubt it would have made it out of the factory.

From what I understood the benefit of this was no track ties, less bolting, and a continuous track gauge...ie, not having two separate sides to the track that need to be kept at a continuous distance. I assume this will produce a smoother ride, easier to manufacture (less welding, bolting), as well as being able to span greater distances, resulting in fewer supports. Looks pretty great to me. I'm ready to see a steel RMC!

I'm leaning towards a mini-dive coaster like Krake...there seemed to be a lot of hints at 'diving' in the blog and hints. Although maybe a bit longer with more loops. I think that would fit in well at HW. But, at this point, who knows...pretty shocked that this is looking like a B&M but whatever it is, I have faith that HW will make it awesome.

I've had this thought as well, although I always imagined Intamin would be a better fit for revamping old Arrow rides. Seems like the Intamin track design would just be a better fit to begin with. I loved the Arrow multi-loopers. I grew up riding Shockwave at SFGAm and love the intensity of those rides...those first three vertical loops were awesome! Oddly enough, wasn't Drachen Fire originally designed by B&M along with Kumba, and handed off to Arrow so B&M could focus their efforts on the inverted coaster?

Seeing the Rocky Mountain track, and thinking back to the original mind behind the 4th dimension concept makes me wonder if Alan Shilke still has any input into this? My hero. Looks awesome!