Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 

Cedar Point (CP) Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Did they happen to mention how heavy that train is?

OK these are freaking cool. https://cedarpointonlineshop.com/

Made it out to Cedar Point this past weekend, October 17th-18th with my mom and dad to visit my sister working at the park. My sister works at Dorney, but since they closed early, a bunch of full time

Posted Images

I bet it's a dive coaster. Anybody want to take that bet?

 

I don't know... I am still not convinced. I don't even think Cedar Point is getting a coaster. I think they are still just storing the track for CW...

 

(Sadly there are people who still believe this.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I bet it's a dive coaster. Anybody want to take that bet?

 

I don't know... I am still not convinced. I don't even think Cedar Point is getting a coaster. I think they are still just storing the track for CW...

 

(Sadly there are people who still believe this.)

 

image.thumb.jpg.d6c0b572948f118b846e31160a28cac0.jpg

image.thumb.jpg.d6c0b572948f118b846e31160a28cac0.jpg

image.thumb.jpg.9c6cf877796584593a619eaa9639bd8a.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to some posters saying they would like to see black track at CP, I see your point, and do understand, but I have to say black track would look AWFUL once fading started! Its not cheap to repaint a coaster as to why it doesn't happen more often. Now, I'd love to see purple track. But black would end up being a huge mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently the FAA said no to the height, Idk what happens now

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/WebBlobServlet

 

FYI - your link is dead. Was a new PDF attached to it?

 

Or are you talking about the letter today saying it wasn't approved for 230 FT but if it was 217 feet the FAA would not have an issue?

 

Pretty ridiculous response I guess...that 13 feet will cause a "hazard" to air navigation and a reduced height is required or "up to 120 days..." for another survey?

 

Well, with MF/TTD nearby there wouldn't be any "obstructions" and aircraft obviously wouldn't fly that low over it...

https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/letterViewer.jsp?letterID=264356385

 

EDIT - to those conspiracy theorists....

**Does this mean we could see a 13 ft underground tunnel?!**

image.thumb.jpg.d3b70ef1da05f14582f9395583929448.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems to be the issue:

 

Section 77.17(a)(2) - A height that is 200 feet AGL, or above the established airport elevation, whichever is

 

higher, within 3 nautical miles of the established reference point of an airport with its longest runway more

than 3,200 feet in actual length. The proposed structure would exceed by 13 feet.

 

Cedar Point listed their distance in their submission from the highest point to the intersection of the two runways at the airport, which is 19215.51 ft, or 3.16 nautical miles. The FAA determined the distance to be 17,907 ft, or 2.94 nm from the closest endpoint of either runway.

 

Oh, and in case you were wondering what the 3 nautical mile radius is from the point the FAA used:

 

 

And relative to the highest point of the coaster as shown by CP:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, that came out of left field. I think everyone expected it to sail through. At this point with track in production, it would be very expensive to redesign it to be 13 ft. shorter. Reducing the height changes the speed throughout the course, which changes G forces as well. It would be far cheaper to run a public campaign to approve the coaster. Sounds like the FAA would approve it if the public pass it. Considering the entire town's economy depends on Cedar Point, it would be very likely approved by the public.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that the coaster was supposed to be announced almost a month ago, and I simply can't imagine them announcing, and putting into production, a coaster that wasn't completely approved yet, I have to think this isn't going to hold up whatever they have planned! Maybe the coaster IS only 217 feet, instead of the previously thought 230. Or maybe there is going to be a ravine after the drop in the middle of the marina entrance midway that the coaster drops 13 feet into. I just can't imagine CP being so presumptuous as to not get height clearance before getting into the manufacturing and announcement phase of the coaster.

 

All this to say nothing of the fact that CP has already gone WAY over 230 feet all over the peninsula, and I can't see the FAA suddenly caring about this particular location - especially involving a closed airport...

Link to post
Share on other sites

....How in the world is a 230 foot coater an obstruction while only a couple hundred yards away from 310, 205, and 420 foot coasters? This makes no sense at all as to how it could be considered an obstruction.

 

Also:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/