SkyBreak95 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I made this in photoshop. How the ride should have ended. It would have costed very little to do this as it doesn't require much extra track. I thought this was Leviathan, Huge Camel humps! Not a family-friendly ant hill type of ride, it just doesn't fit in with the rest of the coaster. But I do agree that the brake run sticks out like a sore thumb. At-least one more stretched out camel hill would of really looked allot better.I just really think that B&M/CW could of made better use of that segment. Here's my "cheap" Microsoft paint artwork... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b&mforever Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I made this in photoshop. How the ride should have ended. It would have costed very little to do this as it doesn't require much extra track. Very interesting! Approximately how much more would it cost them to do this? How little is "very little"? And the return on this investment would be what? The return on the investment would be that instead of being a mediocre Giga thats far too short timewise it would be an all around great ride. It wouldn't cost much in comparison to the rest of the ride because the amount of steel required for it is nothing compared to the rest of the ride. It also requires less steel for supports as it is shorter and traveled at a lower speed. To the person saying they prefer rides that are fast till the very end then they could have finished it more like goliath at SFOG which unlike this seems like a complete ride. Everybody here knows when they watched the pov video when they first released the details of the ride that they were shocked when they saw this midcourse brake simply just feed into a ridiculously long final brake run. This is especially a problem since in the same park there is a similar coaster that is a full ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJeXeL Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^Your mechanical engineering degree and in-depth analysis of the steel industry's pricing structure back up this theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b&mforever Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^Your engineering degree and in-depth analysis of the steel industry back up this theory? Why would I need to make those calculations. If the ride costed about 28 million adding another 600-800 of track feet of low to ground track would not have added cost anywhere close to what the rest of the ride costed (5400ft). Also nowhere did I state that my design is exactly what they should. It was simply a concept drawing. I didn't specify any constraints or dimensions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougMJr Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ...mediocre Giga thats far too short timewise... Short? Levi doesn't seem short at all. I just quickly timed the POV from Leviathan against i305. From the top of the lift hills to the beginning of the final break runs were as followed. i305-44 seconds levi-55 seconds Levi is not short. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b&mforever Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ...mediocre Giga thats far too short timewise... Short? Levi doesn't seem short at all. I just quickly timed the POV from Leviathan against i305. From the top of the lift hills to the beginning of the final break runs were as followed. i305-44 seconds levi-55 seconds Levi is not short. I305 is a fast paced forceful ride that never lets up. It doesn't have to be long, it has the wow factor. In comparison Leviathon has some pretty slow parts. Nitro at great adventure is 55 seconds just from the first drop to its midcourse breaks. Its about 75 seconds total. Those extra 20 seconds really add to the experience. There is a lot of airtime on those final few hills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJeXeL Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 My point being, CW & B&M were content with the final design. With Dragon Fire underneath the brake run I'm curious as to where they would put said extension of their design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXman308 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Can't we just stop complaining and be happy B&M built a Giga, in a world class theme park like CW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robbalvey Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I made this in photoshop. How the ride should have ended. It would have costed very little LOL! I love it when people who know nothing about the amusement park industry make statements like this. I would take a fairly educated guess that your "little" addition would have probably put another $5 - $7 million onto the price tag of that coaster. Keep dreaming..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJeXeL Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^But the cost of steel is so cheap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b&mforever Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 I made this in photoshop. How the ride should have ended. It would have costed very little LOL! I love it when people who know nothing about the amusement park industry make statements like this. I would take a fairly educated guess that your "little" addition would have probably put another $5 - $7 million onto the price tag of that coaster. Keep dreaming..... So your telling me that it costs as much as an entire batman the ride (6.5 million) to build an additional 600-800 feet of track (thats not even as tall as batman). I have a hard time believing some more track segments, landscaping, and hills would have costed that much. There's no additional trains required and nor is there any extra braking hardware or electronics needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougMJr Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^There are TONS of factors you have to account for. -Inflation -Gauge of track -Man-hours / construction costs -Obstacles in the way There really is no way of knowing the cost of your proposed design, but I doubt it would be "little." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b&mforever Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Well I guess they should have built nitro, apollos chariot, raging bull, silverstar, and diamandback with no second half then and designed them to just go towards the station once they turn around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simaticable Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 And you need to realize that the Batman clones were built in mid-nineties. We're in the 2010's, do you really think the price of material has gone up? A Batman in this year frame would cost more than when it was built in 1995 or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougMJr Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^^http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html And with that, I'm out of this argument. It is obviously not going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_koppen Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^^http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html And with that, I'm out of this argument. It is obviously not going anywhere. Oh, god one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXman308 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Any word on the construction of the tunnel yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedimaster1227 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 The return on the investment would be that instead of being a mediocre Giga thats far too short timewise it would be an all around great ride. I don't think you understand what "Return on Investment" means, at least for a business. Rides like this aren't designed to cater to enthusiasts and fans with photoshop and Rollercoaster Tycoon. They are designed to cater to the general public, who more often than not see "New, bigger, faster, crazier" in the marketing and show up, or just show up for the park and decide to ride the attraction. I can tell you that no general guest is going to go to Guest Relations after riding Leviathan and say "Give me my money back because that elevated finale was a let down." Let's be real here. Well I guess they should have built nitro, apollos chariot, raging bull, silverstar, and diamandback with no second half then and designed them to just go towards the station once they turn around. 1. I can assure you people would still ride it. 2. 50% less of a new coaster is still 100% more of a new coaster than a park would have had they not built the coaster at all. So while this would certainly make these rides less attractive in the eyes of the enthusiast, the general public still wouldn't care to the level you give them credit for. This argument is proof positive why rides should never be built for the enthusiast to begin with. A park builds the tallest B&M to date and people moan about the brake run. It may not be the most insane ride ever, but guess what? It is still a NEW ride. Do I think it looks like the greatest coaster ever? No, but the brake run is certainly not the thing that stands out as the fatal flaw of the ride. Does my opinion (or yours) matter when it comes to the park's annual ticket sales and attendance? That's a solid no. If this were the last new coaster to be built in the world, you'd still have people finding reason to complain about it not meeting their expectations. Like I said before, 50% of something new is still 100% more of something new than the 0% of anything new you'd have if the park decided to never build a new coaster again. Can we just accept the coaster for what it is and move on? I'm sure in another five years there'll be another huge investment for you to pick apart for its disappointing finale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fooz Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 Looks great to me, giga speeds seem like a perfect fit for B&M's design philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Khan Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 The last pages of this thread made me think about this (LOL) Would TTD be "better" ? Well, actually, it is probable. Does the existing one s*ck ? Absolutely not... really, there are lots of spoilt kids on here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XYZ Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 ^Reminds me of Abismo. Anyways, this is the first time I ever heard this much complaining about a coaster that is over a mile long. Think Leviathan is too short, well TTD is about 18 seconds long. Did I think that it was short at first? Yes, but once looking at the length, duration, and cost of the ride, I think it is good as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 Does the existing one s*ck ? sack seck sick sock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
australianalex Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I also dislike how the ride ends, but I realise that with Dragon Fire situated right underneath, there probably wasn't any other option. At least it doesn't end with a lift hill back to the station like on some rides Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas2 Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 I would kill to have a coaster like this in my country. Heck I'd be happy with one that would go straight into the final brake run after it's first drop! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJeXeL Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 ^That would only be fun without the magnetic brakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now