Six Flags Enthuseast Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Perhaps they want the train to pass through the run ASAP so that the next train can clear the lift hill more quickly? I'd prefer a few airtime hills, but I wouldn't be surprised if some kind of planning for capacity was calculated into the design of that long brake run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 The rationale was probably that it's much cheaper to make a 300 foot tall ride at its halfway point rather than give it a more full course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietcokevan Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 My guess for the reason that the brake run is so long is because of the speed. Perhaps B&M heard of the problem that I305 had with wheels and wanted to slow the ride down as soon as possible, and help CW with maintance costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CedarFair1 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Halloween Haunt Update with picture~ http://www.canadaswonderland2012.com/2012Haunt.html Leviathan Vertical Construction (3 minute portion of the ride, the break run)~ http://www.canadaswonderland2012.com/Leviathan.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCW_Nut Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 So looks like that's Terry of London in Splash Works? Looks good so far. So, are there any rumblings of any major work around Leviathan as in a new plaza area or something? After the crazy line ups last time when Behemoth opened up, I hope they kind of find a way to account for the crazy crowds that will now be over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom497 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 After looking at the pictures that canadaswonderland2012 posted on their website, it almost made me think that Cedar Fair onpurposly wanted the break run to be high because you can see it everywhere!!! P.S I'm probably not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_koppen Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 I understand that the long brake run is for being able to use a three train operation. What I don't understand is where to switch track is gonna be located on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnderCoverDrummer1 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 Although I think the length of the brake run is obnoxious as well, I feel like the reasoning behind it may have to do with the length of the ride and the fact that there is no MCBR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom497 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 I understand that the long brake run is for being able to use a three train operation. What I don't understand is where to switch track is gonna be located on this? If you look at this link http://www.cwmania.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2222&start=75, the second picture shows long concrete "bars". I think thats where the switch track will be. Also, is it just me or the supports for the 306 foot lift hill where supposed to be different??? Look at CW''s profile picture ( )Then look at this picture (http://www.cwmania.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2222). The supports are different and nothing is supporting the top (in the second link to CW Mania)!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flizt Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 ^ CW's profile pic on facebook is the airtime hill after the first overbank turn. It's not the 306ft lift hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnderCoverDrummer1 Posted September 18, 2011 Share Posted September 18, 2011 As far as I can tell, CW's profile picture is a different part of the ride and does not show the supports on the lift hill. That being said, yes there is nothing supporting the very top of the lift hill. I'm guessing it's B&M's own version of I305's supports and that the track spine will be thicker than normal to compensate for the lack of support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom497 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 CW Mania has posted a message that a big construction update will be released later tonight. http://www.cwmania.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2222&start=75 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XYZ Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 www.canadaswonderland2012.com/Leviathan.html Whoa, this really does seem like the world's longest break run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom497 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I think those rumors that this coaster was originally supposed to go to Knott's are right. Just because the hammerhead may fit perfectly with the "tree island", doesn't mean it couldn't have gone to another park. That part of the coaster wouldn't have been built until later (not even today) in the year. CW an B&M could have easily made modifications to the part of the coaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XYZ Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I think those rumors that this coaster was originally supposed to go to Knott's are right. Just because the hammerhead may fit perfectly with the "tree island", doesn't mean it couldn't have gone to another park. That part of the coaster wouldn't have been built until later (not even today) in the year. CW an B&M could have easily made modifications to the part of the coaster. I have nothing against Dom497's opinion, but here's a question that I want to know for those who side with Dom497: Why didn't they build in Knotts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dom497 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Thats what I was thinking too. After all, Screamscape does say that there is a Giga rumor for Knott's. The park could have changed their mind with leviathan and bought a new design. The original design (leviathan) could have been transferred to CW. But we will never know for 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emery96 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I'm still thinking that this coaster was destined for Canada's Wonderland all along. Even if some of the sections could fit at Knott's, or any other park for that matter, it just fits to perfectly at CW for me to believe it was designed for another park. I suppose it may have been intended for another CF park, and that when the decision was decided to move it, the design was changed as well, but it would take a long time to edit the design. So if it was intended for another park, the decision was made to move it a LONG time ago. P.S. just because Screamscape reports the rumour of a 500' looping aquatrax dive machine, does not mean it is happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathbydinn Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Why didn't they build in Knotts? Plans for parks change all the time like Chang @ SFGAm, the dive machine at SFFT, the MTV coaster at CGA, the wooden coaster at CGA all the proposed rides for SFA, Demon Drop @ Knotts and so on. Sometimes it has to do with management changes, or permits, competition and sometimes they probably just decide something else would be a better fit. So, the ride very well could have been destined for Knotts originally, and then one of those factors or something else sent it to CW instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kunpc1 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Construction tour from September 17, 2012 has been posted on CWMania: http://www.cwmania.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=50&t=2222&p=49249#p49249 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazywolf88 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I find it interesting that B&M would opt for the chain to be returned through the track, the chain would then have to be longer and be heavier. Would that cause problems? Only time would tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_koppen Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 I find it interesting that B&M would opt for the chain to be returned through the track, the chain would then have to be longer and be heavier. Would that cause problems? Only time would tell. Don't think so, were only taling about a couple of extra feet here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kunpc1 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 It's a bit more than just an extra couple of feet... An extra 76 feet in height equals over 150 feet of extra chain. I'd say that weight is a substantial sum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_koppen Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 It's a bit more than just an extra couple of feet... An extra 76 feet in height equals over 150 feet of extra chain. I'd say that weight is a substantial sum. I was thinking about the chain returning in the track as opposed to hanging under like Behemoth. And I say that's just a couple of extra feet in length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterbill Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 Are we seriously talking about this? I'm sure the engineers at B&M knows what they're doing. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harper83087 Posted September 19, 2011 Share Posted September 19, 2011 ^It is a decent curiosity to discuss in my mind. B&M obviously has never gone this tall before, are they going to use a single chain or two chains? Steel Dragon has a two chains on its lift for a decent comparison. I am pretty interested in how they're going to pull this off. 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