Six Flags Great America (SFGAm) Discussion Thread

[rollin_n_coastin]

This is shaping up to be be the most insane Goliath ever. I can't wait to ride this one day soon if all goes well.

 

^Agree. It seems that recently there have been a lot of coasters popping up that hit the brake run either too fast or too high *cough*leviathan*cough*.

 

In all fairness, Leviathan had a unique issue where the train had to get back to the station over an existing roller coaster, F&B catering building/area and maintenance area. I don't think it's a trend as much as a ride adapting to its location.

[Goooose]

Red topper track was added to the exit of the zero g stall! #finally #progress #whatsnext #sooneritopens,thesoonerillgoaway

[El Toro_Ryan]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

[DJeXeL]

Sometimes running 1 less train than designed will give you better capacity and decrease downtime.

 

California Screamin can run 6 trains but 5 is more efficient AND decreases downtime. TTD is more efficient with 5 trains VS 6.

[Password121]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

Not using the switch track makes sense, but why not use the second station behind the one in use for unloading? I just don't mathematically see how it would be more efficient to not have a separate, connected unloading station like MF utilizes.

[coasterbill]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

 

I love the way they run Kingda Ka now.

 

The fact that the queue slows down once it splits shouldn't be downplayed because it makes a big difference when you want to wait for a certain seat. For example... the wait for the front row of Kingda Ka is usually about 20 minutes once you get in line for it. That same line in the past would have been at least 80 minutes (20 times 4 stations)... probably more because you have to add time for switching the track like Ryan was saying.

 

Logic would tell you that this wouldn't happen because if the line was 80 minutes it wouldn't be as long... people wouldn't get in it. This is not the case. For some reason people always fill the lines for each row... I don't know why that is, I guess it's because they assume that if it's within the area they have set up then it's a standard wait time. The line is rarely longer than the allotted space but it's almost never shorter.

 

A perfect example is on a ride like Raptor compared to a ride like Montu. Raptor always has a 5 minute wait for the front because the line is only long enough to fit a 5 minute wait. Montu has some switchbacks for the front so the line always fills up and there's a 45 minute wait for the front. People will always fill the line, it's rarely shorter or longer than the line unless there's a very convenient waiting area like the back wall of the station (Dragster) that naturally flows in to the line for a specific row.

 

My point is that if you prefer the front or back row on a specific coaster like most enthusiasts do then you shouldn't ever want a duel loading station. It doesn't matter as much on the other rows because if there was just one station the queue would have been longer and it evens out, but if you prefer a row that will have a longer queue then having more than one loading station is awful.

[aCoasterStory]

My point is that if you prefer the front or back row on a specific coaster like most enthusiasts do then you shouldn't ever want a duel loading station. It doesn't matter as much on the other rows because if there was just one station the queue would have been longer and it evens out, but if you prefer a row that will have a longer queue then having more than one loading station is awful.

 

The exception to that, for me at least, is SheiKra. I love that it has a dual loading station, especially because all the GP wants to ride in the front. Makes it much quicker and easier for me to ride where I want, which is the back, far right seat.

[coasterbill]

You're right, but my point was really that the more desirable seats will always have the longer lines. On Sheikra the back isn't really that desirable for most people, everyone wants to sit in the front. Sheikra also sits approximately 11,000 people per row which helps.

Edited June 2, 2014 by coasterbill

[Goooose]

The cranes kept revisiting the overbank and drop over the past two days. Since both were already totally topper tracked and grouted, I am guessing they were installing sensors. Now the cranes are lifting something to site from off site. Hopefully train cars!

[EricGarbo]

I'm at the park right now. The liftchain is currently being tested.

[Goooose]

They keep revisiting the steel/wood structure perched atop the top of the overbank. PLEASE dont let there be any structural issues! Glad to hear the lift is running.

[DoinItForTheFame]

I'm at the park right now. The liftchain is currently being tested.

This made me more happy than it probably should have. Just means we are getting closer and closer to opening with each passing day.

[El Toro_Ryan]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

Not using the switch track makes sense, but why not use the second station behind the one in use for unloading? I just don't mathematically see how it would be more efficient to not have a separate, connected unloading station like MF utilizes.

 

To answer your question, the park staffs 4 people to check the 18 passenger trains on Kingda Ka rather than use an unload platform. This way, trains can checked and dispatched faster to make up for the lack of an unload station. Plus the ride runs 2 trains a lot so having an unload station really only works well if you have 3 trains.

[Goooose]

Grouting the inverted portion of the zero g stall. this HAS to be the end of it. Everything else has its red topper track.

[Jodon]

^^^

I'm at the park today as well and Ss best as I could tell, there was a guy at the top of the overbanked welding a support to the 90 degree angle steel opposite of the track. Not sure if other steel supports are going to get that treatment, but he was up there a while.

[GayCoasterGuy]

Why wouldn't that apply to Banshee? I mean, I get that there are lots of other inverteds in the world and only a couple RMCs, but Banshee is not a cookie cutter, has a unique layout, and has very strong reviews.

 

It was just my personal opinion. To me, Banshee is a shell of a ride. It is 6 giant loops, a turn and another inversion built in a dirt field. Nothing particularly unique about it. I know, I know... a pre-lift section, some tunnels and trenches would have cost a lot more $$$, but they would have a GREAT ride then. Look at Nemesis, Nemesis Inferno, Oziris, etc. At the end of the day, they know people will rave about it b/c it's big and fast, so "they don't need to do all that other stuff" (as a friend explains to me). Don't get me wrong, it's a nice fun ride, but no where near world-class. (Again, all that is just my opinion; I know many people LOVE it.)

[tororific]

Why wouldn't that apply to Banshee? I mean, I get that there are lots of other inverteds in the world and only a couple RMCs, but Banshee is not a cookie cutter, has a unique layout, and has very strong reviews.

 

It was just my personal opinion. To me, Banshee is a shell of a ride. It is 6 giant loops, a turn and another inversion built in a dirt field. Nothing particularly unique about it. I know, I know... a pre-lift section, some tunnels and trenches would have cost a lot more $$$, but they would have a GREAT ride then. Look at Nemesis, Nemesis Inferno, Oziris, etc. At the end of the day, they know people will rave about it b/c it's big and fast, so "they don't need to do all that other stuff" (as a friend explains to me). Don't get me wrong, it's a nice fun ride, but no where near world-class. (Again, all that is just my opinion; I know many people LOVE it.)

 

fair enough, I get that. (I mean, Nemesis is a tall order to compare it it, though!)

No doubt that Goliath is a more unique ride -- and despite all kvetching about the delays, it's going to be a great ride

[Password121]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

Not using the switch track makes sense, but why not use the second station behind the one in use for unloading? I just don't mathematically see how it would be more efficient to not have a separate, connected unloading station like MF utilizes.

 

To answer your question, the park staffs 4 people to check the 18 passenger trains on Kingda Ka rather than use an unload platform. This way, trains can checked and dispatched faster to make up for the lack of an unload station. Plus the ride runs 2 trains a lot so having an unload station really only works well if you have 3 trains.

Thanks for the answer. It makes sense, but seems a little cheap to not want to hire two more attendants to improve capacity on the park's main draw for out of town guests. His brings up another question, though. Why do they have four attendants on Ka, checking four to five seats each, and two on El Toro and Nitro, checking 18 seats each? It would make sense to be just the opposite, IMO. Thanks Ryan.

[El Toro_Ryan]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

Not using the switch track makes sense, but why not use the second station behind the one in use for unloading? I just don't mathematically see how it would be more efficient to not have a separate, connected unloading station like MF utilizes.

 

To answer your question, the park staffs 4 people to check the 18 passenger trains on Kingda Ka rather than use an unload platform. This way, trains can checked and dispatched faster to make up for the lack of an unload station. Plus the ride runs 2 trains a lot so having an unload station really only works well if you have 3 trains.

Thanks for the answer. It makes sense, but seems a little cheap to not want to hire two more attendants to improve capacity on the park's main draw for out of town guests. His brings up another question, though. Why do they have four attendants on Ka, checking four to five seats each, and two on El Toro and Nitro, checking 18 seats each? It would make sense to be just the opposite, IMO. Thanks Ryan.

 

Yeah that is kind of backwards but Ka needs to send out way more trains an hour than Toro or Nitro do to get good numbers. I think they shoot for atleast 60 trains an hour there while El Toro shoots for 30 an hour. I'm not sure about Nitro but probably around 40. Ka needs those extra people in order to do so since it's OTSR can't be checked as fast as lapbars. Although I feel like all of our rides could use 4 people checking restraints. When we have 4 people checking at Toro, it's almost impossible for us to stack. That's a decision made by management though.

[GayCoasterGuy]

fair enough, I get that. (I mean, Nemesis is a tall order to compare it it, though!)

 

That is a tall order... my point is that B&M can do really unique stuff. But they will do whatever the park wants. When I was riding Banshee, I looked over to Adventure Express; other than the seemingly truncated ending, it's a GREAT/unique ride. I'm disappointed that a chain as reputable, popular and big as Cedar Fair wouldn't want to build something especially world class and unique (think Beast, Helix, etc...)

 

No doubt that Goliath is a more unique ride -- and despite all kvetching about the delays, it's going to be a great ride

 

Yup! I think people will forget the delay once the ride opens. Does anyone remember when they tried to open V2 and Deja Vu in the same year? That turned out a mess. The park was sued for false advertisement; there were billboards all over the city touting "2 new coasters in one year!" Not the same case here, but thought I would mention it (neutrally) as some folks brought up the park potentially being sued. I don't remember the outcome of that case, but I couldn't imagine the park being liable (other than perhaps a few refunded season passes.)

[rcjp]

Yeah that is kind of backwards but Ka needs to send out way more trains an hour than Toro or Nitro do to get good numbers. I think they shoot for atleast 60 trains an hour there while El Toro shoots for 30 an hour. I'm not sure about Nitro but probably around 40. Ka needs those extra people in order to do so since it's OTSR can't be checked as fast as lapbars. Although I feel like all of our rides could use 4 people checking restraints. When we have 4 people checking at Toro, it's almost impossible for us to stack. That's a decision made by management though.

What if they used two and sent the other two or the unloading station? Have they ever tried it? At least it wouldn't require more people.

[SFGAmFan1976]

I think they've turned off the construction cam for Goliath. The page no longer displays a new image.

[jetsplumber]

SFGAdv only uses one loading/unloading area on kingda ka out of 4.

I think that's ridiculous. I'm not saying they should use all the four as that apparently slows down the queue once it splits but they could use one side of the station with both the loading and unloading platform working. Given the trains only carry 18 it would be significantly better.

Also, why did they go with only one row for the last car in the first place? I know the trains are made so that a last row can be added but why haven't they done that?

 

someone wrote on the SFGAdv thread that only using one loading/unloading area and only running 3 trains gives them the best capacity. i dodnt buy it, and still think its a money issue. TTD uses 5 trains and has 2 loading areas and the separate unloading areas.

 

I work at GADV and I know for a fact the ride gets better numbers now then it did when it used all 4 load stations. Last year was the first time the ride gave over one million riders in a season. The switch track would slow down cycles because you had to wait for it transfer which wasn't the quickest process. Plus the switch track would have problems a lot and cause the ride to go down. Idk why the park doesn't switch in the last row of seats in on Ka but that's up to management. 1 loading platform is used in place of four for better capacity and to save on expenses.

Not using the switch track makes sense, but why not use the second station behind the one in use for unloading? I just don't mathematically see how it would be more efficient to not have a separate, connected unloading station like MF utilizes.

 

To answer your question, the park staffs 4 people to check the 18 passenger trains on Kingda Ka rather than use an unload platform. This way, trains can checked and dispatched faster to make up for the lack of an unload station. Plus the ride runs 2 trains a lot so having an unload station really only works well if you have 3 trains.

Thanks for the answer. It makes sense, but seems a little cheap to not want to hire two more attendants to improve capacity on the park's main draw for out of town guests. His brings up another question, though. Why do they have four attendants on Ka, checking four to five seats each, and two on El Toro and Nitro, checking 18 seats each? It would make sense to be just the opposite, IMO. Thanks Ryan.

 

Yeah that is kind of backwards but Ka needs to send out way more trains an hour than Toro or Nitro do to get good numbers. I think they shoot for atleast 60 trains an hour there while El Toro shoots for 30 an hour. I'm not sure about Nitro but probably around 40. Ka needs those extra people in order to do so since it's OTSR can't be checked as fast as lapbars. Although I feel like all of our rides could use 4 people checking restraints. When we have 4 people checking at Toro, it's almost impossible for us to stack. That's a decision made by management though.

 

it all comes down to $$$$$ when rides only have 2 compared to 4. that's why to this day I still feel the attendant at the ride entrance is a waste. people still come up to the platform with bags and crap. and fat people still dodnt try the test seat and slow the whole ride down. the gate attendant at most rides is not doing the job they are supposed to be doing. id rather the parks have a grouper in the station. this season, I have never seen so many empty rows or empty seats in my life.

[radiohead8989]

If you have a ticket for the June 1 midnight ERT on Goliath, you can get exit passes at the park. Go to the store where you purchased the Goliath shirt, and they will give you two exit passes for each ticket. I picked up my exit passes at the store near the front of the park today. You can use the exit pass for Goliath, or any other ride. Guest Services cannot help with this.

[Goooose]

I dont think great america got sued, because who wouldbhave sued them? I believe the chain sued Vekoma.