YoshiFan Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval.
traincrossin Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 Anyone know how the reinforcement structure is connected to Kingda Ka? Looks like they welded it.
larrygator Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval. Anyone who wastes their time riding Kingda Ka doesn't deserve a short cut to El Toro.
KingdaKaDude1 Posted February 5, 2014 Posted February 5, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval. Anyone who wastes their time riding Kingda Ka doesn't deserve a short cut to El Toro. Excuse me?!?
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval. Anyone who wastes their time riding Kingda Ka doesn't deserve a short cut to El Toro.
coasterbill Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval. Anyone who wastes their time riding Kingda Ka doesn't deserve a short cut to El Toro. I got a laugh out of this but I do have to agree with Yoshi, the fact that Golden Kingdom is now 2 separate areas that aren't connected to eachother at all is beyond stupid. And Kingda Ka is actually a great ride if (and only if) you wait for the front seat... especially if you have a Q Bot and reserve El Toro so you're technically waiting for El Toro when you're waiting for Kingda Ka's front seat.
alilstronger Posted February 7, 2014 Posted February 7, 2014 I hope that path reopens. It would save a lot of time getting to Kingda Ka from Frontier Adventures and Plaza Del Carnaval. Anyone who wastes their time riding Kingda Ka doesn't deserve a short cut to El Toro. I LOVE Kingda Ka but to each their own.
coasterfreak101 Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 Question for anyone who knows: why is Nitro's support system for the main stretch of the ride (lift hill, first drop and valley, and return hills) so odd? I'm going to attach a picture, but anybody who's seen the ride or even a POV of it has to have noticed how much different those supports are from any other B&M hyper out there.
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 Well directly below the lift is a pond or water holding area, and the supports don't go into the water. So they go to each side creating the unique style for the supports in that area.
rcjp Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 ^^Well it was their first hyper but I don't really know much. I actually think Nitro has some of the bes looking supports of any coaster, I just love how big and wide they are for some reason.
GigaG Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 Am I the only person who found the first part of Nitro almost devoid of airtime? I rode it twice, near the front and back ends of the train, and found the floater hills less intense than even Diamondback. It could have been a bad trim day, but still, I found the ride mediocre and quite overrated (even in the Mitch poll.)
SingleRiderCam Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 ^^I think that he meant the first hyper at SFGAdv.
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 ^^I think that he meant the first hyper at SFGAdv. LOL, its their one and only hyper. And that fact would have no bearing on the support design of a coaster HAHAHAHA
rcjp Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 ^Nitro was not the first B&M hyper. Sorry, I meant it was B&M's tallest coaster at the time.
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted February 12, 2014 Posted February 12, 2014 ^Nitro was not the first B&M hyper. Sorry, I meant it was B&M's tallest coaster at the time. The support design was a direct result of the pond under the lift. That's the reason the supports are the way they are.
_koppen Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 It's a unique arrangement for the B&M hypers, due to the water under the lift, but it was standard for B&M to build their coasters like that in the 90's.
Dr. M Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Am I the only person who found the first part of Nitro almost devoid of airtime? I rode it twice, near the front and back ends of the train, and found the floater hills less intense than even Diamondback. It could have been a bad trim day, but still, I found the ride mediocre and quite overrated (even in the Mitch poll.) My rides on it have been inconsistent, but I find the front much better for smoothness/airtime than the back. It has the potential to be a very, very good ride.
hydra Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 They group the supports at the bottom to consolidate footers. Two big footers are cheaper than 6-8 individual footers.
coasterfreak101 Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Well directly below the lift is a pond or water holding area, and the supports don't go into the water. So they go to each side creating the unique style for the supports in that area. I don't mean the lift supports, really. I shouldn't have said that - they're standard for a B&M at the time. What I'm really curious about is the bottom of the drop and pull-up into the next hill. I understand the design for the lift, but not for the supports after or for the return run. They're just genuinely ugly and can't possibly be an efficient use of steel.
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Well directly below the lift is a pond or water holding area, and the supports don't go into the water. So they go to each side creating the unique style for the supports in that area. I don't mean the lift supports, really. I shouldn't have said that - they're standard for a B&M at the time. What I'm really curious about is the bottom of the drop and pull-up into the next hill. I understand the design for the lift, but not for the supports after or for the return run. They're just genuinely ugly and can't possibly be an efficient use of steel. LOL, totally different area. It's does seem odd, and there is also weird cross bracing as well at the bottom of those supports too. I can't think it was simply a design decision, based on the bracing, but it could just simply be over built.
medusa99 Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Those supports are like that because there is a deep vally and creek there. It also is where the coaster exits and enters back into the park.
gerstlaueringvar Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Footers damage the ground and are hard to remove after the coaster retires. I guess they are trying to build as less footers as possible.
medusa99 Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Footers damage the ground and are hard to remove after the coaster retires. I guess they are trying to build as less footers as possible. How dose a footer damage the ground? It is made out of sand rocks cement and water and steel but its illegal for it to touch the ground and has to be in cased in concrete. Also it is much harder to remove track 230' in the air than it is to take out a footer.
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