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

Strangest layouts


Recommended Posts

I throw my vote in for Leviathan just because of its massive brake run that just seems to prematurely terminate the ride.

 

It took me a while to figure out why the brake run is so ridiculously long, but I eventually did figure it out: They wanted three train operation, but for some reason they didn't want to have an MCBR (possibly due to variety as Behemoth already does, otherwise, after studying the ride's property on videos an MCBR could have been placed right after the overbank at the far end, but it would have required quicker transitions that B&M generally doesn't seem to prefer to build) and had no other choice as there would otherwise be too few block sections to safely allow three train operations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 191
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The Ultimate's first half looks like it MIGHT have airtime....

 

 

....and the second half looks like you MIGHT not get whiplash if you've developed a usable-on-a-coaster brace-for-impact position.

 

I've always thought Iron Wolf's layout was kinda weird due to the first half being forceful with a loop-turnaround-360 (Sounds like Gerstlaur, doesn't it?) Then through what looks like it could have been a MCBR (It probably was going to be before they realized they couldn't load that fast) And then into a Whippy Corkscrew before it vanishes into graceful transitions through the woods. I don't know, it just seems... different.

 

...and Awesome

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I throw my vote in for Leviathan just because of its massive brake run that just seems to prematurely terminate the ride.

 

It took me a while to figure out why the brake run is so ridiculously long, but I eventually did figure it out: They wanted three train operation, but for some reason they didn't want to have an MCBR (possibly due to variety as Behemoth already does, otherwise, after studying the ride's property on videos an MCBR could have been placed right after the overbank at the far end, but it would have required quicker transitions that B&M generally doesn't seem to prefer to build) and had no other choice as there would otherwise be too few block sections to safely allow three train operations.

 

While trying to do a recreation of Leviathan for RCT2, I came to the same conclusion. I know many on this site didn't like the ride, either for not being forceful enough, or because of the brake run, but I still thought it was fun ride, and being unique for having the world's tallest brake run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I throw my vote in for Leviathan just because of its massive brake run that just seems to prematurely terminate the ride.

 

It took me a while to figure out why the brake run is so ridiculously long, but I eventually did figure it out: They wanted three train operation, but for some reason they didn't want to have an MCBR (possibly due to variety as Behemoth already does, otherwise, after studying the ride's property on videos an MCBR could have been placed right after the overbank at the far end, but it would have required quicker transitions that B&M generally doesn't seem to prefer to build) and had no other choice as there would otherwise be too few block sections to safely allow three train operations.

 

A handful of us have been saying this since literal day-one of the announcement. This is the exact reason why it's there - three train operation while 'minimizing' cost on a ride that already has a $28 million price tag.

Link to comment
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/