On a side note, what about the premier bullet coaster i heard about last year.
I am sure more coaster companies will get in on this, there is money to be made! *** Edited 4/15/2005 5:43:09 AM UTC by Beast Tamer***
Also, depending on how Busch's Dive Machine works out for them, who knows!
Beast Tamer said:
I mean a 130mph+ rocket. It is stupid for other companys to not want to get a piece of the pie!
No, it's stupid for other companies to want a piece of a pie that's clearly only big enough for one company.
People have been saying "B&M will go defunct like Arrow because they don't do anything new!!!" for years. I have yet to see any indication of that happening.
*** Edited 4/15/2005 6:42:06 AM UTC by coasterdude318***
There is a lot of money to be lost as well. Anytime a coaster is down for a long time, money is lost. All three rocket coasters in the US have had long delays that have probably cost both the parks, and Intamin, a great deal of money. Why should B&M automatically decide to go with a clearly unstable concept. Sure, they could improve on the design and take it from there (as they have done with other past designs) but it doesn't seem like they are willing to take that gamble right now. They have proven and reliable designs that are still selling.
Universal designed the launch system. B&M agreed to build the coaster but they didn't want to modify the trains for the launch system, and wanted Universal to make sure the launch speed would be the same each time. The original idea for the start of Hulk didn't even have the camel back inversion but rather a non-inverting hill.
B&M have also been using magnetic braking since Nitro. Silver Star has them as well.
First of all you said every park wants a rocket. I can agree that rocket coasters are one of the models that are currently getting a bunch of hype. I think many parks will be installing various versions over the next few years.
But then you say you only mean the 130+ mph rockets. Which one is it? Every park may WANT a record breaking coaster (although I seriously doubt even that statement) but very few have the space, money and potential customers to make it really happen. While there will probably be a few more of the TTD and KK type rockets built, the market for those will soon be gone.
The true market for rockets is more along the lines of Xcelerator, Kanonen, Rita and Storm Runner. Those are the models that fit more into what most parks want and can afford.
The launched coasters that were/are built by Premier, S&S and Vekoma can compete with those as far as thrills go. Heck, FoF is at your most beloved park and is a great coaster now that they've removed the OSTRs. And PKI is adding a different twist to launched coasters this season with Italian Job.
Just looking at the launched coasters that are opening this year it is clearly evident that most of the other companies aren't completely missing out on the launch craze. There are 4 or 5 rockets being built around the globe for this season. But there are also two IJ:STs being built, Powderkeg, one Vekoma motorbike being built and one opened late last season. So while Intamin is definately leading the pack in numbers and pricetags, you're completely off base on this one once again.
*** Edited 4/15/2005 8:47:48 AM UTC by Incidentalist***
Don't hold your breath when it comes to a Beemer Launcher, it would be nice but I like Beemers just the way they are.
I have heard that Universal Port Adventura "was" getting a 4-d. Was on www.rcdb.com for the longest time and all the sudden was gone again. I think B&M re-inventing the 4-d would be sweet.
By the way, don't you have anything better to do then making up these crazy threads to drive us all NUTS?
By the way, congrats on making more new threads in the last 5 days then I have in 5 years...
When I said what I said in some OTHER dopey thread of yours about your input vs. CPNut and imaginary friends, it was an observation we've had dumber. It wasn't an invitation to compete for the title!
NOTE: Severe fecal impaction may render the above words highly debatable.
And, I don't think that this is a stupid topic at all. It's a good question. Why have some companies gone with a launch concept and B&M hasn't? I have also heard people say that B&M won't go over the 300ft. mark because they felt that they couldn't safely do it. But, why not now? I think Intmain has proven that going 300 plus feet is fairly safe.
Edited for punctuation. *** Edited 4/15/2005 1:34:27 PM UTC by Coasterbuzzer*** *** Edited 4/15/2005 1:34:55 PM UTC by Coasterbuzzer***
Sean Flaharty said:
All three rocket coasters in the US have had long delays that have probably cost both the parks, and Intamin, a great deal of money.
That's not true. Storm Runner opened on time and at least the day I was there, ran without incident. *** Edited 4/15/2005 1:49:50 PM UTC by Intamin Fan***
I'm remembering some articles I read about LIM systems in the ASME magazine, and those engineers were working with designers to increase capacity. I didn't keep the article, but I believe they were discussing The Hulk, Rockin Roller Coaster, and California Screamin'. With a launch coaster, the blocking system is different, and by reducing time on the lift hill time, the train returns to station ~60 seconds faster than conventional lift hills. Sure riders get some thrill out of the launch, but the parks are focussed on getting more happy riders through the turnstiles.
There are downsides to LIMs versus conventional chain lift. Reliability is one (while they have no moving parts, LIMs have other reliability issues), and electricity consumption is another (the ASME article was written shortly after the California electricity crisis). But if these can be controlled, I expect we'll see even more launched coasters popping up.
Never Has Gravity Been So Uplifting.
Whatever "money to be made" there is by Intamin has been lost in R&D and costs they've had to eat for not getting it right the first time. Why would B&M want to do that? They're selling a few rides every year, just like they have for 15 years.
- They could have achieved practically the same capacity by using four trains and used flush loading. The bottleneck in capacity is never with the people unloading, so why is Intamin so in love with unload stations? For a ride with a 20 second ride time, it sure does have awful capacity.
- Also, if they didn't intend to ever move the trains in pairs, then why do they need proximity switches every six inches in load, unload, and holding? If the block ahead needs to be clear before the next train moves up, why not one or two pairs like every other ride? Someone said on Pointbuzz that the next train moves when the previous train clears 10 pairs of proximity switches. Why 10? That seems overboard.
- I also am not a big believer in their drive tire systems in and around stations. My preference would be to use gravity like the older arrows that never break down, but maybe that wouldn't allow them precise enough control over the train. B&M figured out how to make these systems desirable and workable. There's no reason why calling a "hold" on Millennium Force should result in 20 minutes of downtime because maintenance has to come and do something with the drive tires in order to get the train from unload to move again. That doesn't happen on Raptor that I know of.
I'm not so sure that another company such as B&M couldn't take the concept of a rocket coaster and get it right. Maybe Intamin will even get it right eventually. But honestly, I can't believe someone else bought one of these things after seeing the nightmares with Dragster. It has brought the whole park down for two seasons now. Other areas of the park suffer because of the time and expense put into that thing.
*** Edited 4/15/2005 3:30:02 PM UTC by MDOmnis***
You must be logged in to post