Cedar Point Removing WildCat

LostKause said:

I see what you are saying djDeamon, but Cedar Fair hired Intamin, and approved of what Intamin came up with. Cedar Point has final say on what is being built at the park, so I think it is their fault too.

Just... no. CF managers are in no position to dictate the actual elements in a ride. That would be like a car dealership telling a group of engineers how to design a car.

About StR, design rules state that in order for a boat ride to be good, the biggest thrill should be after the least thrilling parts of the ride. Shoot the Rapids has a large drop at the very beginning, and then a small drop at the end. I call that poor design.

The problem here is that you're correlating drop height with thrill. Some might argue the first, larger drop isn't very exciting because you pretty much just land in a boring pool and travel straight for a while. On the second, smaller drop, you crash through water rapids and into a nicely themed section of the ride.

Regardless, StR seems popular, at least when it's hot outside (which is pretty much the case for all water rides). As such, it's not fair to suggest the ride is a failure.

My biggest point in all of my rambling is that Cedar Fair seems to have a problem with design. My brain is just so full of ideas lately that it's hard to organize them and make them easily-understood.

Well, I'm willing to say that Shoot the Rapids is chock full of fail, and people seem to enjoy riding it anyway. Starting with Intamin's failure to notice the difference between an elevator lift and a chain lift, and the effect that has on the bottom of the boat. The reliance on electric pumps to clear the bilges is also somewhat suspect. But the biggest issue is that Intamin doesn't seem to understand critical concepts of water flow. There isn't enough drop in their flume to keep the boats moving faster than a typical RCT creation. Holiday World ended up solving the problem on their ride in part by pumping like crazy, only to create a spectacular (not to mention useless) rooster-tail behind the pump house.

Meanwhile Arrow, on their rides, made sure there was a greater difference between the top and bottom of the chute. For a particularly spectacular example, take a look at Snake River Falls, where there is a drop of about 8' past the bottom of the lift that ensures plenty of flow in the lower channel.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

OT: Jeff: That "see new posts" feature is really cool! Never saw that on any other forum, and it works great here!

djDaemon said:

Regardless, StR seems popular, at least when it's hot outside (which is pretty much the case for all water rides). As such, it's not fair to suggest the ride is a failure.

It would be interesting to see a ridership comparison to WWL once the kinks were worked out from StR. Of course, we'll never see it unless they start releasing ride numbers again. From my anecdotal standpoint, my waits for StR have been far shorter than WWL, even with the breakdowns and delays that had occured. I'm sure there are some capacity differences between the two, none of which I could tell because I don't know.

~Rob

For one thing, your more likely to send out full boats on STR than you were with WWL. Secondly the capacity on WWL was never the same after they shut down the one side of the last drop. I have no idea what kind of capacity WWL had back in it's peak seasons.

99er said:

I don't see where everyone keeps thinking this midway is being cut in half.

The midway isn't being cut in half. But the amount of space providing a good view of the stage is. The old screen and midway setup provided a direct view to everyone, all the way back to Coasters drive-in. The new setup significantly reduces the number of people able to get a direct view, even with the wings on the stage to help.

A hopefully larger crowd trying for a decent view with a narrower field of vision results in a bottleneck. And that's exactly what I see in the construction pics. I think this fact was realized and the tough decision (and probably correct one) was made.

djDaemon said:
Just... no. CF managers are in no position to dictate the actual elements in a ride. That would be like a car dealership telling a group of engineers how to design a car.

Actually that doesn't work either. A car dealership is buying a mass produced product from a manufacture, they don't get as many options in what they want. Though they still get a surprisingly lot of options.

Cedar Fair is ordering a custom machined and assembled piece of machinery. They can dictate the demands of the design from as detailed as, "The lift hill has to be x feet high, and it must have x number of inversions." to as broad as, "Make it fun, oh and a loop would be nice!"

Though if the park said they wanted something that was not physically possible (either due to wear, physics, or the human body) then it's the manufacture's responsibility to tell the park that it is not possible. With that though some things just can't be seen till it's built and tested in the real world. Things like the heart-line roll on Maverick, it tested ok in all the simulations, but when it was tested in the real world that is when they found out that it wouldn't work as well as they wished.

Saying that the park's management can't dictate ride elements is silly. Do you really think they just throw $20 million at a company and say "surprise me on opening day"?

It's not like someone telling a group of engineers how to design a car, but rather telling a car manufacturer what existing elements you'd like to see in your specific car. I want a black, supercharged, convertible coupe with a depth-charge sized cupholder. If Chevy can't help me, BMW can.

obxKevin said:

The midway isn't being cut in half. But the amount of space providing a good view of the stage is.

There is no way for you to know that until you are standing in front of the stage looking at it.

The old screen and midway setup provided a direct view to everyone, all the way back to Coasters drive-in. The new setup significantly reduces the number of people able to get a direct view, even with the wings on the stage to help.


The old screen was just that, a movie screen. Whether you are up close or in the back, you get to see what is happening. Not to mention the size of the screen at Cedar Point allowed for people as far back as Coasters to actually watch the show. If you had a stage in front of the Train Station, no one back at Coasters would be able to enjoy the show. While you could hold a lot of people on the midway, this would actually limit the amount of people who could ENJOY the show. With the stage where it is at now and as wide as it is, you can get a good view and not be far away from it. 

Ever been to Halloweekends and seen the stage that they place under the giant screen? If you are anywhere from Iron Dragon's entrance back to Coasters, you can't see what is happening on the stage. Had they built the stage there, the location would have only been good to those within 100 feet of the stage. In the back, where the view would have been good for the screen, the view would suck for the stage show. 

Look at these two pictures. One of them is going to allow more people to see what is happening on the stage and I can tell you it is not the 2nd one. In the 2nd picture, the yellow area is where you are going to lose your audience. They are simply going to walk away because they are not going to fight the crowd to work their way to the front to actually see the show. A really good example of this is 'Dream Along with Mickey' in front of the Castle at the Magic Kingdom. You can see the Castle from the start of Main Street but you can't see the show until you are at the Partners statue.

kpjb said:

Saying that the park's management can't dictate ride elements is silly. Do you really think they just throw $20 million at a company and say "surprise me on opening day"?

The point I'm making is that the too-high-force on Maverick's heartline is not a failure of CP management, but rather a failure of the people CP management paid to design the thing.

Yes, the park can request certain elements, but it's the ride designer's responsibility to ensure those requests are reasonable.

...rather telling a car manufacturer what existing elements you'd like to see in your specific car. I want a black, supercharged, convertible coupe with a depth-charge sized cupholder. If Chevy can't help me, BMW can.

And if you asked for something that was unsafe, the manufacturer has a responsibility to not make that thing, or at least warn you that it's completely unsafe.

djDaemon said:
The point I'm making is that the too-high-force on Maverick's heartline is not a failure of CP management, but rather a failure of the people CP management paid to design the thing.

Mixed terminology when saying "designed". Although CP and Intamin would both come up with ride concepts, and go back-and-forth with layouts, Intamin would be the company actually engineering the product, and then building it.

That said, they probably had already known the heartline had potential for a high-stress area, but likely saw it comparable to the other over-banks within the ride. If there wasn't a highly banked turn going into it (or if the turn/roll were more drawn out), the heartline may still be there. In the end, Intamin was doing some quality control and changed it after the fact.

LostKause said:

My brain is just so full of ideas lately that it's hard to organize them and make them easily-understood.

Sounds like a design problem. :)

I don't know about any of the other stuff, but there is definitely something to be said for saving the best part of a ride for last. One of the biggest offenders in my book: Powder Keg. A great ride with lots of excitement and then about 3/4 of the way through...a lift hill. Followed by a mediocre drop and a helix. Totally kills the pacing.

On the other hand some of my favorites (S:RoS SFNE, PR, NTG, El Toro, Phoenix, BD) have some of their best moments at or near the end of the ride.

NOTHING I have ever seen quite compares to Adventure Express in that department...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

^ Hahaha, Adventure Express was the first thing that came to mind when I read Andy's post too. Although laughing about how corny the animatronic statues and sound effects are does help distract one from the fact that it ends with a lift hill. Heaven help us if that ride ever gets "Disaster Transported."

I suppose it's debateable as to which drop is the 'better' drop on StR. Is it the bigger one or the wetter/themed one?

I would probably argue that on a water ride it's not about the size of the drop, it's about how wet you get.

I'd also argue that lift hill last rides aren't necessarily a bad thing. Seems like most airtime coasters have strong endings (just make the hills smaller), but most inversion coasters are markedly more exciting before the mid-course.

With tht said, I don't deny that there's a certain 'flow' that's expected which is exactly why the things Travis said are true - popular music and movies follow a pretty simple tension-and-release pattern.

Most people probably don't want the orgasm first and the foreplay last. :)

You've never met my wife.

If I knew how to +1 I would do it for Dave's post above.

You could click "vote up."

^wahoo - just click the "vote up" next to the "+1" under Dave's sig... ;~)

edit: Nevermind - just do what Jeff said... LOL!

Wait. I have an even better idea... You could just click the button that reads "Vote up".