DV Monument: Record-Setting Futility?

Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:16 PM

Some of you coaster historians may have to help me out on this one. I was wondering if any coasters have ever been structurally completed and then been torn down before being open to the public.

I'm also wondering if our own DV Monument (SFGAm's Deja Vu to the uninitiated) might be in the running for some type of 2-year, least days operational record. As of right now, I believe the ride has been operational for 7 regular season days (Fright Fest Fridays counting as half days) out of approximately 150 regular season days since opening day 2001. That's around 4% uptime. Even if the coaster were to be open on half the operating days for the rest of the season (major stretch, given the coaster's performance to date), that would put its uptime at 16.7%. Any coasters done worse over two years?

+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:21 PM
Well it was tested on 5-28-02 but again wasnt operating for the public!!!! What a major mistake to have purchased the ride!!!
+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:24 PM
No one could really forsee problems of this magnitude when they were purchased.
+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:26 PM

Bull fan said:

I'm also wondering if our own DV Monument (SFGAm's Deja Vu to the uninitiated) might be in the running for some type of 2-year, least days operational record. As of right now, I believe the ride has been operational for 7 regular season days (Fright Fest Fridays counting as half days) out of approximately 150 regular season days since opening day 2001. That's around 4% uptime. Even if the coaster were to be open on half the operating days for the rest of the season (major stretch, given the coaster's performance to date), that would put its uptime at 16.7%. Any coasters done worse over two years?



You can't really base the coaster's uptime on 150 regular season days, since the coaster didn't open until the very last minute of last year. If the coaster had been completed on time, then your figures would work, but that isn't the case.

-----------------
---------
"Getting on Iron Wolf is kind of like going in a blender and pressing PUREE"

--Ever lying in wait for someone to say something stupid.

+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:29 PM
I have to agree with MisterX, everybody is bashing Six Flags for purchasing the coaster but hwo could they have seen this coming? I don't recall any of you seeing it coming, I say, as for the one in SFGAm, if you have to, replace it with a Wild Mouse (desperately needed at SFGAm) a Zamperla Volare or possibly a major Thrill Ride.

-----------------
The below statement is true.
The above statement is false.

Constant Looping is a lack of creativity.

+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:31 PM

I don't think you have to a historian to answer this.

Wild Wind at Playland Park was built in 1999 and removed in 2000 without ever opening to the public - at least according to RCBD.

http://www.rcdb.com/installationdetail681.htm

-----------------
www.coasterimage.com

+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 8:41 PM

Why? (In reference to Wild Wind)

And to Du8die, I disagree with your logic, but I'm too tired to defend my position right now. Bed time.

+0
Tuesday, May 28, 2002 10:14 PM

Wait, you're telling me that they couldn't see this coming?

At SFGAm's approval night (where the city said they could build it) they didn't know what type of train they were using NOR what would drag the car up the tower. Not to mention it originally was said to have 6 rows, not 8.

You mean to tell me NONE of those were red flags? I find that hard to believe.

-----------------
"Hey, what were the 80's like, were they cool?"

+0
Wednesday, May 29, 2002 4:49 AM
The name "Vekoma" should be a red flag in and of itself.
+0
Wednesday, May 29, 2002 5:57 AM

"Wild Wind"'s G's were considered too extreme? Interesting. RCDB says the coaster is was only 33 feet tall.

+0
Wednesday, May 29, 2002 6:08 AM
I seem to recall that there is an entire park in South America that has never opened, thought the coasters are still SBNO not demoed yet.
+0
Wednesday, May 29, 2002 6:09 AM
Yes, but it had an inversion too, Bull fan. I'm guessing it had to be the inversion that caused problems. I have no solid info on that, it just seems to make sense to me.

-----------------
www.coasterimage.com

+0
Wednesday, May 29, 2002 6:12 AM

....thinking is that with the 6-row train Legendary mentioned, the drop height would effectively rise a few feet, the momentum loss fromthe sharp turn at the bottom of the drops would be reduced, and it might make for a better overall ride (faster, no valleying).....

...also thinking that some would complain about further reduced capacity from this solution, and these people should realize you can't go lower than zero capacity....and that this is just too simple an answer to be utilized....;)

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...