With the rocket coasters that have been built since Xcelerator, it seems as though rockets are the coaster of choice. They pack a major adrenaline rush and do not take up much space to do so. Is this the end of the traditional hyper coaster? I personally hope not and am actually very suprised to see so many being sold, despite the MAJOR problems that the two giants seem to have. I personally would take an S:ROS (SFNE) clone any day over all the rockets that exist. Your thoughts?
I wish someone would build an Intamin Rocket Coaster that was 200' tall. Make it the first full circuit Intamin Rocket. Make the ride last as much as a traditional hyper coaster does. Add in some awesome turns, bunny hops, maybe even an inversion or two. That would my ideal rocket coaster.
Meh... it's a bit of an apples/oranges comparison. CP and SFGAdv both had hypers prior to getting their rockets, and Hersheypark could probably still build a hyper if they want to. Knott's is the only situation where the park might have forgone a traditional hyper because of space concerns.
I don't know why there's been a lull in hyper construction in the U.S. (Of course, SFOG might end that streak next year.) It just seems that you could make an out-and-back hyper pretty easily with limited land. As The Voyage demonstrates, you can get a 6,000-foot ride on a long, slender footprint. And hypers are a proven crowd-pleaser.
I don't see any rockets being 'transformed' if you will into full sized hyper type rides for a couple of reasons. Even if you had a launch of 80 mph and a following hill of 200' then a bunch more turns and a hills the ride could be just as long as something like superman, but the ride would still last half of the amount of time as a real superman, and people would still complain that it was over to fast........ I think as commented above, Rockets have a lot of bang for their buck, take up a lot less space and are extremely popular. Since these rides are so popular and do take up so much less space parks probably see that as an insentive to build one instead of a traditional hyper.
I would have to agree. Think about it. Mega coasters are never referred to as that because almost every special type of coaster is at least 100+ft. tall. (ex- floorless, stand-up, invert, ect. ect.) So now that some of those type of coasters are becoming over 200+ft. We probably won't be saying Hyper as much. Do you still use the term 'Mega'. I can understand the regular o-n-b coasters but. Like SheiKra, its over 200 ft. and isn't referred to as a hyper. Just like 100 ft. aren't referred to as a mega anymore. In the future we'll probably see 200+ ft. inverts. Alpengeist (sp?) almost is, and thats from what, '97. I think the term hyper will be lost. Execpt for those few left O-A-B.
I think that the reason we are no longer seeing as many hypers built today is because the only parks that can afford them (ie.larger theme parks) mostly allready have one. All of the major regions of the country that have larger themeparks have a hyper. The only three areas that I can think that don't are Northern CA, Florida, and the South, and the South is probably getting one next season. It's not that the hyper concept is beat or anything, it's just that there are only so many parks that have the space and land for them and a majority of those that do, allready have one in the area.
But there isn't one in IOA or SFNO. I do hope that SFOG is getting one as the rumors suggests. I will be disappointed if it ends up being a floorless looping coaster instead of an airtime hyper. Like I've said before all of the quality airtime hypers are only in park opened 6 months or less so if you want a quality airtime ride on a steelie you have to suffer a 6 month void every winter. Hopefull SFOG will ease that pain to only about 4 months or less (if they would reconsider bringing back their Holiday in the Park promotion during Christmas time.). I don't consider Goliath or Titan quality airtime hyper becasue of such a short rid and only TWO possible spots of airtime (first drop and only one speed hill). I think Exacalibur @ VF is a much better ride than those two hypers. Otherwise almost any hyper that isn't overbraked too much is a good ride. Mamba and Magnum are the best two hypers I've ridden. Wild Thing is good if you are LUCKY enough to catch it when the brakes are not on too hard. But you are very lucky when you do get a ride like that on WT. *** Edited 7/16/2005 11:08:01 PM UTC by Pink Floyd Fanatic***
Just as a side note, I thought that Excalibur was REALLY HORRIBLE because of the trim brake on the top of the hill. It was SO ANNOYING!!! The train goes down almost half way down the hill before the brake lets go.
But the back seat still work and the brake on Excalibur doesn't ruin the ride experience much like it does on High Roller. But I will say WT's first half is as good as ever. After the block brake being abused as a trim it is rare to get a good airtime ride on the last five bunny hops.
Who would still want a hyper that doesn't have one? The only parks I can think of that don't have one are the paramount parks and it seems to be against their business model or something (none of their parks have one, unless you count SoB). Don't forget the SF Mexico superman coaster that finally opened, in spite of sitting around idle for a few years. ;)
As for the boom in rockets, it's probably because they take up so much less land than a hyper (at least the smaller versions). If you have the room for a full hyper layout, why launch it rather than chainlift it? Half the fun of a hyper is the anticipation of the first drop.