Rocket Coasters? Why not 4d's?

I can't back this up, but I'm nearly certain that X actually cost a really low amount given its size. I'm sure I've read somewhere that it only cost something like $8m or $12m. If anyone knows the true price, by all means let me know.

X's major problems, to me, is that it's at a park who are unwilling to truly give the ride the work it needs. I have little doubt that if the exact same ride were installed at another park in a chain that doesn't leave a ride for dead the moment it's paid for (assuming that SFMM actually did pay for this thing), it'd be running to near the capacity and reliability it was intended to.

For this reason, I believe that SFMM was the nail in Arrow's coffin in more ways than one. There was the lawsuit on one hand, then there was the fact that any potential customer only needs to look at the lukewarm effort SFMM seem to have put into maintaining it and immediately assume it's all Arrow's fault. True to some extent, but I don't think the condition X is in these days has much to do with Arrow Dynamics' design engineering.

Having said that, I was thoroughly unthrilled by X. Arrow has always been my "favourite" company and I've looked at this ride in awe since it began construction, but when I rode late last year, I was really disappointed. *** Edited 8/6/2004 3:05:38 AM UTC by auscoasterman***

Nah...it wasn't $8-12mil... :) I'm not sure where you heard that. Most sources put it at the lower 20s *** Edited 8/6/2004 3:56:44 AM UTC by Peabody***

Having just come back from SFMM a week or so ago, and getting my 3rd lap on X, there are a few items above that are a tad wrong.

First off, the load/unload process takes a long time, the longest being the seat rotation (as mentioned above). However, they have been running 2 trains as of late, but they are not running them correctly. From what I understand with that ride, the trains are so heavy, they can only have 1 on the course at a given time. Couple that with the long load times, and you got yourself a ride that can run a max of 2 trains. The best way to do this would be when the train hits the break run, the next one launches (actually, by doing it that way, you could feasibly run 3 trains as long as you dont use SFMM ride crews). What SFMM does, is wait for the 2nd train to hit the unload station before loading the 1st train. While it still helps with capacity a tad bit, you arent getting the full benifit of running 2 trains.

Second, a properly designed (properly being a re-design of the ride with the problems now known) 4D could compete with the rocket coasters in both cost as well as pph. Heck, all X needs is a station where the seats don't rotate during the unload --> load process and stop stacking and you have trains launching every 2 minutes (approx 850 pph).

Only 1 on the course at a given time due to weight? Where did that idea come from?

No, you can only have one train on the course at a given time because the track length is short and there is no midcourse brake!

But another train could be on the lift, which shouldn't have any load-bearing issues with a train out on the course. But that would involve a faster seat rotation mechanism, a third train (4th so they could still have a backup?) and efficient SFMM ride crews.

All reasons why it will never run that good. Efficient ride crews at MM? That last reason alone is a deal breaker.

I bet they could (with a CP speed crew) get three trains cranking on it, just like MF. As soon as the first train heads up the lift, the next train pulls into load and the train on the final breaks pulls into unload. With a somewhat slow lift and a decent time on the course, it's definitely plausible that a crew could rotate and check the train in load before the first one made it back into the brakes.

Jeff, I'm pretty sure that $12M was the price tag to Arrow for X....the INSTALLATION of course always costs more....esp. when you have to make 3 miles of crazy paths to get to the entrance...;)

The seat rotation issue has been discussed, but I don't think SFMM is overly-concerned about the low capacity of the ride, since they have Deja Vu and Scream! to draw off the crowds...LOL!

The lift does have some load bearing issues. There is a big portion of the lift, as seen here, that isn't supported to the ground. Somewhere on coasterbuzz I read that they were having problems when the train would stop on the lift.

It's supported by a truss. I'd like to think that with all Arrow's problems, they could design a truss properly. That's like Introduction to Structural Engineering 101; as a mechanical engineering student, after my first semester even I could design and analyse almost any truss you could come up with.

Furthermore, how would a small "unsupported" section of track have any bearing on the rest of the ride? How does a train on the circuit affect having one on the lift?

I say just team up and build a rocket-4D coaster!!That would be awesome!!

That was a concept displayed at IAAPA. Given the troubles with both concepts seperately, I'm not sure any park is going to want one any time soon!

If they build a 4D that doesn't put me through a 70 mph boxing match, I'll be all for it! :)

And then they could call it 'X' and give it to Magic Mountain! Oh wait.... ;) :P

I think a park should purchase a 4D with S&S/Arrow manufacturer's specs. It would probably run without challenges. It's been almost 3 years since X. I'm sure S&S have figured out all the bugs with the design by now.

Riiiight. Just like Vekoma has figured out all the bugs with their flyers and GiB's. And Intamin has figured out all the bugs with their restraint systems...and rocket coasters....and impulses...

B&M has just figured everything out.

I'm not so sure a park could buy a 4D right now even if they wanted one, not one they could market worth a damn anyway. If there is a B&M version out there being developed, it isn't ready yet, Arrow is no more, and S&S doesn't seem interested in agressively marketing their product yet. The way parks seem to be thinking right now, if they can't trump SFMM's X, then why bother?

Right, Andy, except how to quieten down the riders on Oblivion...;)

I think thats why we see B&M do less 'innovative' stuff-they have a proven formula that works, they're comfortable with it, and so they work with what they know instead of trying to come up with the "next big thing".

Which seems to me to be Arrow's formula and look at them now...

I'll tell ya why rockets and not 4Ds - because rockets are surrounded by riders and non-riders alike just watching it go, amazed by the speed, the acceleration and the way the thing operates, not to mention the mind-blowing experience the riders get. Rocket coasters are entire-crowd-experiences. They involve everyone. No one at SFMM was crowded around X just to watch it operate ...

The problem with your theory is that you can't really sit around and watch X operate from inside the park, unless your right at the station, which is conviently located off a populated midway.

I'm pretty sure that a 4d that had the seats rotate outside the station & next to the midway would attract a whole lot of people watching.

In my one trip to KBF, not that many people sat around and watched Xcel, either. Like Corey said, if there were bandstands for X, there'd be plenty of people sitting and watching it.