Hopefully they are shortening the first 3 drops by about 50 feet each. Thats' the only way this coaster will ever be re-rideable. It was built simply for sensationalistic advertising purposes of the stats, not for a good ride.
I've heard that GCI is actually building trains for existing rides. Nothing certain, and I'm not saying they're building some for this ride, only that I've heard they're no longer turning away that business. (And yeah, I've been saying for ages it would be stupid for them to do so.)
^^ I thought (at least, previously) that Clair Hain et al. were pretty much dead-set AGAINST building trains for coasters that GCII didn't build themselves...
Assuming what you've heard is true, Jeff, that sounds like a 180* turn(-around) from EVERYTHING that's been previously said...and yes, I *did* ask at the factory tour after PPP '05, only to get the same response we'd *always* heard re: trains...
My thinking (yeah, I know, LOL) is that somehow the insurability issues have been ironed out? If so, then, ummmm, yeeeeehaaaaaw! This could be GREAT news for some older coasters currently running...."crap"...for trains... :)
*** Edited 11/28/2006 7:24:50 PM UTC by rollergator***
My understanding from conversations with People Who Know is that the issue of not building trains for coasters that GCII didn't build was all about them exposing themselves to liability for the performance of a ride they did not design and build.
If the client is positioned right and willing to take on that liability themselves, the problem can be solved.
In my opinion, which I have stated before on this forum, there are two basic problems with Son of Beast.
1) Rideability The trains are ergonomically horrible. They were badly designed and then refitted twice to make them even worse. They are also mechanically inadequate to the ride. They are incapable of steering the curves on a ride that is nothing but curves.
The lateral shaking could be fixed by using a train of shorter cars, preferrably trailered with the axles between the cars. The overall length of the train isn't a problem, but each car is too long for its wheelbase. The vertical pounding was a structural issue which has mostly been fixed, but proper seat cushioning would go a long way toward correcting the problem as well.
2) Interest This is where Son of Beast really fails. It features a great big boring helix, followed by the vertical loop, followed by...another great big boring helix. It seems odd, but all the straight drops on the ride are pretty good, but way too much of the ride is eaten up in those miserable helii.
It's sad that this much needed "love" had to happen due to the circumstances, but it is still a good thing for the ride. It's a safe bet SOB will not lose the loop, maybe the large bowl will be altered (instead of diving right on the second hill, it will continue straight then dive into the bowl coming from the other end and maybe continue on to something else headed under the break run and then back onto the brakes) or perhaps, major changes to the layout after the loop... If anyone can save this massive brute it is GCII. *** Edited 11/28/2006 10:56:56 PM UTC by fearandloathing***
Jeff said: I've heard that GCI is actually building trains for existing rides. Nothing certain, and I'm not saying they're building some for this ride, only that I've heard they're no longer turning away that business. (And yeah, I've been saying for ages it would be stupid for them to do so.)
Thats ludicrous to state. and yes they are turning away buisness concentrating on only a couple projects per year.
Now they've expanded, with a office in KY so they can take on more buisness but they will never build seven coasters in a year the way I see it.