S&S Power ownership shifts from investors to founders

Posted Saturday, August 26, 2006 12:44 AM | Contributed by Kathy Archer

S&S Power, Inc. marketing manager Kathy Archer says the company has announced that Stan Checketts and Gene Mulvihill, an original founding partner of S&S, have formed a group that has purchased controlling interest of the company. The negotiation of this purchase took several months. S&S has been owned since 1998 by Crates Thompson Capital of Fort Worth, Texas, and Checketts, each holding 50% of the stock of the company.

S&S will announce several projects that are underway with major parks that are purchasing rides to open in 2007.

Checketts will be Chief Executive Officer of the company. Checketts also announced that the business operations of S&S will remain under the direction of Rich Allen, who will continue in his role as Chief Operating Officer.

Saturday, August 26, 2006 9:22 AM
Now it's important that S&S keep those innovative rides coming.

Meanwhile, what is going to happen to Huss? They have so many great flat rides and we would miss them if their rides can no longer be maintained easily.

+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 9:59 AM
Bah; overengineered, unnecessarily complex, ugly, unreliable, poorly executed one-and-done thrill pieces of crap. S&S boo.

(yes, I’m bitter)

I agree on Huss though ... Huss rocks.

+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 11:35 AM
I wouldn't exactly call newer Huss rides wonders of simplicity (or reliability) either.
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 11:48 AM
I think the design of the drop towers is brilliant and simple. They're reliable and it's nearly impossible to kill someone on those rides. The swings are nearly the same mechanism, though the restraint system is needlessly complex.
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 1:27 PM
^What is so complex about the restraint system? You rotate it, then you push. It is by far the best lap bar system Ive seen that is able to make sure everyone has their restraint secured directly on their thighs.
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:14 PM
Yes, but they're controlled through a wireless computer. If they get wet they have to shut down the ride. I agree without the computer glitches they're probably the best restraints on the market, designed to hold a child as short as 42". And why do the CF swing have those stupid black belts on the bars?
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:48 PM
Just 'cause...

"contributed by Kathy Archer....S&S Power, Inc. marketing manager"

Further prrof that Uncle Stan loves us...as if the rides weren't proof enough...

Thanks Kathy, thanks Stan, we <3 S&S... :)

+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 2:53 PM
Yeah, have you seen the electronics under the seat on those things? Why do you need all of that? The design itself isn't bad, but the electronics monitoring it seem like a bit much, and I'm not convinced they actually buy you anything in terms of safety.
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 8:17 PM
It's so ridiculous. They had to evacuate me off of Powderkeg, when it was sitting on the launch track because it was raining and the computer shut it down. Why can't they just get normal mechanisims to lock and unlock the restraints? The swings I can see how it might be beneficial to have it wireless, but on a coaster, come on!
+0
Saturday, August 26, 2006 9:37 PM
Sorry I wasnt aware of the wireless issues and I agree they're stupid.
*** This post was edited by Touchdown 8/26/2006 9:44:23 PM ***
+0
Sunday, August 27, 2006 11:34 AM
The physical design on the new restraints is awesome. Comfortable but secure. The relability of the CONTROLS is another story, though.
+0
Sunday, August 27, 2006 12:50 PM
Just wondering...are these "wireless computer" hookups related in some way to the wireless headsets/microphone set-ups (like at KW and Knott's) that allow the ride ops to serve as *carnival-style barjers*. Cause frankly, that kind of stuff is best left to side-shows and Coney Island... ;)
+0
Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:59 PM
Believe it or not, they *may* have a good idea with the restraint system setup on the swings. Just because it is a computer does not necessarily mean bad. In recent years a few states have been requiring some sort of electronic monitoring on seats for certain types of rides. So if you may have to havce it anyways, why not design it in.

The advantages to using a processor onboard is you are cutting down on the number of wires heading back through some sort of slipring or other brush connection. Also you can identify the seat that is still unlocked much easier than if you would try something like daisy chaining the signal through every seat. Lastly if it IS wireless, you now eliminate using a slipring or brushes which do wear somewhat easily, and wireless communication has come a long ways. And no, its not like wireless microphones. The downside is it still is new technology though, and reliability is not certain.

The bottom line is given new regulations and changing technology, which IS the best way to go? The question is not as easy as it sounds.

-Brian*** This post was edited by Wolfhound 8/27/2006 2:59:59 PM ***

+0

You must be logged in to post

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