StR web cam captures Kinzel insanity

The only problem I had with Pilgrim's Plunge was I thought there should be 'something' from the station to the lift. But from the Lift and back to the station it was great.

It's not a CF thing. It may be the State or the manufacturers. Michigan's Adventure has three water rides, one rapids ride, a falls ride and a traditional flume, all of which have lower height requirements than the CP counterparts.

Jeff said:
I like Plunge. I don't think it's pathetic at all. I'm not sure how you can bitch about the height of the splash, seeing as how you can't tell anything about it when riding.

I never said the ride is pathetic...I said the splash is. The ride is just disappointing. ;)

And I can bitch about the height of the splash because the park advertised it as being "45 feet high by 90 feet wide"...and that is how they continued to promote it throughout the entire 2009 season. However, I can easily tell, onride or off, that the splash is no more than 10 feet tall...and I'm guessing management at Holiday World were/are fully aware of this, as well. (In fact, they've since edited the ride's stat page to remove this information.)

Remember though that those stats came from Intamin. Holiday World either asked for or were told that they were getting a ride that was going to create an enormous wall of water, and Intamin absolutely failed to deliver said ride. Sure, PP may be fun, but when one of the ride's key selling points just is absolutely NOT a component of the ride, it's a complete failure on Intamin's part. I'm kind of baffled that they sold another of that type of ride (STR) after PP, though I guess it showing up in a Cedar Fair park makes it mildly less unbelievable...

Jeff said:

You're crossing a line from being a disgruntled former employee to just making moronic accusations.

Just now?

crazy horse said:
Why do you have to get soaked on a water ride anymore? Why can't they build a water ride where you just get a small splash....just enough to cool you down. Not soaked.

I agree with that, I won't ride most rapid rides or splashdown boat rides unless I am already wearing a bathing suit from going to the waterpark like at Dorney. I made the mistake of going on a rapids ride with regular clothes and was still soaked 6 hours later. A log flume normally is fine unless you get hit with water cannons at the end, I'm even willing to ride a regular log flume in the low 40's (Splash Mountain in January, Great Adventure opening weekend)

mlnem4s, exactly how much time did you spend being entertained by the StR webcam?

I agree with the others, it's one thing to express dissatisfaction with the company or its CEO. It's another to make wild accusations to try to prove your point, especially when it's backed up by nothing. It doesn't change anybody's mind one way or the other. But it does make you look like you're way out in left field.

Thats why one of my favorite Shoot the Chutes is at Noah's Ark, because you are always in a bathing suit.

That park also has no glass shield on their bridge, only metal bars, which you need to grip to not be knocked on your $%$ when the wave hits you. Its strong enough to knock the wind out of you.

The thing I don't really get is if Cedar Point insisted on a Intamin log flume, why didn't they go with the reverser log flume? Sure Typhoon Sea Coaster/Skull Mountain at SFA is a POS mechanically, but the second one they did for Blackpool is amazing. It has the backward drop and it can also do other stuff on the drops. Capacity is pretty good too. For claims and publicity, the only "backward flume" in North America sounds good, no?

There is a smaller Pilgrim's Plunge opening this year in Italy.

I believe that Holiday World stopped promoting the big wave as soon as they decided the ride wouldn't make it.

^Its not a matter of deciding but more a matter of the ride simply not making one.

The commercial (both on radio and TV) stating the wave stats ran all the way through the end of August.

Lord Gonchar said:

Jeff said:

You're crossing a line from being a disgruntled former employee to just making moronic accusations.

Just now?

You two crack me up. To use the word disgruntled to describe me would be like using the word ecstatic when describing Falfas' attitude about his termination. I had my time doing what I loved and it is now over. I am very happy to be putting that experience to use at other endeavors, more than I ever knew could be possible. Ironically (sadly?)I see the same thing in a lot of other former industry managers.

Now, if you want to pull the word sarcastic out of your hat to describe my attitude then you might have hit the nail on the head. That I can own up to ;)

...And it's not as though Intamin doesn't know how to build a Shoot-The-Chutes ride that will produce an impressive splash. They did all right with the one at Kings Island (prior to Diamondback the only ride in that park that could deliver actual airtime!) and its various clones including the one at Magic Mountain.

They just completely forgot about how to do stuff, and the result was Pilgrims Plunge...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

I am not here to bash Intamin in any regards, I think most of their rides they make are exceptional, when the all the bugs finally get worked out of them. My Issue that I see all the time where I work is reliablitiy of a computer model saying something will work a certain way, and then after beintg built doesn't deliver. In STR's case this seems to be the issue. Did they get new boats built or just modify the old ones? Either way something obviously isn't working right.

Where I work they order new machines saying they will do something spectacular to help our product become more profitable. When said machine arrives and gets fired up I am the one that has to try and get said machine to deliver on said promises. Sometimes I am able to deliver and sometimes I am not able to deliver on said promise. Either way, it takes alot of time to get the machine up and running, which in turn causes alot of downtime.

My point is, are we reliying to much on computer modeling in all aspects of life, rather then just plain old hard work. I never remember rides of the 70's and 80's having all these issues that the rides of today have. Now, I know alot of it is the technology involved in these rides. But, alot of it seems to be just a plain old engineering screwups. Now, not wanting to bash Intamin, they seem to be the leader of this at their Cedar Point testing and proving grounds.

Computers can be used for good and for, I dunno, not good. A B&M ride owes its smooth lines and precise manufacturing to comprooders, but when you look at how the control systems operate, it's simple. The operation of the trains and the restraints are simple. It's just not complicated.

Now can I appreciate some level of complexity on a ride like Maverick because computers have to fire motors in sequence and what not. That makes sense. But why does a ride like Millennium Force need a bazillion prox switches to operate? That's over-design.

Yeah when you look at a simple Arrow corkscrew, it really isn't fundamentally different than MF. Both are complete circuit coasters with lifts, brake runs, and a station. At the base, they're very alike in how they should run, but why does MF need so many prox sensors?

Arrow may not have had the best design engineering when it came to layouts, but they had decent systems on their coasters, which is why most of them are still running today. Sadly they never made a bigger version of Tennessee Tornado with better restraints.

Jeff, doesn't Maverick have all the prox switches MF has? Maybe even more? I have waited on the station of Maverick and seen operators making people get out of seats and back in quees just to completely reset the system. I know I've read here or somewhere else that Mavie has sensors in the seats. Why do they really need them?

Admittedly, MF does do overlapping blocks to move trains through the stations, which accounts for some of the prox switch madness. (Maverick and Dragster do the same, moving trains in pairs.) But then you see the line of switches just up track of the safety brakes where it comes out of the long brake run, or all the switches used to park the catch car in the station. I mean, really? These sound like compensation for poor mechanical design to me.

So we both agree with the poor mechanical design problems that seem to be (plagueing) the theme park industry lately?

Sorry about the spelling