Track and supports arrive for Timberland Twister

Posted Monday, January 26, 2004 7:55 AM | Contributed by CoasterCameron

Valleyfair! Online has completed an update containing pictures of the new track ariving daily near the Mall Of America for Timberland Twister. While this progress is being made outside, under the glass canopy of Camp Snoopy ground work, and final prep is moving fast for the start of vertical construction.

Related parks

Monday, January 26, 2004 5:05 PM
Actually, vertical construction has already begun. The tallest two supports were already up Saturday. PM me an email addy Cameron. I'll scan what I've got and send it your way.

I'm guessing the remaining supports should go up pretty quick.

- 'Playa
*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 1/26/2004 5:07:35 PM ***

+0
Monday, January 26, 2004 5:38 PM
i am kind of excited about this new coaster but i still think that the best addition to camp snoopy would be a Schwarzkopf shuttle loop like Greezed Lightnin'@SFKK. I think that the roof hight would be just high enough for the coaster.
+0
Monday, January 26, 2004 11:14 PM
Ok, We've updated the site with pictures taken just a few hours before posting. Lots of progress has been made. You can find the update at http://valleyfair.digital-coaster.com
+0
Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:25 AM
Camp Snoopy's tallest attraction, the Mighty Axe, is about 85' tall and comes fairly close to the roof. The tallest point on a Schwarzkopf shuttle loop is 137'. In other words, Camp Snoopy's ceiling is about 50' too short to house a shuttle loop.

-Nate

+0
Tuesday, January 27, 2004 2:31 PM
There were/are plenty of 80'-90' Schwarzkopf looping coasters around...but that's not the real issue here.

KCS-MOA is not a white-knuckle park, nor will it ever be cuz they don't care to be. A looping coaster wouldn't be a good 'fit' for a park intended to be "where Paw takes the kids while Maw spends cash."

-'Playa

+0
Tuesday, January 27, 2004 11:45 PM
Sure there were shorter Schwarzkopf coasters, but not shuttle loops (as he stated). Plus, those smaller Schwarzkopf coasters were generally carnival-quality (Wildcats & Jet Stars) or took up a lot of space (which KCS is pressed for).

I do not agree with you that a looping coaster would be a bad move for KCS. While it is primarily a family park, the Mighty Axe does well and a looping coaster would, too. Personally, I would add a launched Intamin inverted coaster around the top half of the park (barrel rolls only) would be great, but that's just a fantasy of mine. :)

-Nate

+0
Wednesday, January 28, 2004 8:31 AM
I'm very excited to see how these coasters turn out for Gerstlauer. Could be a great alternative to the Maurer's...not like they need one, but I'm all up for variety!

Joe, who will ride the one going into WoF this year

+0
Wednesday, January 28, 2004 8:50 AM
The Mighty Axe does well how? Are you reading the ridership numbers?

I'm not saying it's a failure by any means--but when is the last time you've seen it loaded to capacity with a queue line stretching halfway across the park?

A response like that would indicate a public that's just gotta stand on their head...but it just ain't happening. Frankly, VF's Mad Mouse almost always has a line while a Looping Starship 50 feet away runs at a fraction of capacity. What do the numbers tell you there?

Furthermore, there's this other issue known as aesthetics. While Edmonton does indeed have an amusement park, MOA's is the centerpiece of the mall. Every visitor to the mall has to stare at it. While you might be tickled pink at the sight of steel riggings and supports, not everyone shares your sense of style.

Have you seen TT? It already looks like it belongs there. It doesn't dominate the area; it blends. People who wanna see a tree-lined place to relax will have one. People who wanna coaster will have one, too. Like I said...good fit.

-'Playa

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 1:40 AM
I say the Mighty Axe does well by the fact that (1) it always has a line when I'm there, and (2) the park keeps it around. For a pay-per-ride park that's so pressed for space, if a ride is losing you money, you cut it out. A ride doesn't have to have a line stretching halfway across the park to be popular (heck, I've never seen a line for any attraction spilling into the midway at KCS). What I do know is that the Mighty Axe always has riders, and always has comparable lines to other park attractions. That's success to me. (Not that I like the ride...I think it's a piece of junk that would be better replaced by an Afterburner, but that's another argument).

VF's Mad Mouse has a line because it's capacity is crap. The Looping Starship has poor capacity too, but it's also a heck of a lot older than Mad Mouse. Plus, coasters generally have longer lines than flats. If you want to compare thrill ride to thrill ride (as this argument started by), why not compare Wild Thing or Steel Venom to VF's mouse and tell me what those numbers say?

As for asthetics, I'm confused about what you're talking about. When did I say KCS should get a scaffold-ridden ride that would stick out? I spoke out *against* the Schwarzkopf rides because I think they look carnival-esque. What makes you think an Intamin inverted, for instance (as was my clearly unrealistic fantasy) would stick out any more than the park's current two coasters? I certainly wouldn't worry about intrusive supports, since Intamin clearly doesn't even prefer to use them.

You don't need to speak to me as if I'm not being industry-minded...I'm about as industry-minded as anyone on this site.

-Nate

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 9:57 AM

What makes you think an Intamin inverted, for instance (as was my clearly unrealistic fantasy) would stick out any more than the park's current two coasters?

You are clearly without clue. Like I said, it blends quite nicely. Why not ask anyone who's actually seen TT?


VF's Mad Mouse has a line because it's capacity is crap.

Says who--you? Your statements hang in thin air with no factual support whatsoever. I happened to attend VF on the last day attendance was close to 30K (late July '01) and you could board Mad Mouse in 20 minutes with the queues overflowing. Arrows quoted capacity is 800 PPH and it could easily handle 600+ with a VF crew. Capacity sucks? How?


The Looping Starship has poor capacity too, but it's also a heck of a lot older than Mad Mouse.

Ohhhhh, so nobody wants to board old rides, huh? I suppose that's why the 25 year-old Gemini is always so popular at CP or why the 32 year-old, very tame CCMR was upgraded to increase its capacity. Matter of fact, why don't we just clap the Coney Island Cyclone over...after all, it's old, right? This is the real world--not RCT!

Now let's get back to the actual issue here. While the four year-old Mad Mouse chugs right along--hardly a novelty at that age--the Looping Starship right next to it will sit dormant or run with only 2 rows occupied. That's 8-10 people. That's equivalent to the Mad Mouse with 2 cars running. On heavy days, it may run half-full tops. Capacity isn't an issue. Ridership is. Period.You see, the CF folks can add and subtract. They know which rides have been a draw and which ones haven't. Why do you think they'll build a hyper before a multilooper? Simple. They believe inversions will turn off a significant segment of the riding audience.

But in the long run, your arguments about a looper or even my telling why you're lost in the woods don't even matter. When TT opens and people run screaming like banshees to get in line, that matters. When kids rush off the ride and right back on--that matters. When folks line up to buy all-day tickets at $20+ a pop or season passes that cost more than VF's--that matters. They couldn't be more dead-on right than with this mouse. Visit the site yourself and try to leave unimpressed. Go on. I dare ya.

-'Playa
*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 1/29/2004 10:01:28 AM ***

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 10:48 AM
"You are clearly without clue. Like I said, it blends quite nicely. Why not ask anyone who's actually seen TT?"

I'm without a clue? When did I say TT didn't blend in? Hell, when did I say I haven't seen it myself? When did I ever say TT was an eyesore, sticks out, etc? The answer is never. If you're going to put words in people's mouths, you look like a fool.

Have you seen what the Intamin coaster would look like? Have you seen whether it would blend in or not? Of course not. Why don't you get a clue?

"Your statements hang in thin air with no factual support whatsoever. I happened to attend VF on the last day attendance was close to 30K (late July '01) and you could board Mad Mouse in 20 minutes with the queues overflowing. Arrows quoted capacity is 800 PPH and it could easily handle 600+ with a VF crew. Capacity sucks? How?"

800pph is manufacturer BS thrown out to potential buyers. VF dispatches their mouse about every 30 seconds, just like most parks with mice do. I know because I've seen it myself more times than I can count. That's 480pph [4 people per car * 120 dispatches per hour (two dispatches each minute)]. That's crap. Even if it did somehow manage to get 600pph (which it does not) it's still crappy capacity in terms of the industry. The fact that you can board in 20 minutes is further proof that capacity is crap; it's hardly the largest queue in the world.

"Ohhhhh, so nobody wants to board old rides, huh? I suppose that's why the 25 year-old Gemini is always so popular at CP or why the 32 year-old, very tame CCMR was upgraded to increase its capacity."

Do you think those rides are as popular as, say, Millennium Force? What about Raptor? Of course not. I've personally never seen a line for Gemini or CCMR, which doesn't really do much for your argument. But note that again, you put words into my mouth. Did I say nobody wants to ride old rides? No. I said old rides are (generally) less popular. There's really no arguing that. Note: I didn't say all old rides, so don't put that in my mouth in your next reply. There are, of course, exceptions to everything. But in general, older rides are less popular. A looping ship is hardly exception-worthy.

"Now let's get back to the actual issue here. While the four year-old Mad Mouse chugs right along--hardly a novelty at that age--the Looping Starship right next to it will sit dormant or run with only 2 rows occupied. That's 8-10 people. That's equivalent to the Mad Mouse with 2 cars running. On heavy days, it may run half-full tops. Capacity isn't an issue. Ridership is. Period."

Oh please. I've been to VF more times than I can count, and waited in lines for the Looping Starship more times than I can count. I've never seen it run with 8-10 people except on the lightest of days. Tell me, on that day where the Mad Mouse queue was full was the Starship really running only half full? If thrill rides aren't the CF thing, explain the Intamin impulse to me. Explain why the last flat ride added was a looping ride. Your arguments don't hold for one second.

"You see, the CF folks can add and subtract. They know which rides have been a draw and which ones haven't. Why do you think they'll build a hyper before a multilooper? Simple. They believe inversions will turn off a significant segment of the riding audience."

And because (1) Morgan hypers were cheaper than the only company CF would work with at the time for loopers (B&M) and because (2) a hypercoaster is a much larger draw than a multi-looper.

"When TT opens and people run screaming like banshees to get in line, that matters. When kids rush off the ride and right back on--that matters. When folks line up to buy all-day tickets at $20+ a pop or season passes that cost more than VF's--that matters. They couldn't be more dead-on right than with this mouse."

Then why did they just add an Intamin impulse and not another family ride? Your argument is ridiculous. You put words in my mouth, and make assumptions about what I say and only succeed in making a fool out of yourself. I never said family rides were bad purchases. Not *once* did I say TT was a bad idea (in fact, I think it's a fantastic addition). But why does adding TT, for instance, mean that KCS can't ever add a thrill ride? Why does saying a thrill ride at KCS mean I'm anti-family ride? Before you reply so quickly, I invite you to give a bit of thought to what I said, and then try to reply without making things up as you go.

-Nate

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 2:39 PM
Heee hee hee hee. Let's compare hot air to reality.


Do you think those rides are as popular as, say, Millennium Force? What about Raptor? Of course not. I've personally never seen a line for Gemini or CCMR, which doesn't really do much for your argument.

And now reality...from the CP website itself.

From the Gemini page:


Built by Arrow Dynamics in 1978, the Gemini is one of the top ride givers among the park's 68 rides and 15 roller coasters every season.
Last year alone, this wooden structure with its sleek steel track gave 2,439,934 rides.

Not just amongst the coasters...among every ride in the park. You'd be surprised how many coasters are surpassed in ridership by the CP&LE Railroad.

And from the Raptor page:


In 2001, Raptor gave 2,171,280 thrilling rides

See, I don't need to call anyone names. I can let the park's own facts speak for themselves. Who's reading skills are a little shaky NOW? And why would I debate point-for-point someone with zero credibility?

And speaking of reading...why don't you check the news item again? This thread isn't your little needs. It's about the new coaster @ KCS-MOA.

Like I said before, CF can add and subtract. They know which rides will be the best fit for which park. Instead of slapping some visually jarring outdoor coaster in an indoor park, they had a real beauty custom-designed that will blend right in with the scenery, interact with the surroundings and is about as close to a Discovery channel-grade coaster you'll see in these parts.

-CO

*** This post was edited by CoastaPlaya 1/29/2004 2:44:32 PM ***

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 4:58 PM
1) Raptor's capacity is half of what Gemini's is. If you don't think that has any effect, you're wrong.

2) When have I ever discussed my "needs" in this thread? I never said I "need" anything. What I said was, "Personally, I would add a launched Intamin inverted coaster around the top half of the par...but that's just a fantasy of mine." Clearly I recognize that it's probably not going to happen. But I do continue to think that thrill rides could - and do - succeed at KCS.

3) When did I suggest CF slap down a "visually jarring outdoor coaster"? Please show me where I said that. From what I can tell, I've been saying the exact opposite.

4) Where did I suggest that Timberland Twister is a bad move? That I'm unhappy with the addition? The answer is, "Nowhere."

-Nate*** This post was edited by coasterdude318 1/29/2004 5:13:52 PM ***

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 5:17 PM
I quoted you, I quoted them. You were WRONG. Period. On a topic any fair-to-middling CoasterDork knows at that.

The "I've been there more times than I can count" was pretty funny too (tho it may not say much for a cheesehead ;)) I happen to live 20 minutes from VF, work a 4-day week and it's been a Friday ritual since my 11 year-old was 3. Now who's eyewitness accounts are more frequent and accurate?

But don't worry. Once you finally do take the four-hour drive up, you'll understand what all the fuss is about. You'll probably forget everything you said about a looper.

-'Playa

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 6:26 PM
FYI, my parents live an hour from VF. I grew up an hour from VF. I visited nearly every weekend for years. But thanks for playing.

Of course, you fail to demonstrate how I was "wrong." You also fail to address any of the issues where you mis-quoted me, put words into my mouth, etc. But I suppose that once you realize you have no case, and that you were wrong, the best thing to do is to not address it at all.

-Nate

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 7:09 PM
Yawn. That was the Hot air vs. reality post. Been there, done that. Take a deep breath, pop a Ritalin, squint reeeally hard and FOCUS.

Of course holding season passes the last seven seasons running have nothing to do with a discussion about a mouse installed in 1999. I've only been making this observation since Preview week that year when the landscaping wasn't quite done. Yeesh.

Lucky KCS, I wasn't the only one making that observation. Spinning mousey, yes. Loopy something, no. Winner? The public, of course.

-CO

+0
Thursday, January 29, 2004 9:52 PM
Again, for the seven hundredth time, I never said a looping coaster should be installed intead of a spinning mouse. Never. You claim your reading comprehension skills are okay, but you seem to have missed that in every single post of mine. "Been there, done that" is right.

Do you think holding a season pass for seven seasons makes you an expert? I, too, held a season pass the year the mouse opened, the year before, and the year after.

This isn't an argument about installing one ride over another, no matter how hard you try to make it about that. It's about installing a particular ride at some point in the future, not necessitating the removal of another attraction. Do you have it all now? If not, would you mind telling me how many times I have to repeat something before you can comprehend it? I don't want to be here all night.

-Nate

+0
Friday, January 30, 2004 2:25 AM
Here's what I read. Anybody else miss it?


coasterdude318 said:

I do not agree with you that a looping coaster would be a bad move for KCS. While it is primarily a family park, the Mighty Axe does well and a looping coaster would, too. Personally, I would add a launched Intamin inverted coaster around the top half of the park (barrel rolls only) would be great,


A launched coaster around the top half of the park. So which laughable, impractical idea does this encompass: A ride so tall it dominates the park's appearance, large enough to engulf encompass half the park or both? See why I described this idea as visually jarring and non-aesthetic?

But thanks for asking me to read this again! Not only would it be ugly, out of place and out of touch, I have one more reason to laugh at it: Noise. Imagine upscale diners on the deck of the California Cafe enjoying those screaming LIMs over and over. Or the folks on the South Food Court, for that matter. Splendid.

-CO

+0
Friday, January 30, 2004 11:19 AM
No, I don't think that's ugly, visually-jarring, and non-asthetic. Do you think the Ripsaw is ugly? Because all that ride does is travel around the top half of the park. Position the launch so that the LIMs are located away from any openings to the mall and it'd be fine.


But hey, I'm not going to argue opinion. You can have your (uninformed) opinion, and I have mine.

-Nate

+0

You must be logged in to post

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