The question still stands....why would S&S build another 4-D, this time in their back yard, as you said they should? Just trying to get what you're saying, because I don't.
john peck said:
The design is sound.. Six Falgs went the cheap route on many of it's installation costs and wound up paying for it.
Oh please, that's the most ridiculous thing I've read regarding X. The ride is a nightmare in more ways than one. It was essentially a piece of junk with far more than its fair share of problems, and that's exactly how it was delivered to Six Flags from Arrow. The only one to blame for the failure of the ride it Arrow itself.
As for Busch building a 4-D, that's also laughable. As I said in another thread, Busch is perhaps the most cautious company out there. They wrote Arrow (and Arrow products) off a long time ago. Since then, they've discovered B&M and have been so pleased they've stuck with B&M for nearly every single ride purchase. If you're expecting to see more rides at the Busch parks, expect them to be B&M rides.
Disney is in bed with Vekoma, and Universal seems to be in bed with B&M also. Short answer: don't expect another S&S/Arrow 4-D anytime soon.
-Nate
And no, I couldn't have made the same argument about the Arrow suspended....,they built no prototype after the Bat. *** Edited 5/14/2004 5:27:11 AM UTC by Peabody***
#1 - Who's talking about Intamin
#2 - BBW and XLR8 were not prototype ...they were product delivered in exchange of payment, not built at Arrow's expense in their backyard. The Bat was not even the prototype....Arrow constructed the full scale suspended prototype in Utah before they built the Bat.
#3 - "So there!" So there what? Why should S&S build a prototype when no product has been purchased by a park? *** Edited 5/14/2004 5:53:05 AM UTC by Peabody***
#2 Prototypes can be produced at parks Dah.
#3 So they can show the industry on their own terms a working model with the modifcations and design improvements that works properly. Besides there is still an untapped market with this coaster. There is definately need for this type of coaster. It's one of the most innovative coasters ever produced. *** Edited 5/14/2004 5:50:59 AM UTC by Cedar "Counter" Point***
I concede....S&S should spend $10+ million dollars and gamble their entire company on building another 4D prototype in their backyard. I'm sure it's a wise business decision, although I don't remember them teaching that in business school ;) *** Edited 5/14/2004 5:50:59 AM UTC by Peabody***
Which makes more sense:
#1 - Market a ride, someone pays you $20 million for one, then you manufacture it.
or #2 - Build a prototype (of a ride which already exists) that costs a dozen or so million dollars and pray like hell that someone (in a VERY limited market) buys. *** Edited 5/14/2004 5:59:15 AM UTC by Peabody***
As for "prototypes": The word says it all, it is always the first of its kind. Therefore there can only be one (just like "Highlander" ;))
Arrow used to build a small prototype of the suspended-coaster to test it and show potential customers what the ride is all about. Lets forget the fact that they copied every mistake the builders of "Alpenflug" made five years earlier.
The question remains if they could have noticed the impending problems if they had build a bigger test ride.
But since every suspended coaster was custom made for a certain landscape (except the mobile "Alpenflug" and the standardized Vekoma versions) it would have been impossible to fabricate a full scale prototype at the factory.
BBW was not a prototype, it was an evolution of the failed first attempts. There was no need to build a new test ride, since Arrow just finished the ride which was designed and planned by Schwarzkopf, who was forced to abandon the project due to bankruptcy.
XLR8 was actually the first fully functional Arrow suspended, which used an Arrow design with the technical changes adopted from BBW.
Its pretty rare to build a full size proto. I think the first corkscrew incorporated the most of the track from the prototype into the final design. But there was not much more to the actual ride in the first place.
"Revolution" at SFMM used its prototype test track, which was build at the plant in germany in the final ride. It was just a lift, the ramp and the loop followed by a brake run. The ramp and the loop were then shipped to the US and incorporated into the ride.
AFAIK "Hypersonic" consists to a large part of the actual prototype. Of course there are many modifications to the original.
As for the original 4d design: It was much less thrilling than "X". I think they have a better chance to sell a 4d if they find a way to better its performance and reliability. I doubt that a 4d without a vertical drop will raise many eyebrows.
You must be logged in to post