Worlds of Fun Construction

Caves and tunnels? Mine Ride?

---

Brian Raymond said:
Thunderhead was definitely built on some hilly terrain.
why couldn't GCI build another on hilly terrain?

---

---

Acoustic Viscosity said:Also, why does the land have to be flattened to make a woodie?

---

---

Jason Hammond said:
I find it difficult to see the extent of the grade change, from an Ariel shot. The fact remains that there are plenty of coasters are built on hilly terrain.

---

---

Neuski said:
You're only basing this on the fact that it would be less work than a wooden coaster?

---

I'll answer all 4 of you at once since you all seem to be on the same page. GCI, who is the wooden coaster firm that Cedar Fair has been using here as of late uses concrete slabs under their coasters. While Thunderhead was build on a hilly terrain, it was constructed before the new technique was implemented.

Since then, every GCI wooden coaster has been built on a flat terrain (or one that was forced to be flat) and on concrete slabs. The area where all of the flags are located would be quite difficult to make flat to accomodate the concrete slabs, thus why several of us, so far, have ruled out the wooden coaster.

---

Acoustic Viscosity said:
Caves and tunnels?

---

The park is built on top of a series of caves and tunnels owned by Hunt Midwest Enterprises, the former owner of the park. *** Edited 4/14/2008 12:38:51 AM UTC by iWoF***

So which is it, just to clarify - GCI has built several recent coasters on flat terrain using concrete slabs instead of individual footers, hence a. they no longer have the ability to build a coaster on hilly terrain or b. they no longer have the will to build on hilly terrain.

I mean I have no idea what they're building but there's really big problems with either theory...

Since when does terrain dictate if a coaster is wood or steel? If a park is willing to pay GCI to build a coaster on hilly terrain I'd be willing to bet they will...they've shown they can.

I thought that GCI's big concrete slabs were just a preference thing ... was well as a monetary consideration.

I'm sure if a park paid for it, they'd build on a hill or whatever.

Many people seem to think that the GCI isn't coming to WoF anymore, anyway.

Mike

^^^matt. it's more of a if you build something one single foundation the theory is that it will not settle as bad -- at least that was the reasoning we've been given on why they are using the slabs now... think of it the same way you would build a house.

While I have no doubt that they COULD build it on a hilly terrain, I have problems accepting that CF would pay EXTRA to build a woodie, which has more complex structuring then a steel coaster, on a hilly terrain. The added costs that would be there is just something that I cannot see CF doing. That's what I am getting at. Not that they COULDN'T do it, more of they WOULDN'T do it.

Seriously. Where would the ROI be for the added cost of building a woodie on a rough terrain when you could build it cheaper on the flatter plot of land that OE used to sit on... with a steel coaster you do not have to have all the additional supports, if the terrain drops down some, you build that particular support longer.

^It would probably still be cheaper than building a steel coaster.

Here is my suggestion... a terrain GCI with the best of Zambezi Zinger's elements, namely the spiral drops into the ravine and awesome curved underground tunnel finale. The woodie can be more thrilling than Zinger was since they've got Spinning Dragons to take care of that "level" of thrills, yet they can fill the void left by removing that wonderful twisty green machine. And WoF could once again have a killer woodie since it doesn't seem Timber Wolf will ever be able to run like new again. And the best part is it will cost a fraction of a gimmicky steel coaster with a short layout.

I really hope they make something great. I would love to be drawn to that park again, especially now that I can't just drive down from Des Moines anymore. ;) *** Edited 4/14/2008 2:48:25 AM UTC by Acoustic Viscosity***

Timber Wolf has actually seen sizable improvements over the last couple of years. Each off season has seen it's fair share of work and it's certainly noticeable.

I would also like to add that the Orient lot is also far from flat. The only thing that would make building in it cheaper is the existing house and the lack of trees.

I kinda hope they build another red steel looper in OE's lot, but I'm a nostalgic WoF fanboy at heart. I think that is much more likely than a new green Anton. ;)

Timber Wolf is improving, no doubt. I just don't think it's feasible to fully rejuvenate it without rebuilding it from scratch with a sturdier structure, but I hope they prove me wrong. I would love to eat that crow!

Jason, it is true that the Orient lot is not flat, but you have to admit that the terrain is a lot easier to work with then the Possum Trot lot.

AVMatt, I would love to have Zinger come back but that will never happen :( Truth be told I miss EXT too. Timberwolf was running very solid today. I got two rides on it, one in the front and one in the tail. The pin-balling seemed none-existant this year. There was some up and down jostling, but it ran a lot more like a quality woodie today... still not to '89 wolf standards, but we're getting closer.

Honestly I cannot believe we are fighting over what type of coaster it is going to be -- we really should just be happy we are going to get one. period.

No one is fighting. You'e just assuming too much.

More photos of the flags have surfaced...

http://www.midwestinfoguide.com/worlds/2009/041408/

The amount of flags out by Possum Trot is astounding.

---

Acoustic Viscosity said:And while we're at it, why can't it be Zamperla or anyone else?

---

As long as it isn't Hopkins... ;)

Ouch. Seriously. :)

^One OD Hopkins in the midwest is more than enough... seriously wtf is up with the bunny hops to the lift hill on Dragon?

Good evening everyone. Back from a fun filled day at Worlds of Fun. The area in question will be home to more than one project. I was told that actual construction in these area will not occur for awhile, yet the surveying needed to get done so that "other things" could occur.

---

iWoF said:
Seriously. Where would the ROI be for the added cost of building a woodie on a rough terrain when you could build it cheaper on the flatter plot of land that OE used to sit on...

---

I would still like to preface this by saying I have no sort of idea what WoF is building. Based on the sheer size of the site I'm not surprised that we're looking at more then just a single attraction.

That being said, if there is no ROI for building a woodie on rough terrain then why would there be for a steel coaster? You've said yourself that there is plenty of flat land that they could use, so why even consider the more hilly stuff in the first place no matter what they are building?

The thought process is mind boggling to me even when we DO assume there's no ROI for building a terrain woodie. I mean I wonder what the folks at KI, Kennywood, Holiday World, and several others would have to say about that. Not to mention that CF themselves may be building a steel coaster withing some VERY aggressive terrain in 2009, and KI ain't exactly hurting for flat space either... *** Edited 4/14/2008 1:01:35 PM UTC by matt.***

---

iWoF said:

While I have no doubt that they COULD build it on a hilly terrain, I have problems accepting that CF would pay EXTRA to build a woodie, which has more complex structuring then a steel coaster, on a hilly terrain. The added costs that would be there is just something that I cannot see CF doing. That's what I am getting at. Not that they COULDN'T do it, more of they WOULDN'T do it.

Seriously. Where would the ROI be for the added cost of building a woodie on a rough terrain when you could build it cheaper on the flatter plot of land that OE used to sit on...

---

Uhhhh...of course you ARE aware of this, right?

1) VF actually had to do a bit of wetlands replacement to build Renegade

2) The slabs aren't all flat. Here. Take a look.

3) The project--and every other 2007 cap ex project--still came in at $7 million

I don't claim to know what WoF's building, but the 'flat land' argument proves nothing.

-'Playa

---

Acoustic Viscosity said:Timber Wolf is improving, no doubt. I just don't think it's feasible to fully rejuvenate it without rebuilding it from scratch with a sturdier structure, but I hope they prove me wrong. I would love to eat that crow!

---

The refurb is right around 3 years old and the first 2 were pretty much just structural. There's new cross bracing all over the place.

See, in the olden days of the 20's, terrain was used to help keep costs down. Since terrain can easily be used to minimize needed support structure, I can't see building on hilly land would NECESSARILY cost more. There's more engineering work needed to be sure. But that should theoretically be offset, at least in part, by reduced construction time and support structure costs.

Of course, something like BoulderDash is another story altogether...that's not what I'd call hilly, though, that's "mountainous" terrain.