I know the only time, typically, that they move a coaster is if they are replacing one, or there was an accident.(like the removal of shockwave from SMM to SFAW) Well, I know they didn't add any new coaster at SFAW, and to my knowledge no one was injured...so why does SFAW get the crap end of the stick?
I guess it just pisses me off because I never got to ride it due to it being down.....well that, and I dont understand why they would just up and move a great Shwarzkopf coaster?
well, that and
I don't know if you could call it reliable at SFMW. I was there for two weeks and I never saw it run more than one train, and more often than not, it was down all day. There were a number of times when mechanics had to push a loaded train back into the station.
Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."
mOOSH
Vallejo may have a few hot days here and there, but I doubt it if it ever gets "Texas Hot." It's in the SF Bay Area for God's sake, cool, drizzly and breezy most of the year. I went to the three Six Flags parks in Texas in the Summer of '01, and let me tell you, there is no way that the average summer's day temp in Vallejo could compare with Houston. Not sure if that is the official reason or not, but it seems possible. *** Edited 11/26/2003 6:48:43 PM UTC by Soggy***
Pass da' sizzrup, bro!
Be that as it may, the ride still is wack. Thanks to fellow buzzer (superman) for answering my question why they went to OTSR's. I never know it caused (or was prone to cause) back injuries. The trains are ultra tiny and were obviously not made for OTSR's. I had to do some contortionist manuevers to get inside them. Once inside my head was whacked to oblivion. Since they nuetered the ride they should just use Greased Lightning's trains.
Fate is the path of least resistance.
Yes SFAW got two new attractions, but neither was a coaster. I'm a die hard coaster freak, so if you take a coaster from one of my Texas parks....I expect you to replace it with another coaster.
Guess it just doesnt work that way.
Oh, also...How much does it cost to transport a coaster across the States? If you figure in all of the costs, it just doesn't seem practical.
superman said:I don't know - couldn't it also have something to do with the fact that it was the most G-force pulling (6.5 G) coaster on the planet and they didn't want to get sued by people with spine traumata from the ride?
I don't really think that had much if any to do with the move. Shockwave up at SFOT pulls a little below that has been operating with no problems since 1978.
slowmotion said:Yes SFAW got two new attractions, but neither was a coaster. I'm a die hard coaster freak, so if you take a coaster from one of my Texas parks....I expect you to replace it with another coaster.
Parks aren't catering just to "die hard coaster freaks." Besides, there isn't much to complain about with the swap. Tornado never operated and now they have 2 rides that do. Sounds like a more than fair trade to me. And isn't it the non-coaster rides that help make the lines for the coasters just a little bit shorter?
*** Edited 11/26/2003 7:31:57 PM UTC by The Shy One***
Fate is the path of least resistance.
You already said it yourself, it's a portable coaster.. it's DESIGNED to be moved.
The exit of the fourth loop was altered many times in the first years of operation and together with the retrofitted OTSR the ride was perfectly ridable. It was a wild ride and explored the limits of what the human body can stand. But that´s what made the ride so great and made it almost legendary. (The Crystal Beach Cyclone isn´t so notorious for nothing either).
Note that the ride had this stupid accordeon OTSR which would drop down on you during the ride. You got literally "depressed" by them. But they never caused any headbanging! I don´t know about the new ones, but I heard that they make it difficult to board the train.
I wonder why SF decided to bring the ride to California and to SFMW. If they decided to alter (castrate?) the coaster because people will take their lawyer to californian parks, they could have sent it to SFMexico instead or to Belgium. Those parks and their surroundings are not spoiled by huge multiloopers (and they don´t have flashy B&Ms and Impulses as their neighbours.
Adix said:
"Oh, also...How much does it cost to transport a coaster across the States? If you figure in all of the costs, it just doesn't seem practical."You already said it yourself, it's a portable coaster.. it's DESIGNED to be moved.
Yes, but they laid supports for a more permanent installation...plus, just because the thing was originally portable doesn't mean that it moved itself. My guess on the cost to transport that thing...say using 10 trucks would be somewhere in the ballpark of 6000 dollars. They could have used that to repair the coaster, no? Plus think about the cost of installing it at the new park.
Anyway, pretty useless topic at this point...apparantly if a coaster causes too many problems at a particular park (in Six Flags eyes) they just move it instead of using the money to fix the problems.
You must be logged in to post