Tricoart

Or, better yet, you could just add 4 more coasters, ‘cause new rides don’t break down & their addition’ll never cause any cascading issues (e.g. spreading staff thinner). Right?

I don’t see why it wouldn’t have been a reason. If they had no current plans for the area, why get rid of it when there could’ve been plans in the future that incorporated elements of the ride? Really don’t get how this became a point of argument tbh, I never said ‘heritage’ is the only reason, as obviously if there’s no reason to demolish something, they more often than not wouldn’t spend the money to do so (cough cough WB Kids hut). Just that it could be a reason for them actively wanting the track to stay standing, keeping 1 old train, and doing minor repairs while its SBNO.

I mean, I don’t see them removing it completely or turning it into something like a walkway instead, partially ‘cause they consider the Monorail heritage. If they needed space that it’s blocking, it’d be cleared no doubt about it.

I think part of the case for the Monorail track & train still remaining is just that they somewhat consider the ride heritage. As a result, I don’t know how keen they’d be to have it completely demolished or turned into something else entirely (especially as it isn’t impeding anything). I think, though I’d like to be wrong, this is just them removing the valuable/operational hardware from the track so they can future-proof keeping it standing.

I don’t think they’d have not reattached them, then

I don’t think they’d have detached the LSMs from the track pieces, but there’s not really any way for us to know if/see that they’re in a functional state ‘til there’s a train on the track.

They’re taking over a year to relocate a ride that takes weeks to construct. The area that’d benefit from the change is on the plot of land of a ride that stood SNBO for years without any explanation. It took them years to demolish a rotting hut in their kids section. Their only thrilling flat ride has been barely operational for ages, and is currently as ‘thrilling’ as the Claw on 50% speed. They’re not exactly known for being forward-thinking, fast, or doing any more than the bare minimum. Thus, though it’s a nice thought and not necessarily ‘unrealistic’, I’d definitely go with ‘unlikely’.

To clarify, by ‘zero car’ I meant a front end that (partially) shields riders & destabilises wind before it hits them. Just seems like it’d be pretty unpleasant to not have that. But the main reason/s it wouldn’t fit’d be track gauges & clearance issues w/ the tophat supports (namely, the downward twist), the ‘zero car’ thing was just a nitpick.

It’s the diagram for their 4-across variant of their ‘Lightning’ train… …the one intended for their SRII competitor, the Double Heart. As for “Food for thought”, I believe he’s suggesting the use of the 4-across variant over the 2-across one that was unveiled alongside the first known accelerator conversion (the train posted by Rivals, black & pink on yellow track) to boost TTD’s capacity. If that was the intention, then entertaining the idea (and disregarding that it’s very unlikely for the track gauges to match), having 120+mph in your face with no zero car sounds like torture for the front row.

Reckon the (only/main) reason that they’d ever replace more hardware than just the launch system (and other smaller, associated things) is if/when either the track or the supports are fatigued enough to warrant their removal/refabrication, and even then I doubt they’d do any layout changes. ‘Cause the existing layout is pretty heavily built into the park, so there’s not really anything extra that a layout change/next-gen remake could utilise, and there’d be a very noticeable void if the ride is just removed entirely come time. Both factors are only made more prevalent with Flash’s existence.

Likely true, but wrong thread. Unless I’m missing extra context, this was about TTD. Assuming I’m not missing context and it was about TTD, though, I don’t think it’d fit the existing track gauge, would it?

They really haven’t given up on this yet? Just got a passholder email about a ‘Leviathan Quest’. Seems to me like it’s ‘CryptoZoo’, but instead of paying for eggs/XP/whatever, you pay for the Key then ride Leviathan.

1. I’m sure the actual law is much more complicated than ‘85 meters’, and takes things like sight lines & sound/sound barriers into account, both of which would be pretty hard to accomodate on a hypercoaster built 130m away from residential area. 2. That plot of land (or, a portion of it) already has detailed plans, with no mention of any additional attractions, let alone a hypercoaster built into a hotel like you’re suggesting (which, by the way, would make the price for said hypercoaster skyrocket). 3. Even if they were able to skirt past the laws & drastically change their plans enough to accommodate what you’re proposing, it’s already been quite clearly outlined in here that an expansion of the park wouldn’t work in that area, as it’d create a massive dead end beginning in Kids WB. 4. Disregarding that also (say they build a massive bridge/transportation ride over the parking lot or whatever, if we’re being unrealistic we may as well go the whole way), following an ejector-focused, out-and-back hypercoaster up with an ejector-focused, out-and-back hypercoaster is clearly not that smart. There are so many more ride models that’d fit MW much better than that. 5. For the last time now, let’s disregard that too & say MW knows much more than we do, and there’s somehow a massive untapped market for a Gold Coast theme park with 2 very similar hypercoasters, all other quarrels don’t exist, and they’re ready to go ahead with your pipe dream project of a Hyperion clone built into a hotel on the opposite side of the park to anything that’s comparable in thrill level. What does SurfRider’s relocation have to do with it anymore?

(Accidental repost ‘cause I took too long editing) Yeah, even if it was completely newly fabricated track (which, it’s pretty clear that it isn’t), I’d still be surprised to hear a $20 million dollar price tag. The coaster itself isn’t even vertical yet & they’ve got their facts completely wrong twice (three times if you include ‘ride within a ride’). Who knows, maybe ‘Movie World’ was a mistake too, and they’ve been meaning to say ‘Sea World’ this whole time.

To be fair to the first commenter, there’s no way that $20 million isn’t a severe over-exaggeration, though, right? Superman itself was around $18 million (adjusted for inflation), and you could feasibly get an SRII with that money, and still have ample left over to add the same calibre of (welcome, but) cheap theming.

Intamin states it has a 27m max height (here), which seems to be the standard height for the ‘Surf Rider’ model according to them. There is an older, 30m tall variant though (here), being what RCDB classifies as a distinct model called the ‘Half Pipe’ (Half Pipe, Surf Rider), with the only discernible differences being some more straight track at both ends, tubes beside the track, and a 2kph faster top speed. So I reckon MW likely just got the two mixed up & pulled the wrong stats, possibly due to wanting to use different terminology than ‘Surf Rider’ for seemingly clear reasons, and evidenced by them mentioning ‘half-pipe track’ in the announcement. And, assuming that Intamin’s measurements are correct, RCDB’s height classifications are just out-of-wack for the 27m Surf Rider models, instead porting the same terminology as the Half Pipes that preceded them (20m Half Pipe, constructed 2 years before SurfRider).

I initially thought the same, as I can’t discern any OTSR’s on the yellow side, but they may be vaguely viewable on the red side. And, even if I’m misinterpreting the restraints on the red side, they still don’t quite match with the new restraint system, let alone the new train design. Note the difference in restraint colour, shape, etc. between the 2 designs, the exposed steel structure underneath the seats, the rounded edges of the board, and the large, black LSM assembly underneath. Then again, it’s just concept art, it could mean nothing.

April 2024, really? There’s gotta be more going on than just a repaint, then, right? No way it takes ‘em over a year just to shuffle it between carparks.

I don’t really care about the text personally, mainly because I didn’t notice it ‘til it was pointed out here by people wanting it changed/removed, but that’s pretty unlikely reasoning. First, its ‘theme’ consists of a couple of questionably-worded signs & some warning tape, it’s not even close to being thematically representative of what ‘very industrial buildings have’. And, even if we imagine for a second that it was, I’d still bet pretty high on “Let’s add a barely noticeable, caps-lock Arial text decal of the ride’s name onto its’ vehicles, as to enhance the industrial theme of our 390ft tall pole” being a brand new thought process.

They’ve also got a bad relationship with the phrase ‘Now Open’

Except B&M were a newly formed, unproven company with proven staff from Giovanola, making a relatively risk-free ride, and RMC were a newly formed, unproven company with proven staff from Arrow/S&S & Silverwood, retrofitting a relatively risk-free ride. Zamperla, on the other hand, is a classic company with nothing to show for growth or improvement (unless if you want to argue for their Lightning model, but like, c’mon), massively changing almost everything about one of the worlds tallest & fastest coasters. Not to say improvement can’t come from a classic company, obvious example of such being Vekoma, but I can’t think of any circumstance where it’s happened so quickly, let alone on such a gargantuan scale, let alone without major issues. Every company has to start somewhere, yes, but starting from the top is a hell of a gamble for both parties, no matter how you look at it.

Update on GD via passholder email, main ‘newsworthy’ thing here is that they’re gonna hold a contest for it.

New Deep Sea Dodgems concept art, via passholder email.

New passholder email states work will commence on the 29th (Monday).

Okay Google, what’s the definition of ‘monopoly’