Photoshops / Mock-ups

Ok, after a few hours of hard thinking I had a layout. I made it on Hyper Rails and was about to click the finish track button when the computer went to the main screen. I had forgotten (for the 50th TIME!!) that sometimes when I click on the finish button without saving the coaster, it returns to the main screen and I lose everything I had worked on. So I have nothing to show.:(

I'll do it again......some other time, because I do not want to do it ALL OVER AGAIN!!

*** Edited 8/8/2006 1:50:15 AM UTC by TTD 120mph***

Little Leslie said:
Are you high?

Nope, not me. I don't touch anything but (lots) of alcohol.

*** Edited 8/8/2006 1:54:29 AM UTC by e x i t english***

you better not be making the layout I told you about adam. you know that was top secret, right???

Yeah, this one's different........WAY different!!!:)

well, then you know its wrong, right??

I never said it would be right.;)

djDaemon said:
Okay, so it doesn't have to stop. However, the cost analysis still holds true for BOTH scenarios.

ADDED
Also, what evidence is there that would indicate both a lift and a launch?

*** Edited 8/7/2006 4:20:14 PM UTC by djDaemon***

There's nothing to indicate that the ride will do both, but in this particular case, I do not think it can be ruled out because of economic reasons. CP hasn't installed a new coaster in four years, and this one will obviously be spending a lot of time near the ground. Adding in that they've built this in the summer, and I see this being a relatively cheap coaster. I honestly hope it is, but I can appreciate that CF certainly has the ability to get the money for a dual lift/launch coaster considering that the rest of the ride is pretty cheap as far as steel coasters go.

I guess I just don't understand the thought process that's getting everyone to the two-launch idea. I'm still waiting for someone to point out some evidence.

*crickets chirp*

Keep in mind that I'd very much like to have two launches (and two lunches, for that matter), but I'd also love to have a floorless coaster. But, because there's no evidence of either, I'll just wait patiently for some more developments.

djDaemon said:
I'll just wait patiently for some more developments.

You're one of the good ones. ;)

Hold on now - that doesn't mean I won't argue with people's baseless theories. ;)

how much room dose raptor waste

djDaemon said:
Hold on now - that doesn't mean I won't argue with people's baseless theories. ;)

Come on DJ, don't be ridiculous! At this point, 90% of anything anybody says is a "baseless theory"! There isn't much to base anything on right now, and people are just speculating based on what we can see (which as I said before, isn't much).

Me personally, I was just commenting on the Mock-Up by BGRooDoG, which showed a lift hill, and then a straightaway under it. Assuming he based it off of actual footers on-site, then it's certainly a possibility (now that the shed appears like it's going to be built there as well). There is nothing "baseless" about that!

And for the record, I always get a kick out of people who somehow think that they are better than others who use their imaginations, and speculate about new coasters and what they could be, just because they choose to "wait patiently" and only comment on what's actually known for a fact. Without the people who have imagination, and are always looking at what something could be, rather than only what it currently is; you wouldn't have all the great books, movies, musical works, and yes, innovative coasters that you have today. The world needs "dreamers" to keep changing for the better, and there's nothing wrong with them popping up in coaster enthusiast forums and saying what they think this new ride might be. Let's treat everybody in a respectful manner, regardless of whether we agree with them or not. There, I got that off my chest, and you can take it, or leave it. But I think some people do need to lighten up a little, and let some people have their fun with this.

Keep in mind, this particular thread is all about "speculating" as to the layout of this coaster. It's not like it's a thread titled "Facts about the new coaster". Crikey! :)
*** Edited 8/8/2006 1:44:13 PM UTC by DILinator***

I wasn't being disrespectful, first of all. Secondly, there is a significant difference between what "could" be and what "might" be.

Further, I have no problem with people dreaming up big ideas, and rarely take issue with them. I do take issue to people who repeat completely irrational ideas when they have absolutely no evidence to support them. And your estimate on 90% of the ideas being baseless is probably accurate, unfortunately. That is actually why I've been trying to get people to back up their claims with some sort of evidence. I don't do this simply to give people a hard time, but rather do it so that I may understand where they're coming from and possibly learn a thing or two myself.

And, no, I don't think I'm better than everybody - just better than most people. ;)

djDaemon said:
I wasn't being disrespectful, first of all. Secondly, there is a significant difference between what "could" be and what "might" be.

Further, I have no problem with people dreaming up big ideas, and rarely take issue with them. I do take issue to people who repeat completely irrational ideas when they have absolutely no evidence to support them. And your estimate on 90% of the ideas being baseless is probably accurate, unfortunately. That is actually why I've been trying to get people to back up their claims with some sort of evidence. I don't do this simply to give people a hard time, but rather do it so that I may understand where they're coming from and possibly learn a thing or two myself.

And, no, I don't think I'm better than everybody - just better than most people. ;)

But only a select few knows whats going on, So the majority of people arent going to be able to back up what they say. Its just what they may THINK is giong to happen. and I disagree. 99 percent of what we all say, myself included, is more than likely wrong. I think that the point that the other guy is trying to make, is that there are alot of people who post there ideas, and the ones that have been on the forum longer, always put them down for bringing up their "stupid ideas". And whats so funny about it, is that most of the ones that are scarcastic are the same ones that were put down when they first started posting here. its funny how the "circle of life" life works.

Ok i havent talked in a while and i didnt know where to post this becuase i didnt want to start a new thred. But i was reading my Sports Illustrated and there was this section about Jaws (there a huge type of wave that all the surfers go crazy about), and then they listed stuff about them and it was mentioned (sp), that in Northern Califronia there called Mavericks. I dont know if this means anything, but i thought it might be usefull.

grant2cp,

Wow. Didn't know that one. Something else to think about.

But I think it may be more of a Western theme because of the location.

Gmoney, you're missing the entire point. The only reason I reject ideas is when they are repeated without merit. For instance, the dueling coaster idea was one that I had no problem with when it was first mentioned. I realized that it would be cool, then silently dismissed it since there is no evidence that points toward that. However, when this theory was repeated (often times by the same individuals), I began to as for evidence to their thought, process to no avail. That is when I began "slamming" the idea. The veterans here generally seem to accept any and all relevant and logical ideas that are put forth. However, approximately 0.0000001% of all the "new" ideas have those characteristics, and are therefore dismissed, slammed or ridiculed. If someone presents an idea, regardless of how logical it is, and backs it up with some legitimate proof, no one is going to "slam" that idea.

I think the problem is that every conceivable idea has been mentioned hundreds of times, and seeing the same people bring up the same ideas without any sort of logical reasoning behind them, it gets supremely irritating. I like to keep up on the P2007 threads, but to wade through dozens of "its a dueler" or "its gonna be a 500' terraflopper rocket" stuff repeated over and over and over again, without new evidence, is maddening.
*** Edited 8/8/2006 3:28:14 PM UTC by djDaemon***

Little Leslie said:
Are you high?

Now I too, am laughing my ass off.

Can't we all just get along.

Ok if this coaster is going to be called Maverick, It will most likely have Western Theme to it. But thanks grant2cp for the insight.

Dj, I understand what your saying completely. Like I said there are only about .1% of useful info. everything is speculation, and everything could be right or wrong. I understand that. but unless you have a degree in Roller Coaster Technology (i know thats not a real degree ;) ) no one should trash anyones ideas. But if someone, like you said, says the p2007 is gonna be a "500 Terraflopper-gigga-B&M Hyper coaster", then i hope they have there flame suit on. You get tired of wading through dozens of "Its a dueler" posts. I get tired of wading though " Your an idiot, Shut up, and your wrong" posts.