Top Thrill Dragster 2022 Status
I continue to remain somewhat skeptical Zamperla is doing this entire project.
I mean, I get the trains issue, and the LSM conversion, which they are doing for the Italy-to-Vancouver coaster.
But, wow, would CP really gamble on a project of this apparent size and dimension with Zamperla - they haven't done anything remotely as big and costly as this?
I can’t shake the thought that Intamin is involved. Even though CF and Intamin haven’t been on great terms for a while, I can’t see CF staying away from a world-class manufacturer forever. What better way to restart the relationship than reimagining one of the most notable coasters Intamin ever built for CF?
But I was also firmly on Team No Spike until the lagoon maintenance project took shape. So what do I know?
Well for one, it was notable...notable for nearly all the wrong reasons; quite literally from day one until the final launch.
Now I haven't a clue as to who is behind the scenes (although Zamperla makes sense to me for more than one reason), but I can't imagine anything more gratifying than Cedar Point washing away Intamin's identity from this attraction.
Promoter of fog.
veritas55:
I continue to remain somewhat skeptical Zamperla is doing this entire project.
Same. I think Intamin is handling.
I also think the notion that CF has large vendettas against manufacturers that will almost all but prevent them from ever working together again is blown out of proportion. Sure, Intamin brought headaches to a handful of CF parks, but they did it because the parks signed on the dotted line to go in for ride experiences that pushed boundaries. I'm by no means saying TTD wasn't frustrating and costly, but at the same time, that's the risk you take asking someone to create a system that's expected to launch 30,000lbs to 120mph in the blink of an eye every 45 seconds for 10 straight hours a day. I think expectations need to be in check a bit when it comes to things like this.
There are very few manufacturers that can hang their hat on being blemish free, and those that can generally don't have deliver ride experiences that get mentioned in this community (yes, I know B&M is an exception with their hyper and giga offering - but they are not attempting a project like this). I personally am not ruling out Intamin and Cedar Point coming back together for this one, or something else in the future when the need arises.
I get what you’re saying. But when a company agrees to build something, the manufacturer they go with are who they trust to make it a reliable product.
Cedar Fair: “We want to go bigger and faster”
Intamin: “How about 420ft at 120mph. BUT you need to have an expectation that this ride will go down for mechanical reasons a lot for years to come”
Cedar Fair: “SOLD!”
A small part of me does hold out hope that it will be Intamin. Selfishly, all I care about is that the launch is forceful, the ride is more reliable, and it is safe for everybody.
Has there been a lot of serious down time or incidents on Kingda Ka?
As for Cedar Fair, let’s not forget Knott’s and the problems with Xcelerator, some of which could have been deadly. Then there was Perilous Plunge, which actually was deadly. There’s also another major park, and enthusiast favorite that reportedly will never, ever ever work with Intamin again after a disastrous installation that eventually resulted in removal.
If it was up to me, I’m not sure I’d tap Zamperla on the shoulder (even this little mouse is having its share of issues), but I know I’d stay true to my word on Intamin.
High Flyer:
Intamin ...a world-class manufacturer...
According to who?
Speed104:
Sure, Intamin brought headaches to a handful of CF parks, but they did it because the parks signed on the dotted line to go in for ride experiences that pushed boundaries. I'm by no means saying TTD wasn't frustrating and costly, but at the same time, that's the risk you take...
If Intamin wasn't confident that they could build reliable versions of their own products, they shouldn't have agreed to build them. If Intamin was confident that they could build reliable versions of their own products, they are self-deluded, terrible engineers, because they couldn't build reliable versions of their own products.
There are very few manufacturers that can hang their hat on being blemish free...
I wouldn't consider the fact that TTD had excessive downtime in its debut year, has injured numerous guests, one of them to a horrific degree, nearly injured others, a "blemish". I also wouldn't consider StR, a water ride that had boats that couldn't float and barely moved, and almost killed several passengers, a "blemish". Nor would I consider people who were injured or killed on Ride of Steel Darien Lake and SFNE, Perilous Plunge, Xcelerator, among others, as "blemishes". And this isn't even a comprehensive list of the issues parks have dealt with as a result of working with Intamin.
Brandon
djDaemon:
I wouldn't consider the fact that TTD had excessive downtime in its debut year, has injured numerous guests, one of them to a horrific degree, nearly injured others, a "blemish". I also wouldn't consider StR, a water ride that had boats that couldn't float and barely moved, and almost killed several passengers, a "blemish". Nor would I consider people who were injured or killed on Ride of Steel Darien Lake and SFNE, Perilous Plunge, Xcelerator, among others, as "blemishes". And this isn't even a comprehensive list of the issues parks have dealt with as a result of working with Intamin.
Firm but fair stance.
Out of curiosity because that’s heavily related to safety, and I promise this is not a “gotcha” question, do you ride Intamin rides when visiting parks?
djDaemon:
they are self-deluded, terrible engineers
Easy for someone who isn't an engineer to say.
Literally and figuratively, there are so many moving pieces when it comes to designing and building roller coasters - especially something that hasn't been done before. The same could be said for all sorts of complex machines.
Without a limitless budget, an army of people, and no deadlines, it is virtually impossible to get something 100% right in its first iteration that goes to market. Given the appropriate means, engineers will get things damn near perfect by time something is released. However, there are typically a number of non-engineering factors that can and do get in the way. It's far more likely that things were overpromised by other arms of Intamin than their engineering department and the engineers were forced to do the best they could working inside the proverbial box they were placed inside of.
Speed104:
...do you ride Intamin rides when visiting parks?
Yes, because I trust Cedar Fair to maintain their rides. Had the park, as one example, reopened StR without alterations following the capsized boat incident, I might not be so trusting. But they did what seems to have been the right thing by removing the death trap dud.
MichaelB:
Easy for someone who isn't an engineer to say.
Even easier for someone who is an engineer. :-)
It's far more likely that things were overpromised by other arms of Intamin than their engineering department and the engineers were forced to do the best they could...
Maybe, but so what? If it was, as you seem to posit, the sales team at Intamin that sold CP on the idea of TTD without the buy-in of the engineering team, why would things be any different this time around?
Brandon
Speed104:
B&M is an exception
Hmmm. B&M and CF seem to have a pretty good working relationship. Anyone think there is any chance they could be the ones working this for CP?
Separate from the debate above, I was pondering something interesting last night. If theoretically Intamin was contracted for the renovation, and the spike comes to fruition, AND the top hat remains as is, what track style is implemented for the spike? Do they use their modern track design and Frankenstein it with the box track, or do they re-introduce the box track for the spike?
I would imagine they'd use the latest track designs, assuming it's an improvement over the original design.
Brandon
Acknowledging that CP has had a bad track record in terms of Intamin's reliability, it's not a fair statement that they're incapable of making them. Hagrid, Cheetah Hunt, Gringott's, and Velocicoaster all operate the entire year in Florida, and they generate extremely high throughput. You could argue that these are newer rides than all of CP's Intamins, which could be the result of improvements on Intamin's engineering team/processes. But that's just more credence to consider them for updating a premiere attraction at your park, which they originally developed.
384 MF laps
Smoking Area Drone Pilot
From my understanding, Hagrid’s is a mechanical nightmare. But what wouldn’t be when a company agrees to seven launches? Velocicoaster is a big hit for sure, but at what cost?
Dvo:
...could be the result of improvements on Intamin's engineering team/processes. But that's just more credence to consider them for updating a premiere attraction at your park...
"Intamin - Now Less Bad than Ever!" does have a certain ring to it. ;-)
Kidding aside, I'm not arguing that Intamin is incapable of making a reliable and safe product, because that is clearly not the case. I just think it's important to clarify that the issues Intamin has had over the years aren't mere technological "blemishes", and that's especially true when it comes to their history with CF.
Brandon
The "Intamin is a team of hacks and their rides are unreliable" story is far over-blown.
They are a world-class ride (and coaster) manufacturer, and they have installed tons of highly successful, creative and interesting rides. If they weren't, little companies like Universal wouldn't hire them to build enormous rides, like the incredibly well-received (and highly reliable) Velocicoaster. Millennium Force remains the most popular ride -- by far -- at CP and has been mostly problem free. Maverick is incredibly popular too, and, yes the heartline roll was a mess, but its been a stable ride for them despite its complexity. We could list a ton of others that have been successful and problem free. And when their rides hit: they hit big. And that's why parks around the world still use them.
This is not to say they have not had some significant hiccups, especially when pushing the boundaries, like Maverick, TTD, Hagrids, the plunge ride at Holiday World. Shoot the Rapids was an unmitigated disaster. The wooden prefabs may be a disaster, but again, I question whether park maintenance (or lack thereof) is the bigger factor.
But some of the accidents mentioned aren't fairly placed at Intamin's door step. The riders that fell from the Superman coasters and Perilous Plunge were not properly secured by park employees and had body types that should not have allowed them to ride - including one person with two prosethetic legs. That's on Intamin? The piece of metal that flew off TTD nearly 20 years after the ride was manufactured -- that's on Intamin and not park maintenance catching metal fatigue?
Other manufacturers have had similar challenges, especially when pushing boundaries. Did we forget Arrow and the Bat disaster? Or Arrow needing to repeatedly reprofile the Magnum pretzel loop (or two out of three Six Flags parks completely demolishing their massive Arrow mega loopers built in the late 1980s long before their normal shelf life?) The X coaster at magic mountain? Or Vekomas giant boomerang disasters? Or RMC with Ligthning Rod and Steel Vengeance and others? Son of Beast?
Most of these rides share a common theme: when you go to a place that's somewhat "new" in coasters, an outer boundary, the early versions have struggles, regardless of manufacturer. The one exception, and standout, is of course B&M. Most of their rides are superbly engineered, but they also benefit from not pushing outer parameters as much. The one major exception is their inverted coaster: that was a bold design, flawlessly executed, and has run like a dream.
I fully concede B&M is the gold standard. But Intamin is the silver, maybe bronze range. Not pewter.
Closed topic.