Missing Intamin

[The Grape Wizard]

I was sitting on rita the day and me and brookes were saying that one thing Orlando is missing is and Intamin Accelerator, i know they have Hulk and R'N'R but i still think a good intamin would be nice.

Do you agree or disagree? i think its fine for now but in a another couple of years they should get a really good one with an original layout and elements.

 

[Pokemaniac]

Speaking of it, they lack a good Gigacoaster, a P'n'P (or good woodie in general), anything with airtime, a good Standup...

But an accelerator would work. A Teracoaster would be awesome too, anyone with NL who remembers Crazycoaster's Xibalba knows how epic that could potentially be.

 

[Brookes]

I think the thing is in Florida pretty much all the biggest coasters are B&M. There isn't much variation in terms of manufacturer where the big rides are concerned really. Everest and Gwazi are probably the only ones but no Intamin. Of course what is there at the moment is fantastic, but I do think they need like has been said something with airtime instead of just being based on inversions, which most of the coasters in Florida are.

 

[nadroJ]

It seems to me that Intamin are the 'cheap' option for parks that aren't as well off as the Floridian parks but can still pack an amazing punch and also look awesome without much theming.

You can bet that if one of the Orlando parks got an Intamin it'd be seriously well themed.

I'd still prefer a woodie though =]

 

[Ben]

Of course what is there at the moment is fantastic, but I do think they need like has been said something with airtime instead of just being based on inversions, which most of the coasters in Florida are.

Something like that ****ty X Car USF are building? You know, the hideous one? I mean, it doesn't look like it'll actually have any airtime (brake runs aren't famous for force), but, it's along that idea.

I don't really thing an Intamin would fit... They go for B&M or someone they can theme for a reason...

I mean, Toro at the Magic Kingdom? Um...

 

[coasterdude_1]

I can't really see Florida parks ever adding an accelerator for several reasons:

-Reliability: From reports, accelerators seem to be nothing but trouble for a park's maintenance department. TTD, Rita, Stealth, KK and many others had tons of breakdowns in their first years, and these don't seem to ever let up, and Xcelerator- well, that ride seems to be closed at least 3 months a year regardless. Orlando parks with their high visitor numbers (and fierce competition from other parks in the area) can't deal with having rides failing on a semi-regular basis.

-Throughput: Accelerators ~1000pph, B&M get closer to 1500. With the huge visitor numbers in the holidays (and the small number of coasters at each Florida park), it would be ridiculous to pick a ride with such a low capacity. I also can't really see an accelerator with a MCBR happenning... so length would be short.

-Accelerators' heyday is pretty much over- many parks now have either an accelerator or there is a similar thing in other local-ish larger parks. They are losing their marketability- it seems now that most places have some form of launch coaster due to Intamin's 'cheap' solution [the accelerator] opening up the market to even tiny parks like Magica- and Florida has a build ceiling of around 200ft ish so they can't be taller, better, faster etc. Even Intamin has moved on from the accelerator to an extent with the introduction of Blitzcoasters (Maverick, iSpeed).



So yeah, those reasons I feel account at least a large chunk of why Florida parks wouldn't go in for the accelerator. Intamin haven't quite distinguished themselves as the industry leaders yet- sure some of their rides are great- but the rest age badly (Colossus), have awkward, painful restraints (accels), often break down (accels) and only have 2-across seating (low capacity). As a PARK MANAGER, I'd rather have a smooth-as-glass B&M that rarely breaks bown with a large capacity that will stay smooth for a good few years- especially in Floridian parks which are the main focus of Orlando, rather than being a tourist attraction 'if you happen to be in the area.'

 

[10ryansmith]

^ That is what I was thinking. True Central Florida needs a better thrill ride, but an accelerator is not going to pop up anytime soon.

Also, Busch is more than likely going to go with B&M because of there experience wtih them and Disney isn't going to get a large coaster anytime soon. They really only deal with children and that is fine but it makes most of there coasters tame. Everest and R n R are there only thrill coasters and they are rather tame.

Universal is in the process of building/ built H:RRR and that was a drastic move. H:RRR is going into Universal Studious and Islands of Adventure is getting the whole Harry Potter revamp which means that they are going to leave the whole new coaster thing alone for a couple of years.

Florida needs a good woody, something like Thunderhead or Voyage. That would be the best for the parks, accels are so unreliable and the whole pph thing that was mentioned is another thing. True, BGT has Gwazi but, it is years overdue for a retrack and new trains and that was when I rode it last and that was almost three years ago.

 

[marc]

Well Disney built California Screamin' and thats had good reviews, even though a lot of Disney fans say it has nothing to do with Disney.

I still think this type of coaster could fit into Orlando, and if they ever build a new land I think they would get something like this, well I hope they would anyway.

 

[coasterdude_1]

Well Disney built California Screamin' and thats had good reviews, even though a lot of Disney fans say it has nothing to do with Disney.

On the other hand, now DCA is being completely revamped because the management see the entire concept of the old park as flawed and not in-keeping with the Disney values.

I still think this type of coaster could fit into Orlando, and if they ever build a new land I think they would get something like this, well I hope they would anyway.

I point back to my original arguments: without a ridiculous number of block breaks (which are cleverly hidden by the wooden trestling on screamin' the throughput simply wouldn't be good enough- either that of the coaster would be two short.

Orlando theme parks especially also can't take the risk of having a coaster with any downtime either which Intamins are notorious for. They'll stick to the manufacturers that they know. Sorry.

+ Intamin accelerators don't really look the part. Especially next to B&Ms.

And also, on a new note, accelerators are often built to escape the need for a space-consuming lift hill but still want to gain a reasonable amount of height. Coasters in Orlando can't feesably be above 200foot. Thus this also partly negates the need for the accelerator system itself.

Disney already has a launch coaster. So does Universal- they have 2. They wouldn't want another. The area is saturated.

I can't see it happenning. At all.

 

[marc]

California Screamin' has a higher through put than RnR. RnR also has a number of block sections. If a coaster is run properly you should never need to stop at them.

Take a look at Paris they have 2 launched coasters.

Also this does not use the same system as other launched Intamin coasters.

Also the block sections are not well hidden you can see them when on the ride. But how often do you get stopped? well out of 10 rides we got blocked once.

And whilst we were there we saw the ride break down hum 0 times.

Its also the longest coaster in California.

So sorry I dont agree with anything you have said. Have you been on it?

The problem would be theming but with the people they have it could be worked on.

Can you please tell me how many B&M's Disney own, as I count 0.

Also when in Orlando we saw an evac on The Hulk and a number of break downs when we were queuing.

 

[Mark]

Well Disney built California Screamin' and thats had good reviews, even though a lot of Disney fans say it has nothing to do with Disney.

On the other hand, now DCA is being completely revamped because the management see the entire concept of the old park as flawed and not in-keeping with the Disney values.

They may indeed be revamping the park, but I doubt very much you are going to see any Major changes to California Screamin'. They know full well that the ride is a very big success. The concept of the park in general might be flawed, but clearly the concept of paradise pier can't be that bad, otherwise they wouldn't be spending a lot of money enhancing it to feel even more like a pier amusement park. (Basically with added Disney characters)
This in turn does not mean that the coaster itself couldn't be adapted and themed differently to fit into WDW somewhere. They are the masters of making rides fit in, so if they really wanted to, they could!

 

[coasterdude_1]

They may indeed be revamping the park, but I doubt very much you are going to see any Major changes to California Screamin'. They know full well that the ride is a very big success. The concept of the park in general might be flawed, but clearly the concept of paradise pier can't be that bad, otherwise they wouldn't be spending a lot of money enhancing it to feel even more like a pier amusement park. (Basically with added Disney characters

Given the chance again, Disney wouldn't opt for 'paradise pier'- rather than totally rebuilding the park, they're having to work with what they've got to try and get the park closer to the normal notions Disney associate with. Should a new park be built, I cannot see this ride ever being considered by Disney.

I am not suggesting it's a bad ride, but it isn't the usual Disney type thing- yet it is too valuable to simply rip it out, and is now iconic to the park. You need only look at suggested plans / rumours for the area to see that it is a massive fail from Disney's POV- they're removing half the attractions nd doing their best with the ones that remain.

Have you been on it?

Yes, I live in LA for half the year, so I've been on it a fair few times more than you. But it isn't an accelerator. It's powered by LSMs. I was arguing about the reliability and flow of ACCELERATORS which I believe is the focus of this topic. LSMs are more reliable, but the sad fact is that accelerators have a shockingly poor track record.

The Vekoma's Disney run are extensively more reliable.

Can you please tell me how many B&M's Disney own, as I count 0.

I was trying to keep the focus to Orlando (including BGA even though that's in Tampa), where there are ~8 B&Ms.

Also when in Orlando we saw an evac on The Hulk and a number of break downs when we were queuing.

Every coaster breaks down, and even though you may have been wrong place wrong time, I'm sure even you know that accelerators are far less reliable that most B&Ms. Let's look at Thorpe's track record for example: I rarely see NI on the rides unavailable list, where as Stealth seems to be on there almost weekly.

You say Hulk broke down, but in Universal's eyes I can assure you that it's considered a reliability god and rarely fails them even though it's a combination of both B&M and an independant launch system. Personally, I've never seen it not operating, and I've been a fair few times and stayed in-resort.


And, again, 200ft ceiling.

 

[marc]

I was replying to this

"Orlando theme parks especially also can't take the risk of having a coaster with any downtime either which Intamins are notorious for. They'll stick to the manufacturers that they know. Sorry. "

In IoA The Hulk was down for 2 hours.
DD down for hours.
BGA Skeikra was down for god knows how long.
Universal The Mummy was down for hours
Disney Space Mountain and BTM were down for hours at the same time.

Yes rides do break down but Intemins are no worse, apart from accelators which they would avoid probably.

I dont even look at Thorpe as that park is a law to its self

As for California Adventure all they are doing to re theming the rides, only Mailboomer is going and a show thats it.

I also mentioned California Screamin' as this was away from the normal Disney coaster with Vekoma, and you were saying the tend to stick to who they know. Thats what I meant.

 

[The Grape Wizard]

That must be a record :shock:

 

[CMonster]

I've read shorter books.

Man, UC, that was inspiring. If they ever have a "longest poster of the year" award, I would vote for you

 

[Mike T]

2 things:

1) Hollywood Rip Ride Rockit has a theoretical capacity of 1,800 pph

2) Don't confuse FAA requirements with ceiling. Hard Rock Park had a 155 ft ceiling. Florida has rules pertaining to anything constructed over the 200 foot level...

 

[Rob]

Just for the record:

Stealth is run by a park that, on any given day, apparently has half their star lineup down. Odd how its near-clone, Zaturn, never has issues

Lets just point out that Stealth is rarely broken down due techanical issues. Usually its the fact that it can't quite make it over the top hat. Yes, 2 of the trains seem to run a little slower but there are multiple potential causes.

This off season it had major work done on its motor replacing large parts of it, and after that work was completed it has yet to break down for any significant length of time.

Thorpe's reliability really isn't that bad, lets not forget that Thorpe hasn't had a single ride down for atlest the last 2 or 3 weeks. Thats not bad, and many parks will probably struggle to attain such a long period.

The main reason, as I've said before for Thorpe's bad reputation is the fact there's some member of CF on park on almost any given day, and there ride availability is published online, meaning when something is broken, the world knows about it. Compare this with say Alton, people don't visit as regularly, and there is no ride list published by them. When I visit I often find atleast one ride down, usually Submission, yet because this ride isn't half decent, no one actually cares.

Then, Alton's big 4 that people would really care about missing are obvious. Thorpe is generally considored to have a big 8 or 9. It's easier to keep 3 coasters renown for good reliability, and one accelerator open, than several coasters and flats that are in several cases prototypes and select ones which have been poorly made.

But back to the point, I rarely find Stealth down due to issues of a mechanical nature, and it certainly is no worse than Rita, which also isn't too bad for reliability.

To bring it back on topic, even two of the accelerators considored to have bad reliabiltity, arn't actually that bad at all.

 

[marc]

Rob you have covered Stealth, what about everything else in the park then

Anyway there is another topic for this.