Pantherian

[rswashdc]

Try and find me another coaster out there in the world like Intimidator 305 that's an actual detriment to the park it operates in.

Grizzly tries to break my ribs and Anaconda snap my neck, so the occasional tunnel vision on I305 isn’t much of an issue (personally I find Verbolten way worse for graying out).

Most every park has something that a subset of guests don’t like, but I couldn’t imagine KD‘s situation if it didn’t have I305, as I’m not sure Twisted Timber’s by itself would draw thrill seekers.

 

[Jonesta6]

Grizzly tries to break my ribs and Anaconda snap my neck, so the occasional tunnel vision on I305 isn’t much of an issue (personally I find Verbolten way worse for graying out).

Most every park has something that a subset of guests don’t like, but I couldn’t imagine KD‘s situation if it didn’t have I305, as I’m not sure Twisted Timber’s by itself would draw thrill seekers.

I don't see KD as geared for the thrill seeking audience as they were when I305 opened - perhaps because they didn't see the rise in park attendance with the coaster they figured the capex for new rides would be best spent mostly elsewhere.

To be fair, though, the entrance is at a dead-end at that may be a little confusing for guests that aren't regularly visiting, or that KD as a whole hasn't been a main destination park over BGW in the area, and definitely not over CW or SFGadv (not sure about Hershey or KW).

 

[rswashdc]

I don't see KD as geared for the thrill seeking audience as they were when I305 opened - perhaps because they didn't see the rise in park attendance with the coaster they figured the capex for new rides would be best spent mostly elsewhere.

To be fair, though, the entrance is at a dead-end at that may be a little confusing for guests that aren't regularly visiting, or that KD as a whole hasn't been a main destination park over BGW in the area, and definitely not over CW or SFGadv (not sure about Hershey or KW).

When I305 opened they had a decent lineup already in a pretty well rounded park overall, so it's a bit of diminishing returns. However now with all the rides they've had to take out, not having a ride such as I305 would be problematic. They'd be heavily dependent on events to drive attendance which would be challenging in spring/summer.

 

[Jonesta6]

Maybe so, @rswashdc, but if you've noticed they've been doing an incredible job ramping up live performances, culinary operations, and presenting a much stronger appeal for family friendly experiences in the last few years. Coconut Shores and Planet Snoopy, anyone?

While the average guest probably doesn't know or care about such things, a lot of their high thrill rides that have been removed were just remnants of Paramount's poor stewardship - so if I305 was a way to test the waters for replacing those attractions that were to be scrapped (I'm guessing replacing Volcano was already under consideration but one of those 5-10 year plans), it didn't do much so CF likely didn't feel the need to provide the funds necessary to build the replacements... Which bit them when their previous end of service life estimates were incorrect and those rides were removed earlier than planned.

 

[Zachary]

The reprofiling of the turn definitely helps handle the forces. As the train rises, it loses speed and the force decreases slightly. With the original layout, the whole turn was at full speed, and that left you still at ground level, so it took even more positives to get you rising, continuing at full force halfway up the hill. Of course if the wheels can feel the difference, so can you.

I'm not saying there isn't a measurable difference in positive Gs—in fact I'm sure there is—I'm just saying that the perceived difference of the turn's effects on riders seems to be miniscule.

From what I understand, gray-outs on i305's first turn are less a result of the exact intensity of the positive Gs experienced and far more of a result of the length of time the positive Gs are maintained. The turn modifications definitely lessen the length of time the absolute maximum positive Gs are experienced throughout the first turn, but the modifications also extend the amount of time in which riders are experiencing very high, sustained positive G-forces. If the wheels were melting due more to the absolute maximum Gs vs the time under which they're experiencing significant Gs, it seems totally reasonable to me that the turn modifications could have helped fix the wheel problems while also resulting in very little perceivable difference in the coaster's ability to rob your brain of oxygen.

 

[EdK]

Grizzly tries to break my ribs and Anaconda snap my neck, so the occasional tunnel vision on I305 isn’t much of an issue (personally I find Verbolten way worse for graying out).

Most every park has something that a subset of guests don’t like, but I couldn’t imagine KD‘s situation if it didn’t have I305, as I’m not sure Twisted Timber’s by itself would draw thrill seekers.

I stopped going to KD around 1999/2000 (I'll never forgive Paramount for mowing the trees around Grizzly for Hurler amongst other injuries done to the park) and the only thing that brought me back to the park was Twisted Timbers - I'm a sucker for RMC coasters. When they built I305 I just wasn't interested but I'm also not a big fan of Millennium Force. I305 has grown on me and it's starting to become one of my favorite coasters and IMHO it's way better than Millennium Force. I was pleasantly surprised to see how CF has tried to bring the park back to it's 80's glory. The singing mushrooms and nice beer selection sealed the deal and KD is now a regular stop on the way home from BGW.

 

[rswashdc]

Maybe so, @rswashdc, but if you've noticed they've been doing an incredible job ramping up live performances, culinary operations, and presenting a much stronger appeal for family friendly experiences in the last few years. Coconut Shores and Planet Snoopy, anyone?

While the average guest probably doesn't know or care about such things, a lot of their high thrill rides that have been removed were just remnants of Paramount's poor stewardship - so if I305 was a way to test the waters for replacing those attractions that were to be scrapped (I'm guessing replacing Volcano was already under consideration but one of those 5-10 year plans), it didn't do much so CF likely didn't feel the need to provide the funds necessary to build the replacements... Which bit them when their previous end of service life estimates were incorrect and those rides were removed earlier than planned.

I definitely agree that they are on the right path in terms of in park experience, but a balance of rides is going to be needed as a draw.

Imagine an alternate history, where I305 isn’t built or they build something more moderate - e.g. a wing coaster. Come 2018, they have to shut down Volcano, but are just starting to look at expanding events, they have limited thrill draws to keep their baseline customers coming in. I could see Twisted Timber’s almost being a non-factor in that scenario and the park really struggling to come up with an identity. Love or hate I305, it puts the park on the map in ways their other rides (sans Volcano) really don’t.

 

[bill s]

^^-- Yeah "identity" is a good word.

A lot of people seem to be saying I305 did nothing for the park. Certainly that isn't true compared to adding nothing until 2018. So that would have to be relative to something else instead. And yet who would say Carowinds got the better coaster in 2010? Or even that Fury would have been all it was without I305 happening first?

I'm not saying there isn't a measurable difference in positive Gs—in fact I'm sure there is—I'm just saying that the perceived difference of the turn's effects on riders seems to be miniscule.

From what I understand, gray-outs on i305's first turn are less a result of the exact intensity of the positive Gs experienced and far more of a result of the length of time the positive Gs are maintained. The turn modifications definitely lessen the length of time the absolute maximum positive Gs are experienced throughout the first turn, but the modifications also extend the amount of time in which riders are experiencing very high, sustained positive G-forces. If the wheels were melting due more to the absolute maximum Gs vs the time under which they're experiencing significant Gs, it seems totally reasonable to me that the turn modifications could have helped fix the wheel problems while also resulting in very little perceivable difference in the coaster's ability to rob your brain of oxygen.

I still gray out now less, 11 years older, than I did then, so that's an effect. Probably wouldn't be able to handle it anymore.

I was somewhat wrong in my statement, because the reduction of speed also helps the wheels directly, as well as through reduction of forces. But rider response to G forces is nonlinear too, you can handle 3 Gs more than 33% longer than 4 Gs.

 

[GoHokies87]

^^-- Yeah "identity" is a good word.

A lot of people seem to be saying I305 did nothing for the park. Certainly that isn't true compared to adding nothing until 2018. So that would have to be relative to something else instead. And yet who would say Carowinds got the better coaster in 2010? Or even that Fury would have been all it was without I305 happening first?



I still gray out now less, 11 years older, than I did then, so that's an effect. Probably wouldn't be able to handle it anymore.

I was somewhat wrong in my statement, because the reduction of speed also helps the wheels directly, as well as through reduction of forces. But rider response to G forces is nonlinear too, you can handle 3 Gs more than 33% longer than 4 Gs.

The wheels' ability to shed heat from friction and individuals ability to keep blood flowing to their gray matter are two completely different things. I think your understanding of the situation is a bit oversimplified.

 

[bill s]

The wheels' ability to shed heat from friction and individuals ability to keep blood flowing to their gray matter are two completely different things. I think your understanding of the situation is a bit oversimplified.

It's a "back of the envelope" calculation but not as oversimplified or wrong as saying it's completely different. I claim:
1. Even though the slowdown results in the section of track taking slightly longer to transverse, the "area under the curve" of G force vs. time is reduced by the change of track geometry.
2. Ignoring #1, if the area under the curve were the exact same, the reduction of force over part of it would still benefit both wheels and brains enough to more than offset the increased length of time. Maybe different, maybe almost the same, I don't know and don't need to.
3. The reduction of speed has an additional benefit to the wheels that is not felt by the rider, which I did ignore originally, but in the case of reprofiling, speed and force are reduced together.

 

[GoHokies87]

This is getting ridiculous but for one, there is no calculation for g-loc so your implications of some sort of math involving an integral that is somehow going to show if a person passes out or not is...just stop.

 

[Jonesta6]

Force = mass × acceleration. Problem is mass is a constantly changing variable considering the mass of any given coaster train and the impact of the mass of any given rider.

 

[GoHokies87]

Here's a link to a scholarly article on the subject that focus on g-loc but also has data on greyout. You'll notice there are several models based on a wide data set that tend to differ significantly. You'll also notice that multiple models have a dip where lower g forces are associated with a shorter time period of exposure. You'll also see how scatter plots of this data have a wide distribution. Put simply, theres a lot going on and this is something muchore difficult to figure out/ impossible to solve compared to determining the heat generation and dissipation capabilities of Identical wheels.

(PDF) The +Gz-induced loss of consciousness curve

PDF | +Gz-time tolerance curves were developed to predict when exposure to +Gz stress exceeds human tolerance resulting in neurologic signs and... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

 

[Furyous Baco 325]

Got stuck on I305

 

[Mushroom]

A lot of people seem to be saying I305 did nothing for the park. Certainly that isn't true compared to adding nothing until 2018. So that would have to be relative to something else instead.

They added plenty of things in between I305 and Twisted Timbers: Windseeker, 2013 Planet Snoopy expansion, 40th anniversary stuff, Soak City expansion, Delirium, and another Planet Snoopy expansion. Those additions might seem like "nothing" to a die-hard coaster enthusiast, but it's very possible the park actually saw a better ROI on those additions than they did on the major coasters.

In fact, it's been reported on here a few times that the park's most successful year under CF (pre-Winterfest) was, believe it or not, 2017 when they renovated Planet Snoopy. If that report is true, it's good evidence that CF saw more value and better results in investing in things besides giant coasters for the park--things that better target the higher-paying family demographic . So the idea they "added nothing" just isn't true and doesn't accurately reflect why CF might have gone 8 years without adding a new coaster to KD.

 

[CoasterAuditor]

Yeah I305 was closed at the end of the day and there was a mechanic walking up the lift. Hopefully it reopens tomorrow.

 

[bill s]

They added plenty of things in between I305 and Twisted Timbers: Windseeker, 2013 Planet Snoopy expansion, 40th anniversary stuff, Soak City expansion, Delirium, and another Planet Snoopy expansion. Those additions might seem like "nothing" to a die-hard coaster enthusiast, but it's very possible the park actually saw a better ROI on those additions than they did on the major coasters.

In fact, it's been reported on here a few times that the park's most successful year under CF (pre-Winterfest) was, believe it or not, 2017 when they renovated Planet Snoopy. If that report is true, it's good evidence that CF saw more value and better results in investing in things besides giant coasters for the park--things that better target the higher-paying family demographic . So the idea they "added nothing" just isn't true and doesn't accurately reflect why CF might have gone 8 years without adding a new coaster to KD.

But if they had added no COASTER between 2008 and 2018, would have any of those other investments done as much? To get that family there, you have to interest older brother and dad, not just mom and little Johny. And even as the park diversifies, vs. BGW if they don't have a strong coaster lineup, how can they compete? At least in 2010, maybe now they can turn that around.

 

[Jonesta6]

But if they had added no COASTER between 2008 and 2018, would have any of those other investments done as much? To get that family there, you have to interest older brother and dad, not just mom and little Johny. And even as the park diversifies, vs. BGW if they don't have a strong coaster lineup, how can they compete? At least in 2010, maybe now they can turn that around.

This isn't Planet Coaster or RCT - parks can't just plop down big investments on a thoosie's dream coaster and realistically expect a positive ROI if many guests are generally too intimidated to ride it.

However, upgrading the park with what capex is available for smaller rides including some decent flats and a renovation of an existing ride in addition to refreshing whole areas (CAG, and now JX) plus increasing focuses on entertainment and food/beverage means that, per your analogy, both brother and dad have plenty of rides for them but mom and the little ones also have plenty of other experiences... Plus lots of stuff everyone could be happy to do together.

TLDR; they spent their relatively small budgets on things to make the park appealing to a wider audience including younger guests and families, which in turn has seemed to increase the ROI for these expenditures.

 

[horsesboy]

Interesting theoretical question if or when 305 gets a retheme what effect do we think it might have on ridership? I could see a possible increase especially if it's repainted with guest who have been to intimidated to try it thinking it's been altered and willing to give it a shot suddenly.

 

[GoHokies87]

I could see a possible increase especially if it's repainted with guest who have been to intimidated.

It's already red so it probably wouldn't be that noticable.