They built the Marcel Vos mini corkscrew.
News Project 2027/Purple: Delayed “World Record Breaking Coaster" (Phantom Spire?)
- Thread starter Zachary
- Start date
Looking at these images, I am so impressed. I've always liked the idea of this Mack Tower Coaster. I always found it to be a ride I feel I'd enjoy. I rode Kingda Ka several times and it was thrilling, but I never saw why people could love that and hate this? They are somewhat similar, yet unique.
I'd imagine that a bulk of this will be complete by late April. I think where we will see some delays is with the tower construction. They can start the tower but they won't be able to get far with it until the other crane is staged. Then again, they might just hold the crane until they finish the other elements. I really think this coaster could be done by June.
Which also gives hope that they could just attempt to open it or tease it during Fright Fest or Holiday in the Park. I can't imagine it sitting there looking gorgeous without even teasing it to the riders if it's functionally ready.
My last thought: I'd assume more supports would be showing up since it looks like a lot of supports are up already.
I'd imagine that a bulk of this will be complete by late April. I think where we will see some delays is with the tower construction. They can start the tower but they won't be able to get far with it until the other crane is staged. Then again, they might just hold the crane until they finish the other elements. I really think this coaster could be done by June.
Which also gives hope that they could just attempt to open it or tease it during Fright Fest or Holiday in the Park. I can't imagine it sitting there looking gorgeous without even teasing it to the riders if it's functionally ready.
My last thought: I'd assume more supports would be showing up since it looks like a lot of supports are up already.
It doesn't look that tall? I thought it would be much taller. Did he mean worlds longest zero g stall?
Looks like part of one of the curls up around the tower.I'm sorry but what is this element?! Omg!!
Can we get a rough estimate of length of the initial launch before the zero g roll to then potentially measure the speed the car will have.
We have factors of other Mack spinners for vehicle weights and launch speeds ..
I know it’ll be very hard to do the estimations but we should be able to get some type of idea no?
We have factors of other Mack spinners for vehicle weights and launch speeds ..
I know it’ll be very hard to do the estimations but we should be able to get some type of idea no?
Roughly 350ft in length.
Edit: Looking at the videos from yesterday. The launch ends approximately 300ft from the front of the station. Two footers before what I have marked on the image.
Last edited:
It's great to see all this track going in, but these new photos also show some really, really bad news in my opinion—news that makes me seriously question what the hell Mack is thinking—much in the same way I was baffled by the station setup on Stardust Racers last year.
The last photo in the post above clearly shows that this coaster WILL NOT use the Mr. Freeze station setup that many of us were expecting. Instead of two station tracks that move independently in and out of the coaster's circuit, they are using a conjoined track setup in which both tracks can only move in tandem.
In my opinion, this is an incredibly shitty design decision from Mack. Not only does it reduce operational flexibility, but it will also, in my estimation, notably harm normal operating capacity as well. The easiest way I can think to do this is to run through some scenarios that show just how damaging this is.
Seriously stunned that this decision has been made. It seems to void nearly the entire upside of a sliding station. In fact, there's a good chance that, despite slight increases in parking times, the operational efficiencies that would be achieved with a simple Y-shaped switch outside the station with two independent station platforms would surpass the real-world hourly capacity I expect this attraction to achieve now (as that setup could still enjoy the added operations flexibility of two independent stations and allow for partially overlapping load/unload cycles when needed).
I've been a pretty ardent defender of the potential capacity outlook for this coaster if it were to be designed well. This IS NOT designed well. From where I'm sitting, this looks like a completely unforced error by Mack/Six Flags.
Maybe there is some mysterious, great reason why this is actually more efficient than both Mr. Freeze's setup and a more traditional split station design that I just don't understand—but right now I certainly can't work out what that great reason would be. Hopefully someone will address this with the park on a future construction tour. I want to know the reasoning because from where I'm sitting, it looks like an incredibly short-sighted, anti-consumer move.
Very disappointing.
The last photo in the post above clearly shows that this coaster WILL NOT use the Mr. Freeze station setup that many of us were expecting. Instead of two station tracks that move independently in and out of the coaster's circuit, they are using a conjoined track setup in which both tracks can only move in tandem.
In my opinion, this is an incredibly shitty design decision from Mack. Not only does it reduce operational flexibility, but it will also, in my estimation, notably harm normal operating capacity as well. The easiest way I can think to do this is to run through some scenarios that show just how damaging this is.
Custodial Issue
This is a crazy-intense spinning coaster. People WILL throw up. With two, independent sliding platforms if one train comes back in need of cleaning, loading can be paused on the platform with the train needing attention to allow staff to actively clean the train as the other platform continues to dispatch its train with zero interruption. With the conjoined setup we've seen installed here, the entire ride will have to shut down to deal with train cleaning as there's no way to move trains from one platform to the launch track while the other platform isn't simultaneously cleared for movement.Prolonged Load/Unload Cycle
There are some cycles that take an abnormal amount of time to load/unload, whether it be a train of particularly awful guests, a bunch of loose articles to deal with, complicated handicap loading/unloading, etc. In those situations, a coaster like Mr. Freeze is able to, on the fly, opt to allow a platform experiencing a particularly slow load/unload cycle to be skipped for a round and allow the other platform to dispatch two cycles during the delayed platform's single cycle. The conjoined station track Mack provided completely removes this adaptive, capacity-maximizing, operational flexibility.Overlapping Load/Unload Windows
And then, finally, most crucially and most relevantly, the conjoined platform setup never allows ANY overlap between each platforms' parking/unloading/loading/clearing periods. In an absolutely ideal world, the time window between restraints unlocking for unloading guests and the platform being cleared for movement with a loaded train of guests will never exceed the amount of time the other train is out on the course. In reality, though this will happen VERY FREQUENTLY. SFGAdv is a chain park post like 2010. The ops suck at least 65% of the time. That's just the industry now. I fully expect to see many cycles where trains full of guests sit on the switch track unable to do anything while they wait for the other platform to be fully cleared and dispatched. All of this overlapping station time will compound to, in my estimation, VERY notably harm hourly capacity. The beauty of the sliding station as executed on the Mr. Freeze clones is that you can overlap these station area activities and maximize the amount of time in an hour a train is out on the course. To see that thrown away here is just stunningly stupid.Seriously stunned that this decision has been made. It seems to void nearly the entire upside of a sliding station. In fact, there's a good chance that, despite slight increases in parking times, the operational efficiencies that would be achieved with a simple Y-shaped switch outside the station with two independent station platforms would surpass the real-world hourly capacity I expect this attraction to achieve now (as that setup could still enjoy the added operations flexibility of two independent stations and allow for partially overlapping load/unload cycles when needed).
I've been a pretty ardent defender of the potential capacity outlook for this coaster if it were to be designed well. This IS NOT designed well. From where I'm sitting, this looks like a completely unforced error by Mack/Six Flags.
Maybe there is some mysterious, great reason why this is actually more efficient than both Mr. Freeze's setup and a more traditional split station design that I just don't understand—but right now I certainly can't work out what that great reason would be. Hopefully someone will address this with the park on a future construction tour. I want to know the reasoning because from where I'm sitting, it looks like an incredibly short-sighted, anti-consumer move.
Very disappointing.
Last edited:
I just want an announcement date at this point
I didn't get a good picture today, but they may still allow combined load/unload if when one station is in the primary/launch position, the other is at its gates.
Great points @Zachary. By some insane coincidence, there is precedent with Six Flags and Mack correcting a capacity issue on a ride before it ever opened... and seeing that they have a full calendar year to make it happen, I severely hope they can do.
Oh, yeah. V2 coming ASAP
Oh, yeah. V2 coming ASAP
I know people will kinda hate me for saying this, but the way to fix loose articles from slowing down the operations of this is to ban bags in the line (like most recent CF coaster installs) and/or have metal detectors with free double sided lockers in the queue.
Obviously there's the potential issues with "protein spills" or someone with a boarding pass needing extra assistance getting in or out of the train. And I agree this setup makes me raise my eyebrows a bit. However, I don't think you can blame current Six Flags for this decision as this ride was likely purchased pre merger or at least under Selim/Zimmerman's watch and both aren't part of Six anymore. It also may be Mack's decision as this is a protoype ride and setup so they're wanting to showcase it.
To be honest I'm a little worried about reliability for this ride. Both Stardust Racers and Hyperia both are recent Mack installations and both have had multiple stints of extended downtime and they likely aren't going to be anywhere near the height and scale of this.
Obviously there's the potential issues with "protein spills" or someone with a boarding pass needing extra assistance getting in or out of the train. And I agree this setup makes me raise my eyebrows a bit. However, I don't think you can blame current Six Flags for this decision as this ride was likely purchased pre merger or at least under Selim/Zimmerman's watch and both aren't part of Six anymore. It also may be Mack's decision as this is a protoype ride and setup so they're wanting to showcase it.
To be honest I'm a little worried about reliability for this ride. Both Stardust Racers and Hyperia both are recent Mack installations and both have had multiple stints of extended downtime and they likely aren't going to be anywhere near the height and scale of this.
One thing that's nice about this project is how easy it's going to be to follow the build progress. In addition to the unparalleled access that content creators have been getting, even laypeople like myself can get some very solid views of the construction site with minimal effort. Case in point...
The fences flanking the boardwalk path are less than than 6 feet tall. I overheard a comment that this was very much by design: to paraphrase, "We want people to be able to see this and get excited about it."
There sure are a lot of pieces on site.
The fences flanking the boardwalk path are less than than 6 feet tall. I overheard a comment that this was very much by design: to paraphrase, "We want people to be able to see this and get excited about it."
There sure are a lot of pieces on site.
Thanks for the pics, your first picture makes it very easy to see. When one track is in the 'launch' position, the other track is against the 'edge', so they should be able to load/unload while one train is cycling.
Direct Link to Embedded Media Source
This reddit post has some close ups of the sliding mechanism and shows the underside of the area between the sliding track and the launch track and shows they're lined up on that side.
I love the low fences, I wish they had some cutouts with plexiglass similar to NYC construction sites to make it easier for kids to see through too.
To be clear, yes, it can. The issue is that both platforms can't simultaneously be in their own load/unload windows meaning that full trains will return from the course and have to wait on the switch for the other train to be fully cleared for dispatch before the returning train can even slide to its platform to start its own load/unload window.
The sliding station setup should afford enormous optimization by way of doubling up on any load/unload time that exceeds ride cycle time. The specific design here removes that core benefit entirely. We can't know how much this will hurt hourly capacity until we know cycle length and average load/unload times, but I can basically guarantee you that it will have a very real, negative impact on throughput.
This problem was solved like over two decades ago. I just can't fathom why Mack/Six Flags wouldn't have picked what looks to me to be extremely low-hanging and potentially quite significant capacity optimization fruit.
Last edited:
Hear me out: get around this by doing a Kärnan style random row assignment preshow. Keeps the policy but makes it fun. Was one of the coolest parts of Kärnan
That's fair, I can see how this can/will be an impediment.
To play a little bit of devil's advocate here since I'm sitting on the bus coming from Mt. Fuji and there's insanely heavy traffic
Addressing guest illness - this problem plagues almost every other coaster out there. Someone gets sick, ride shuts down. Yes it could be addressed if they did a sliding station, but it's not really a serious issue considering this is a problem 99% of coasters in the world have
Addressing loose articles - GAdv has a pretty strict no loose articles policy. Just have metal detectors and free lockers under the station. Problem solved.
That leads to dispatch windows - I've never had any major issues with GAdv and their operations on 90% of my visits. I've had a few stints where the ops took a bit longer to check on some of the park's supporting coasters, but the ops at Nitro, Toro, Devil, KK and Flash basically rival Knoebels operations most of the time.
So why not implement a sliding station like Freeze?
More moving parts? Moving parts are more prone to breakdowns and reliability issues. The park probably isn't as comfortable with a chance that a sliding station may cause downtime in the future
More expensive? There's a good chance it would probably cost the park more to install the sensors and stuff required to do a sliding station vs their current setup
R & D? Perhaps a station setup like that isn't in development. I believe Mack has experimented with switch elements, but not a switch track station yet. If the park needed this coaster sooner, they'd have to go with whatever's already in the catalog
They could go with a track switch element - something more tried and true, but what if there isn't enough space to add that? What if extending the launch track just adds more to the cost that the park cannot spend?
TLDR: the park is just working within the constraints they're given and a sliding station doesn't fit within those constraints. There's probably a good reason why a sliding station had only been implemented on a handful of coasters when there are far more coasters with dual load setups.
Addressing guest illness - this problem plagues almost every other coaster out there. Someone gets sick, ride shuts down. Yes it could be addressed if they did a sliding station, but it's not really a serious issue considering this is a problem 99% of coasters in the world have
Addressing loose articles - GAdv has a pretty strict no loose articles policy. Just have metal detectors and free lockers under the station. Problem solved.
That leads to dispatch windows - I've never had any major issues with GAdv and their operations on 90% of my visits. I've had a few stints where the ops took a bit longer to check on some of the park's supporting coasters, but the ops at Nitro, Toro, Devil, KK and Flash basically rival Knoebels operations most of the time.
So why not implement a sliding station like Freeze?
More moving parts? Moving parts are more prone to breakdowns and reliability issues. The park probably isn't as comfortable with a chance that a sliding station may cause downtime in the future
More expensive? There's a good chance it would probably cost the park more to install the sensors and stuff required to do a sliding station vs their current setup
R & D? Perhaps a station setup like that isn't in development. I believe Mack has experimented with switch elements, but not a switch track station yet. If the park needed this coaster sooner, they'd have to go with whatever's already in the catalog
They could go with a track switch element - something more tried and true, but what if there isn't enough space to add that? What if extending the launch track just adds more to the cost that the park cannot spend?
TLDR: the park is just working within the constraints they're given and a sliding station doesn't fit within those constraints. There's probably a good reason why a sliding station had only been implemented on a handful of coasters when there are far more coasters with dual load setups.
Nah. There's just no way this can be chalked up to ineptitude or lack of funds. I genuinely don't see how you can look at this roller coaster and view it as the best possible experience that the most guests will get the chance to experience for $50 million or whatever. Mr. Freeze opened in 1998, which will be 29 years ago when this opens. The complexity and cost of adding a moving station at all is simply too large to justify NOT investing in whatever in whatever "R&D" costs for independently sliding tracks, a concept almost 3 decades old.
Too much incentive to make the capacity as low as possible, especially with the introduction of "Fast Lane Ultimate." This has ceased to be a business to which the customer pays money for a positive experience. It seems to me the goal is now to make the customer pay money to avoid deliberately-induced negative experiences. I wonder when they'll start introducing Fast Lane Food and upcharged online food ordering. I know there'd be a lot of noise about how that's somehow good for "managing demand" and how "people who don't want it don't have to use it"
I was allowed to pick my row on Flash when I rode it last year after a two hour wait. You just have to ask nicely. The grouper just must have not liked you. I can't imagine why.