Jump to content


Black Tag
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Nitro1118 last won the day on September 6 2017

Nitro1118 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

72 Excellent

About Nitro1118

  • Rank
    Log Flume

Recent Profile Visitors

3,997 profile views
  1. Ok, first off I apologize if my wording in any of my posts came off as aggressive or dismissive. I am not trying to pick on you or attack you. Secondly, no one will disagree that ideally GAdv should get a coaster with the highest capacity possible. I'd certainly prefer it myself. My point of contention is that ultimately a new coaster with poor capacity would not be a huge drawback. *Any* addition will take lines away from other coasters, and the coaster itself will rarely see completely unreasonable lines. That has been proven by past and current additions. Is it the best case scenario? No. Would it hurt the park in any way, shape, or form? Absolutely not. A coaster like an SRII or RMC Raptor would still be a great addition regardless of capacity.
  2. All true in theory, but isn't reality for our specific park. We have over 60 coasters/rides, including 5 B&M coasters and a relatively high capacity world class wooden coaster. A low capacity addition wouldn't be a disaster as was suggested, and I really don't consider it of much importance.
  3. Ok look at KK; relatively poor capacity, managable lines. Same goes for Chiller back in the days when only one side was running, which was most of the time. Lines autoregulate themselves. The capacity issue is largely overblown, which was my point. An SRII would be far from a "disaster" as you suggested. You would not see that line creeping anywhere near 1.5hrs on non-FF days. Even the #1 wooden coaster in the world, El Toro, rarely sees its libe extend past an hour during 1 train operations.
  4. Six Flags Fun needs to tone it down with the constant repeating of himself. However, this is a discussion thread. We are still a year from announcement. There are no "clues" yet. There are no markings in the RT footprint, no deconstruction of the Batman Stunt Arena or old simulator building, El Diablo isn't confirmed to be leaving yet, Bizarro is still standing, etc... It was said on the RMC tour they have made a deal for 1 T-Rex so far and that they plan on mass cloning the Raptor model, which is more "news" to chew on than anything else at this point.
  5. People gotta let go of this capacity idea. Length of lines are not linear with capacity necessarily. Crowds tend to autoregulate themselves. Guests know which lines move slowly (and if they don't, the estimated wait times give it away) and will not keep endlessly filling queues because of poor capacity. Just like how Joker, our newest coaster with poor capacity, rarely gets hour-plus lines, neither would an SRII. It certainly wouldn't be "disasterous" by any means. If BGW, a park with far less rides than GAdv to disperse crowds, can get away with it fine, so could we. This also applies to an RMC Raptor, although I do think it would see longer lines than an SRII due to quality and novelty.
  6. There were no RMC's at SF in 2017 either, yet in 2018 we saw 2. I think 2019 is more of an abberation than a trend. Also, variety =/= quality. We will not be seeing any coaster that's "a lot" better than an RMC.
  7. I hate feeding into his obsessive line of thinking, but those would be the top 3 most likely candidates. SF has added only 1 B&M in the past decade, and it was a small prototype (which usually come at a discount), so I'd say they are out of the question. Based on SF's 10-year history, we are looking at a coaster that will cost around $13-14M max, which greatly limits what we can expect. Those 3 companies offer the greatest value at that budget, and is why SF has almost exclusively contracted them for their coaster needs this last decade. To summarize, thinking that we have the opportunity for something "so much better" than an RMC or Premier/S&S launched is setting yourself up for major disappointment.
  8. Wow that fits like a glove in that spot. I really enjoy the Sky Rocket model, however after Joker I'd really prefer our next coaster to be a more sprawling, "complete" design.
  9. Quite frankly, as much as a GCI sounds great in theory, I do not trust SF to properly maintain a large-scale GCI for more than a few years. I think something like Oscar's Wacky Taxi would be a good fit as it probably wouldn't tear itself apart too bad and would be great for the 40-44" crowd. As far as large-scale coasters go, RMC is the best quality they could realistically go with. I think a launched coaster from Premier or S&S would also be great fits as well.
  10. This is false logic. Our park has over a dozen more non-coaster/water rides than SFMM. It has more flats than SFGAm, SFOT and SFFT, which are largely considered the most well-rounded SF parks. It has more flats than some renowned CF parks like KI and Carowinds. We got a flat package in 2012, a drop tower in 2014, another flat in 2015, a dark ride in 2017 and yet another flat in 2018. We are no longer starved of flat rides. SF has done a great job at filling that need with some really solid additions. Meanwhile, on the coaster front, the last 11 years have been disappointing. They removed both sides of Chiller, GASM and both sides of RT. In their place we got a wild mouse, relocated standup and cloned Free Spin. While our flat ride offerings have gotten exponentially better, our coaster collection is arguably worse than it was over a decade ago. That is not to say I don't want a Giant Discovery. I'd love one. But I think we are past the point of "needing" flats over coasters.
  11. I wouldn't put any stock in the "teasers" the park has given so far. Everything they've said has either been copy and pasted from teasers other parks have given or they are so vague that they could mean literally anything. Thanks to the poster who showed a Raptor and Giant Discovery in that location. I feel like both are definitely viable and make sense for that plot of land. Either attraction would definitely bring together that entire area. I do hope they eventually decide to either utilize (as a show/attraction) or demolish the Batman arena. As it stands right now it is a pointless eyesore that is on very prime real estate.
  12. At this point the Mack thing is still just a rumor. There are talks it could be an S&S, which is way cheaper. It is also rumored the SFMM/SFGAm additions will be clones, which further lowers the price. Lastly, we do not know the size of these additions. Even if it's a Mack launched coaster(s), it doesn't mean we are talking about a ride on the scale of Helix or Time Traveler. A T-Rex the size and scale of the prototype video at IAPPA would really be pushing SF's budget, especially considering they acquired multiple new parks. Not saying it isn't possible, as it is certainly more realistic than something like a giga, but I would still bet against it for now until I see more evidence pointing towards it.
  13. With how SF spends money, anything bigger than a T-Rex is highly unlikely. Even a T-Rex of any substantial length seems like a stretch unless RMC gives them a big discount for purchasing the prototype of that model.
  14. Well, looks like these new attraction advertisements are copied and pasted for all/most parks throughout the chain:
  15. The plot of land a RMC Raptor takes up is roughly the size of a Vekoma Boomerang. It wouldn't take long to clear land of that size, and the actual installation of a Raptor is very, very quick. With that said, I still would put my money on another flat or Skywarp. It looks like SFMM and SFGAm are the leading candidates for new coasters, and SF hasn't been adding much more than that the past few years. I hope I am wrong as the only coasters we've added the last 9 years have been a relocated standup and 4D clone, while removing GASM and RT in the process. We are due for a new, quality coaster.
  • Create New...