Page 512 of 4805

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:24 am
by Arez55
Rcdb doesn't list new coasters before they're announced..Well atleast not the specs.

-Alex

PostPosted: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:59 am
by Vffreak07
Oh you're cool. . .

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:22 am
by robbalvey
Having ridden Atlantis Adventure today at Lotte World I am even more convinced that there may be some truth to the original rumors about Maverick being originally designed as an Aqua Trax, then later changed to a traditional coaster train!

There were so many similarities that you could compare with the two:

- Both rides are part launch, part lift hill.
- Both rides have extremely tight elements and transitions
- Both rides have short ride vehicles
- Both rides come very low to the ground more than a traditional ride.
- Both rides have water elements in them, yet neither actually come directly into contact with the water.
- Both rides can operate multiple ride vehicles at one time.
- Both rides have "dueling elements" where the trains pass each other.
- Both rides loading station are VERY similar
- Etc, etc, etc....

And most importantly, from having ridden both coasters within a few weeks of each other, Atantis Adventure "felt" like Maverick. And everyone in our group that had been on both certainly felt the similarities.

So that begs the question - If Maverick WAS originally designed as an Aqua Trax what would have changed the parks mind to traditional trains?

The only thing we could come up with is capacity. Atlantis Adventure DID take FOREVER to get on the ride, even when they were running 6 cars.

And to even further the speculation, I do wonder if the inversion that was removed was designed with an Aqua Trax car in mind, and when the design change took place they had fabricated the extra piece of track just in case it wouldn't work out. I say that only because it still baffles me how they would re-design, fabricate, and ship those pieces of track SO quickly after they realized the inversion wouldn't work. They must have been prepared for the alteration and a change of train type seems like a logical explanation.

Anyway, this is all total SPECULATION on my part based on now having ridden both rides, heard stories from some of my "industry friends", and really just using some common sense and logic.

Having said that, though I may still be totally wrong!

Anyway, both rides are excellent and exceeded my expecations, so regardless of what type of coaster Maverick or Atlantis Adventure are were going to be, they are both awesome and everyone should get out and ride them!

--Robb

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 5:38 am
by Jew
^What he said.

The only thing missing from Atlantis was inversions, but those trains had more than enough room for the installation of OTSR's if needed.

There is also a drop into a banked turn above water on both too...

No doubt in my mind now that Maverick was at some point an Aquatrax design.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:17 am
by BeemerBoy
The aquatrax seating also somewhat simulates a horseriding position (Mav's logo). Okay, that's a stretch, but yeah.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:52 am
by TheArchfiend
Aww... everyone is getting to ride an Aqua Trax except me. :(

Life isn't fair.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:06 am
by deano
'Atlantis' looks like an awesome ride, i really really want a ride on it...........but, im still happy with whatever decisions Cedar Point had to make to end up creating Maverick. Maverick was so much fun, i almost peed in my pants.

(although one particular ride on the bronze train in the back right hand seat was seriously the roughest ride ive had on a steel coaster, must have had a square wheel or even 'no' wheel that day, ouch)

Apart from the slow loading times, an Aquatrax still would have been sweet at Cedar Point, why arent there that many of these at other parks?

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:11 am
by Skramp
Here's my only question about the Maverick Aqua Trax debate.........Why does Maverick close so quickly at the slightest bit of rain? Is it just the trains? I mean if it was originally an Aqua Trax design wouldn't it have been designed to handle a little bit of water in spots? But overall, I have to agree with Robb, the similarities are just too close to not think that this may have originally been an Aqua Trax design.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:18 am
by robbalvey
Skramp wrote:Here's my only question about the Maverick Aqua Trax debate.........Why does Maverick close so quickly at the slightest bit of rain? Is it just the trains? I mean if it was originally an Aqua Trax design wouldn't it have been designed to handle a little bit of water in spots?

Dude, so does Atlantis Adventure!!! I makes NO SENSE I know, but it does. In fact, today was our second visit to Lotte World because when we were there on Monday Atlantis was closed due to rain, so we had to make a return visit there.

Keep in mind that the Aqua Trax train never actually does come in contact with the water. Matterhorn's bobsleds have more contact than Atlantis does.

--Robb

PostPosted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:18 am
by asr
Skramp wrote:Here's my only question about the Maverick Aqua Trax debate.........Why does Maverick close so quickly at the slightest bit of rain? Is it just the trains? I mean if it was originally an Aqua Trax design wouldn't it have been designed to handle a little bit of water in spots? But overall, I have to agree with Robb, the similarities are just too close to not think that this may have originally been an Aqua Trax design.


That is just Cedar Fair policy after the incident on Magnum.

And about the heartline roll being designed for Aquatrax trains... I think it is more plausible for Maverick's current trains to go through the roll than for Aquatrax cars. Maverick's roll was extremly tight, and I think that the longer Aquatrax cars would only worsen whatever problems the roll had.