General Carowinds discussion
User avatar
By MarkD
#65864
chknwing wrote:
coasterbruh wrote:...bracing myself for the onslaught of of redundant "the crane is moving" post. :wave:



I think most on here would agree that we prefer the crane play by play over comments like this.


No, not really.

Thanks Dave for your continued work. It is much appreciated as I have no time to just sit and watch.
User avatar
By DavidW
#65869
bradbeane88 wrote:Has anyone spotted the trains for fury yet?

We wont see those till next year. I would guess February.
By bradbeane88
#65870
DavidW wrote:
bradbeane88 wrote:Has anyone spotted the trains for fury yet?

We wont see those till next year. I would guess February.


I thought so just thought I would ask. Thanks :D
By uscbandfan
#65873
Here's a question for some of you guys who follow coaster construction...

Since the return track goes beneath the lift hill, will attention now focus on buiding more of that before continuing the lift hill on top of it? I was thinking it would be easier to build the track underneath first rather than try and thread the track through later.

Just a thought.
#65875
I know its just steel but some of the cost of the steel is for Fury construction as well. I expect it to probably be split up half and half so the front gate will most likely be 500,000 of the 1 million.

@uscbandfan good observation, I wonder if they will do that first or not. It does make the most sense.
User avatar
By DavidW
#65876
uscbandfan wrote:Here's a question for some of you guys who follow coaster construction...

Since the return track goes beneath the lift hill, will attention now focus on buiding more of that before continuing the lift hill on top of it? I was thinking it would be easier to build the track underneath first rather than try and thread the track through later.

Just a thought.

B&Ms are unusually built in (pretty much) sequential order. Some exceptions are the lift hills on hyper/gigas and some loops. After the drop, i think they will just continue through the course.
By kirkgun
#65877
That's a good question.

I don't know anything about coaster construction.

I was thinking the opposite. That it would be easier to build the higher section first, and then the underneath. My thinking was that since the lower section uses much smaller and more maneuverable equipment to construct that it would be easier to move that equipment underneath the high sections, than to have to move the big stuff around track that is already locked in place (and equipment can't move around underneath it).

And I was also thinking risk management. I think they would not want to risk heavy things possibly falling down onto already constructed sections.

But one thing I do know for sure. Those big cranes are really expensive to rent. They'd like to get done with the parts that need the big cranes as fast as they can, now that they are here.

Like I said, I don't know anything about coaster construction. And I was wondering the same thing. That is just what I was thinking about it.

-and @DavidW,

GO HAWKEYES!
User avatar
By coasterbruh
#65880
Tawny71 wrote:There's a cool feature on this site called an edit button. You can use it to edit and add your previous posts to avoid having to double post. :)

Lol lol...

Ok I'm done trolling...for the day ;)
User avatar
By Hiveminded
#65881
From what I understand it is in sequential order unless there is track that crosses or is very close to other track. See Intimidator's construction, some of the return hills were partially built before the big hill in front.
  • 1
  • 98
  • 99
  • 100
  • 101
  • 102
  • 504