Thunderbolt (UC)

[Error]

You are theoretically wrong Xpress. Add supports.

You are wrong.

Face it Xpress, you're wrong.

You are a hypocrite Xpress

Old chineese proverb: if 4 different people call you the same thing, it's an opinion. If 5 then it's fact.

Therefore, you're WRONG. Accept it, because pulling out the excuses isn't helping your case at all. And I did the math to prove it.

 

[Anonymous]

Another thing about those supports in that turn.

You have to fix the top most support by angling it so that it follows the contour of the track, since as it is at the moment, then you haven't got a support for the top part and it cuts through the bottom rail, making it an instant failure just in that. Not to mention that it's not adequately supported.

See, it should be where the red line is.

 

[girrocks123]

Xpress, I have gotten to know you for a little while now. I used to think you were a good guy, and I still do, but they are right. You are a hypocrite. A very large one. I have no issue with it, but other people are extremely bothered with it. You should just admit your wrong, and get this whole thing over with. May I suggest ending this rant on Xpress?

 

[Xpress]

Actually loefet, I had adjusted the support after the pic, so it's more or less paralel to the track.

And Joe, if you're going to downrate my ride completely just because of 1, 1 part you don't like, well then that's not a fair rating at all. It's plain wrong in itself. I have a few select words for you, but they do not need to be expressed here. I rate rides based on their BT, the A factor, and O. If an element isn't true to manufacturers, then I give suggestions on how to improve. You guys simply state I'm wrong, and do not offer any ways to contribute to the build. loefet is the only one that's contributed sofar.

 

[Error]

And Joe, if you're going to down rate my ride completely just because of 1, 1 part you don't like, well then that's not a fair rating at all. It's plain wrong in itself. I have a few select words for you, but they do not need to be expressed here. I rate rides based on their BT, the A factor, and O. If an element isn't true to manufacturers, then I give suggestions on how to improve. You guys simply state I'm wrong, and do not offer any ways to contribute to the build. loefet is the only one that's contributed so far.

It's not the ride.

It's the way you act towards others. And it's getting out of hand. You already have had the entire underconstruction topic locked because of your dickness and whining. Mods have twice considered closing the entire games section to stop all the drama you've been causing. We are all sick of it. You act like you are better then everyone and everyone else but you is wrong.

If you want me to tell you about your ride then here:

The layout is basic but works. Hills are nicely shaped and looks like it can be intense. The elements seem dodgy and RCT2 style. The overbank would work if you changed the banking to 90 degrees, LOWERED it to heartline with the entrance and exit, and add 2 layers of supports outside it, making the load even out with the entire structure.

Anything you would like to say about me I'd love to hear.

 

[Dave]

Guys! Stop this now.

We've solved the ****ing argument, stop posting. We'll wait for xpress next update.

 

[Xpress]

Yes? No? Perhaps?

 

[Error]

Yes? No? Perhaps?

Getting there. Add another layer and make it taller and it'll work. But, there's a nick-picky thing for me: a single steel section would clash with the whole ride.

 

[Xpress]

^Yeah, err, I noticed, lol. I was thinking more like this, just one more section out? Dave kinda helped out with this one:

 

[Hixee]

I'm still not convinced.

 

[Dave]

I think its the fact the track is overbanked, not 90 degrees

 

[Slash]

I suggest changing the steel beams to the colour of the wood.

It looks like it'll just about hold. Maybe with a few going into the ground at an angle to support where the weight will go?

I may be wrong on this but thats what would seem to be right.

 

[Xpress]

^No. I prefer natural steel look, as most woodie companies do, even GCI

http://www.rcdb.com/ig2955.htm?picture=14
http://www.rcdb.com/ig4173.htm?picture=15

And:

Also, look at the crossover supports to the left. As you can see, they're steel grey.

 

[Error]

It's better.

Much better.

But I'd recommend have the last outside layer the same height to make it a bit stronger.

 

[Pokemaniac]

*Decides to throw in another word in the debate*

Looking at the GCI steel beams, I think that yours could look better if it was a little less bright. Even in the California sunshine, TS:TC's steel doesn't stand that much out, and they lay on top of the structure. Say, if you made them a little darker, so that they don't stand out that much, it'd look a tad better.

Otherwise, it looks quite good. Give the ride some foliage and perhaps a little work around the station, and it will look ace.

 

[Xpress]

^Yeah, but I just used the preset colors I'll probably change later.

Also, i'm gunna finish up the track supporting, and 3Ds work (if I go that route) before I add landscaping, trees, ect.

 

[Uncle Arly]

I love the idea of a overbank on a woodie, I just don't have the patience to support it.

I agree with all the colour comments.