Nemesis Inferno
Strata Poster
Some of us keep stum with rumours of types so that they can throw drawings like this away as garbage
Justin Garvanovic said:A few points.
1) It has switchback sections - for reversing direction. I've added a
second one inside the building, but that isn't shown on the plans, so the
track may be slightly different when indoors. I imagine the car will stop,
some sort of action take place which will then cause the car to fly out
backwards.
2) The helix that follows is in a trench, and will be ridden backwards.
3) We have no idea who's building it. The drawings show flat track - not
triangular, which would be expected on an Intamin. But, I still wouldn't be
surprised if it is Intamin, but other options are Gerstlauer, and maybe
Premier. I say Premier because the switchback section is very similar what
they did on the Mummy rides at Universal Studios.
4) There are no inversions - it seems this part of the park is the
"non-looping coaster" section.
5) The station looks fantastic. It's a half built castle, with wooden
scaffolding all over it - it sort of looks like the actual Towers.
6) The coaster isn't that long. I've included Rita on the drawing to show
both location and scale, and as can be seen, it may be shorter that Rita.
7) It uses a LOT of terrain - this thing is going to be a lot of fun, with
what looks like a lot of airtime. The hill after the first drop, which is
about the same height at the Corkscrew's, is very small, so airtime packed I
would hope.
8) The "S" bends before the first switchback are there because the track is
dodging around trees. .
Does the plan outline the world first inverted reverse section or something equally rediculous??? No. I commented on what we could see. Fair point though.UC said:It's very possible that the "world's first" element could be something like "First inverted reverse section" or something equally as ridiculous.
I already answered that before you posted! I have put capital letters where you need to pay attention the most. :wink:UC said:You don't have enough information to make this claim.
Is there any reason why you are opposing just the reasons for the plan to be fake and ignoring the reasons supporting the plan?I DON'T KNOW if the above reasons are TRUE OR NOT. THESE are JUST POSSIBILITIES that would tip the genuinity of this drawing.