What roller coasters does Six Flags need to give to their Parks?

[b&mfanboy123]

Hope you like the clickbait title.
But if you could give each Six Flags Park a roller coaster what would it be?
Also it would be nice if you told us the layout and theme but thats optional
HAVE FUN!

 

[Pear]

SFNE: Raptor

please

 

[CanobieFan]

SFNE (ex home SF park) - I'd like a V2, Impulse, give the park a launch coaster and something different to the area.... and space saver in a park with very little room to expand.
(I don't think a Raptor would be smart... It would be in the same height rage of *most* of the other coasters in the park... and probably wouldn't even be a stand out.)

SFOG (current home SF park) - Already a very well rounded park coaster wise.. but again lacking in a launch. Maybe replace the Go-Karts with something like MaxxxxxxxxForce or West Coast Racer. Not that I think either look great...but it would give the park a launch (and with WCR, a duel/race)

 

[Pokemaniac]

Hope you like the clickbait title.

No, and I yield the power to change it! Mwahahahaha!

As I said in another recent thread, within not too many years, many Six Flags parks will have to either reconsider what amount and types of coasters they want to have. The main draws of many of the parks are multi-looping creations from the early 00's, back when Six Flags built rides at a really unsustainable rate and scale. One day, these will age beyond practical usability, and since they were built roughly at the same time, they will begin to need replacement around the same too. Six Flags can't afford to build so many big coasters so quickly (as shown by example), so they will either need to start replacing them soon, spreading the cost over a longer period, or accept that smaller rides will replace the giants of the early 00's, with all the implications that has for the public appeal of the parks. They've been building gimmick rides for the past decade or so, apparently lacking the funds to do anything else. However, in order to sustain the scope and scale the parks have today, they need to start building headliner attractions pretty soon, just to replace the ones that will eventually age away.

Take Viper at SFMM, for instance. 57 meters tall, seven inversions, 1170 meters long. Taller, longer, and more invert-y than anything Six Flags has built post-crash. It'll reach the age of 30 in two years, which should be pretty close to its technical lifespan. If they don't want the park to shrink in scope and scale, its replacement would need to be the biggest coaster Six Flags has built since 2006. That's just to uphold what they have today. Next one out would be something to replace the Batman clone built four years later. Something on the scale of X-Flight would be suitable to replace it in the public eye. X-flight stands as the second largest coaster Six Flags has built post-crash. Six Flags could probably afford to put two coasters of those sizes at SFMM four years apart, but from there on it gets tricky: what about replacing Superman, Riddler, Goliath, X2, Scream and Tatsu within nine years? That's the rate at which they were originally built, and that's probably the rate at which they will reach the end of their lifespan too (never mind Canyon Blaster, built at some point in there). And that's only for Magic Mountain.

They better have a plan soon, is what I'm saying.

 

[Snoo]

No, and I yield the power to change it! Mwahahahaha!

As I said in another recent thread, within not too many years, many Six Flags parks will have to either reconsider what amount and types of coasters they want to have. The main draws of many of the parks are multi-looping creations from the early 00's, back when Six Flags built rides at a really unsustainable rate and scale. One day, these will age beyond practical usability, and since they were built roughly at the same time, they will begin to need replacement around the same too. Six Flags can't afford to build so many big coasters so quickly (as shown by example), so they will either need to start replacing them soon, spreading the cost over a longer period, or accept that smaller rides will replace the giants of the early 00's, with all the implications that has for the public appeal of the parks. They've been building gimmick rides for the past decade or so, apparently lacking the funds to do anything else. However, in order to sustain the scope and scale the parks have today, they need to start building headliner attractions pretty soon, just to replace the ones that will eventually age away.

Take Viper at SFMM, for instance. 57 meters tall, seven inversions, 1170 meters long. Taller, longer, and more invert-y than anything Six Flags has built post-crash. It'll reach the age of 30 in two years, which should be pretty close to its technical lifespan. If they don't want the park to shrink in scope and scale, its replacement would need to be the biggest coaster Six Flags has built since 2006. That's just to uphold what they have today. Next one out would be something to replace the Batman clone built four years later. Something on the scale of X-Flight would be suitable to replace it in the public eye. X-flight stands as the second largest coaster Six Flags has built post-crash. Six Flags could probably afford to put two coasters of those sizes at SFMM four years apart, but from there on it gets tricky: what about replacing Superman, Riddler, Goliath, X2, Scream and Tatsu within nine years? That's the rate at which they were originally built, and that's probably the rate at which they will reach the end of their lifespan too (never mind Canyon Blaster, built at some point in there). And that's only for Magic Mountain.

They better have a plan soon, is what I'm saying.

This guy. A lot of their ride lineup is aging and aging quickly. Paramount parks had the same issue and you can see it with their lineup of crap old Arrow and Vekoma rides. Once Cedar Fair began to invest, we have rides like Fury, Behemoth, Leviathan, Banshee..etc. As Six Flags has more of a chain wide problem rather then a few park problem as Cedar Fair, they're going to have to focus on long term investments rather then blasting in cheap, one off crap rides just to try to appeal to their local base for 2 years *cough*westcoastracers*cough*.

 

[EthanCoaster]

I think you are underestimating the technical lifespan of these attractions. Vortex at Kings Island is already past the age of 30, and it's still operating. An even better example for Six Flags Magic Mountain would be Revolution in the same park, which has been operating for 42 years and it just recently received new trains and a repaint. The point is that these coasters at regional parks don't see nearly as much wear and tear as coasters at, say, a Universal Park (Hulk and Dragon Challenge), where the parks receive 3x the attendance, 3x the riders. Factor in the shorter maintenance periods, and you can see why Islands of Adventure's B&M's were removed/replaced before they were even 20. The day when we see older, large-scale steel coasters reaching the end of their technical lives may not even be in our lifetimes, or at the very least, towards the end. Unless they're taking up valuable real estate, parks will find a way to maintain them.