Expedition Everest drop, in excess of 100ft!

[imagineer boy]

We should start a "I survived Thrawn" thread where all people who have survived being thrashed by Thrawn could sound off. I know I'm one of them!

 

[LSUxStitch]

We should start a "I survived Thrawn" thread where all people who have survived being thrashed by Thrawn could sound off. I know I'm one of them!

Everyone that is still here has survived him at one point. I think it would be better to just leave it alone and move on. He is gone, no need to bring him up or make him feel any better about himself.

 

[Tim G]

We should start a "I survived Thrawn" thread where all people who have survived being thrashed by Thrawn could sound off. I know I'm one of them!

Nahhh... He'll probably return with another nifty username...

I personally never had any issue with him... what bothered me was his instigating way of treating people...

 

[Shaman]

We should start a "I survived Thrawn" thread where all people who have survived being thrashed by Thrawn could sound off. I know I'm one of them!

Nope. I don't think we need that. Lets learn from Thrawn's example and move on.

 

[Tigger1988]

Nope. I don't think we need that. Lets learn from Thrawn's example and move on.

good idea...so back on topic...umm...a 100+ feet drop! wow!!! :lol:

 

[imagineer boy]

Ah well, just a thought. The only thing I'm thankful for Thrawn about is that he sparked the "Who does Thrawn think he is?" thread which led to the great cook off. Man, that was a fun thread. Thrawn didn't show up until minnight of course. :lol: But other than that, we can all sleep peacefully now!

Now we just need to find a body bag for him. :lookaroun

 

[Tim G]

good idea...so back on topic...umm...a 100+ feet drop! wow!!! :lol:

112ft LOLLOL

Oh... jeez I'm doing it myself now... :lol: :lol: :lol:


Better getting outa here... :wave:

 

[Connor002]

Ah well, just a thought. The only thing I'm thankful for Thrawn about is that he sparked the "Who does Thrawn think he is?" thread which led to the great cook off. Man, that was a fun thread. Thrawn didn't show up until minnight of course. :lol:

Ah, that was a fun day. :lol:

But in all honesty, I don't(or should I say didn't?) have any problems with Thrawn. Either way, it's time to move on. I think he did contribute much to this site, but his specificy "style" of doing so was somewhat unacceptable. Farewell Thrawn.:wave:

 

[Connor002]

good idea...so back on topic...umm...a 100+ feet drop! wow!!! :lol:

There was a topic? :lookaroun

 

[Huck]

Let me go on record as saying that I am often amused by Thrawn's posts. I, however, have a strong ability to tolerate and laugh at bull. Just consider his posts a grand sociology experiment.

Bring back Thrawn!:wave:

Yeah, I said it!

 

[Tim G]

Bring back Thrawn!:wave:

Yeah, I said it!

SLAP!!! :lookaroun :lol:

 

[AndyMagic]

Judging by nearly every picture and the reported top speed, I don't see how EE's drop can TRULY be 112 feet. The 32 foot difference from nearly every previous report on the ride's drop is just a bit odd. Didn't the original press release from 2003 state an 80 foot drop?? It's clear that the design hasn't changed so where is Disney finding these 32 feet? Even if they count the turn at the bottom of the drop, all photos of that turn certainly do not indicate that the bottom portion of the turn is 32 feet below the beginning of it. Either way, there is some crazy math going on if they consider that hill out of the mountain 112 feet.

 

[Huck]

SLAP!!! :lookaroun :lol:

You missed!

 

[Tim G]

Judging by nearly every picture and the reported top speed, I don't see how EE's drop can TRULY be 112 feet. The 32 foot difference from nearly every previous report on the ride's drop is just a bit odd. Didn't the original press release from 2003 state an 80 foot drop?? It's clear that the design hasn't changed so where is Disney finding these 32 feet? Even if they count the turn at the bottom of the drop, all photos of that turn certainly do not indicate the bottom portion of the turn is 32 feet below the beginning of it. Either way, there is some crazy math going on if they consider that hill out of the mountain 112 feet.

Now THAT'S called imagineering... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Valawen9]

Judging by nearly every picture and the reported top speed, I don't see how EE's drop can TRULY be 112 feet. The 32 foot difference from nearly every previous report on the ride's drop is just a bit odd. Didn't the original press release from 2003 state an 80 foot drop?? It's clear that the design hasn't changed so where is Disney finding these 32 feet? Even if they count the turn at the bottom of the drop, all photos of that turn certainly do not indicate the bottom portion of the turn is 32 feet below the beginning of it. Either way, there is some crazy math going on if they consider that hill out of the mountain 112 feet.

True.

 

[animal_king1990]

Maybe they're counting the part of the drop that is inside the mountain.

 

[sillyspook13]

There're people here who're claiming that they would be happy riding an 80' drop, but that 112' is just too much. They seem to be just as hung up on the stats as a certain someone else, but are on the receiving end of far less questioning.

People with certain degrees of motion sickness (me!) must take into consideration that greater distance dropping=more time during the drop=better odds of getting :hurl:.

I'm fine with speeds, spinning, inversions, you name it! But big drops give me a case of the :hurl:. 80 feet isn't great to me, but it is much better than 100+.

Having said that, I have been on rides with big (in my opinion) drops and been fine. I had no problems on Big Bad Wolf at Busch Gardens, Williamsburg. It has a similar size drop to Everest.

I try to judge a ride compared to rides of similar height that I have ridden. I expect to be a little ill after (and YES, I will be riding) but it's possible that I may be wrong.

 

[Jose Eber]

Someone here was complaining on the speed -- thinking it 'should' be 55 mph? I disagree -- I did a little simulation and Disney's claim of 50 is more in range than 55.

Keep in mind -- this coaster carries quite a bit of mass with it. 34 people and a caboose in the back is a lot of weight -- more weight, more friction, slower speed etc. You get the picture.

Also -- why are we beeyotching with height issues here? Any CAD program I've used has great measuring tools -- so its very easy to get highly accurate dimensions.

sheesh.

Also, my moderate familiarity with PR folks is that accuracy isn't their strong suit -- its getting 'the word out' that they are great at.

I think its normal to get these details right after a period of time has passed.

CHILL. == also -- some of these pictographs on this thread are really off. Not a good angle.

 

[PlaneJane]

If you guys keep arguing about height and speed you just might get the boot like Thrawn.... I'm just saying, trust in the almighty webmaster and/or Corrus.

 

[ECurto]

If you guys keep arguing about height and speed you just might get the boot like Thrawn.... I'm just saying, trust in the almighty webmaster and/or Corrus.

Thrawn got the boot? Are you serious? I wish.