Search results

Also with regard to this, I believe Merlin have discussed using Doctor Who as a property before but came to the same conclusion.

The idea of a slower paced ride through the forest, seeing all the creatures Hagrid has would actually be really appealling. The more natural Wizarding World is something the current lands haven't shown yet.

Completely forgot about this. :doh: Was thinking something along the lines of the new coaster in Japan but obviously Manta would be a huge issue.

It's a huge chunk of real estate to play with if they do go down the route of demolition. It would be a shame to lose two fantastic coasters but I feel that the alternatives for this space are much more exciting. It could really round out the Hogsmeade section. If Universal are working with B&M...

Would Game of Thrones ever be a viable IP? I could imagine a more Animal Kingdom style park with Game of Thrones/LotR/Fantastic Beasts would be really nice.

My gut instinct would be to say they're for VB but if they're pulling into IOA then I guess not. Intriguing.

Regardless of the final AA I'm sure this ride is going to be something to behold. Really excited to get to ride. That facade looks incredibly imposing, very theatrical!

That sounds just like BIM (Building Information Modelling), it's the next big thing in construction management, but emphasis on the next.

Are they going to be keeping the sound stage look above the new facade? I always did enjoy the studios park aesthetic, although it's evident that it's now out of fashion.

No, I'm not an engineer, but after three years in university studying to become a structural engineer with a focus on steel design then yes I feel like I do know more about this situation than the average user on this site. Sorry if that comes across as big headed and of course if someone with...

Asking out of curiosity, are you an engineer?

You absolutely do though. That's the job of an engineer. Structural efficiency and economy is key. Save the pennies and the pounds save themselves. In the same sense that if when painting it they had one option which could do it well for $15000 and one for $14995, the cheapest one will always be...

Cost on B&M's half perhaps. A good structural engineer will always select the most efficient/economic/appropriate member.

This wouldn't have been a decision Universal would have actively made, just an element of having a newer B&M.

In terms of engineering sense W Shapes (what we're referring to as I Beams, even though beams span horizontally) are cheaper, but buckle much easier. Therefore for longer supports other shapes that can resist this buckling (HSS shapes or tubes) are more appropriate whereas for shorter supports W...

So the new supports are entirely free then? It's a fact that I Beam shapes are cheaper than tubes. I'll send B&M an email just to clarify what I'm thinking is true. Sorry, I know I'm coming across as a broken record but as someone who is training to become a structural engineer and hopefully...

It would be as such to do with this. I'm guessing the geometry of the old tube supports would be the same, just that these shapes are cheaper and the tubes would be over designed. I've seen the phrase on here before about anyone can build a bridge but only an engineer can build a bridge that...

I remain certain that they have been used as part of a new B&M design tweak for structural efficiency.

I can't imagine there will be many parents visiting Universal that won't get begged by their children to take them to the Chocolate Factory, seems like a very good decision to me.

Yeah, not really a fan of that. Would look good for a smaller independent park but for a Universal park? Not my cup of tea.