Talk:Kingda Ka

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kingda Ka article.
Article policies
Good article Kingda Ka was a nominee for good article, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is part of WikiProject Amusement Parks, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Amusement parks. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
This article lacks sufficient references and/or adequate inline citations.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is part of WikiProject Roller Coasters, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Roller coasters. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Picture vote

Which of these two pictures should be used as the main picture? I took both of them and I can't decide which is better, I'd like some input. Dusso Janladde 03:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

The first picture seems to be with a better colour, however the second picture has a better view of the second hill. Why not have both the pictures in the article?--Steven 21:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Picture #1 because of color and a nice angle. The cars/parking lot ruin picture #2. I think there are some good pics on the net of KK taken from the pond, before El Toro got in the way.

[edit] Changes

Someone needs to change this article to be in the presnt tense rather then future tense, as this ride is now built and running, also I expect there is probably more information that could be added! Ok, someone literally changed this page right after I had posted this, and now it is good!

I heard that dummies fell out of the test run on the way up. don't know if it's true but sounds scary to me!


Of course they look the same, THEY WERE BOTH BUILT BY INTAMIN AG! Ian Rubin 5 July 2005 19:16 (UTC)


Where did the 20,800 horsepower figure that the motor is capable of come from? Is there a reliable source? The peak horsepower that the motor will ever put to the train is 'only' 7400, straight from Six Flags themselves: www.sixflags.com/parks/greatadventure/pdf/kingdaka-factsheet.pdf www.sixflags.com/parks/greatadventure/ParkPress/031705KKfactSheet.html

[edit] Re:Changes

Well, it's not currently running. It's "broken." Part of the launch track got dislodged and broke other parts of the ride. Also, when they were testing it before it opened, the dummies' HEADS fell off.

NO DUMMIES HEADS FELL OFF!! CAN PEOPLE JUST STOP SAYING THAT?

[edit] The dummies are intact!

Will you please stop it with all of these rumors with the dummies! None of it is true!!! It never happened! Erase it from your mind! No dummies ever fell out, nor did any heads come off! If that did happen, do you think they would have opened it at all this season? Do you really think Six Flags wants heads of people coming off on one of their rides? Lawsuit-city! They'd go bankrupt, and besides, the state of NJ wouldn't have passed the ride in its test, and NJ is known as one of the states with one of the stricter roller coaster tests. No more about the dummies, okay?

"Boss, the dummy's heads all fell off on the test ride."
"Ah, the h*** with it, just let those kids on already."


I think I have proof that there are dummies; http://rcdb.com/ig2832.htm?picture=34, but seriously, heads detatched from bodies? Count me out. - Ceres3

[edit] Huh?

These sentences:

It is 151 feet (46 m) taller than the Statue of Liberty, including its pedestal and base.

don't quite make sense to me. Can someone clear them up?  :: Salvo (talk) 04:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I'll try to explain it... take a look at Image:Liberty-statue-with-manhattan.jpg. Notice how there's the actual statue, as well as the pedestal and base? The overall height, from the ground to the torch, is 305 feet. The height of the statue by itself, not including the pedestal, is 151 feet. If you were to put Kingda Ka next to the statue, the top of Kingda Ka would be 151 feet higher than the torch. In other words, if you were to hypothetically put a second statue on top of the first, its torch would be 456 feet high, the same height as Kingda Ka. Dusso Janladde 17:53, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


So why not just say it's twice as tall? CrossEyed7 22:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


Because it's not twice as tall. It's as tall as two statues plus one pedestal and base. Mr. Anonymous 07:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Extra seat mounts

Can anybody, perhaps a SFGA employee, confirm that there are indeed extra seat mounts under the panel shown in this picture and this picture? If so, are the stations already set up for loading and unloading this extra row (i.e. do they already have the gates for it)? I can't tell from any pictures I've seen. Dusso Janladde 18:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Both have been confirmed from a conversation with a ride operator. Dusso Janladde 00:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MegaStructures

Justy fyi, that a MegaStructures article exists. This coaster was featured on the show MegaStructures recently. I started a stub article for MegaStructures - if you want to work the fact of being a documentary subject into the article, or watch the show and point at the article in your reference section.

[edit] On-ride photo

Would a scan of an on-ride photo with the faces blurred out qualify as fair use for this article? I feel that it would be notable because it actually consists of two seprate pictures (from the launch and the brake run) rather than one picture as most do. Dusso Janladde 00:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that if we could find an on-ride photo it would be great to add to the article. But look at the Spash Mountain article. They didn't blur out the faces. - Ceres3

[edit] Ride Duration

Six Flags' Website states that the ride duration is 50.6 seconds. In my mind, 28 seconds sounds more realistic. Thoughts?--NPswimdude500 02:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

50.6 seconds is the time from when you leave the station until you return to the station. 28 seconds is the time from the beginning of the launch to the end of the brake run (about where the second camera is), which is what matters. Dusso Janladde 09:20, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification--NPswimdude500 01:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • I explained the conflict of ride durations in the infobox. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.225.72 (talk) 14:10, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reason for Removal

I removed this from the "interesting facts" section:

  • Another Roller Coaster similar (but not as impressive) as the Kingda Ka is called Stealth at Thorpe Park, UK, making it 3rd tallest and the fastest roller coaster in Europe at 205 ft high and an acceleration of 0 - 80 mph in 2 seconds. It has G-Forces of up to 4.5 G's, 1.5 more than an astronaut taking off into space.

The only other roller coaster that really deserves mention here is Top Thrill Dragster. It's the only other coaster of this type that is over 400 feet tall. The rest - and there are a total of 11 operating or under construction (see Accelerator Coaster#List of Accelerator Coasters - are all 213 feet tall or shorter, which is about half as tall as Top Thrill Dragster. It's completely unnecessary to mention just one of these in this article, as Kingda Ka and Top Thrill Dragster are the only two that, shall I say, stand out from the crowd. The only accelerator coaster in the 200-foot range that could be mentioned here is Xcelerator, since it was the first of this design. Dusso Janladde 09:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

On second thought, the fact that Stealth's layout is exactly the same as Kingda Ka's but on a smaller scale (and, of course, lacking Kingda Ka's 270-degree twist) could be mentioned here, but it's really the only aspect of Stealth that deserves mention in this article.Dusso Janladde 09:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
As I understand it, this remark means to say that Stealth is the third tallest coaster in Europe, correct? Because it is certainly not the third tallest in the world --NPswimdude500 01:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
We in Europe tend to posess the 'younger brothers' of all the big boys in America. I'm going on Stealth this next Wednesday, and so far it is the closest thing we have to the almighty greatness of Kingda Ka. So while it might not be anywhere near the third-highest in the world, it is a Kingda Ka clone and the third highest in Europe, so it certainly deserves a mention. Lady BlahDeBlah 20:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It still doesn't deserve mention in this article.

[edit] NPOV tag

I put this tag here for the sake of 151.198.230.12. I do not pretend to know anything about this coaster. If you do, consider talking to Mr. Anonymous, not MrFish :) -- MrFishGo Fish 16:00, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is this correct?

After a rollback occurs, the train will be brought back to the station where the riders have the choice of getting off or riding again.

I know that after being lauched 128 mph and you don't make it over, it comes back and launches 160 mph. I do not think it goes back to the station.

That's total BS. If it launched at 160 mph, everyone on the train would be severely injured by the negative G forces as the train sped over the tophat. Also, there aren't enough brakes to slow a train traveling that fast to a safe speed, so it would crash into the next train. Not to mention the fact that the motor isn't even capable of launching a train that fast, not even close. I've seen it roll back with people on it, in fact I was next in line for the front row of the train that rolled back! Dusso Janladde 19:50, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
Can anybody inform us why the coaster sometimes rolls back? Is it a matter of weight distribution, a flaw in the launch mechanism...any idea why this happens? -Etoile 01:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not exactly sure why, but according to Top Thrill Dragster, rollbacks tend to happen on Kingda Ka, Top Thrill Dragster and other similar coasters when the weather's cold, wet or windy, which throws off the mechanisms that weigh the train and determine the launch forces. - Minkus 04:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
According to the ride ops on TTD at Cedar Point, the best way to get a rollback is to have skinny people sit in front and big people sit in back. When the launch mechanism weighs the train, it gives it just enough juice so the train will clear the tower. This it why it requires more power for a lighter train, because the train has less momentum. It also assumes that the train's weight is evenly distributed, so if there's extra weight at the back end of the train, it might not make it over. Rpachico 07:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

That's garbage

I think it is a flaw in the mechanism, but really, I don't know much about this coaster. However, no other coaster runs at 128 mph, so it probably can't ALWAYS go that fast. I need proof because this is a reasonable guess. - Ceres3

P.S. 160 mph? What do you mean? I think I missed something.

That's wrong. - Minkus 04:31, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

But do you know the truth, if that's not right? - Ceres3


Rollbacks can be caused by many things. Although the weather plays a major roll in the ride's performance, it also depends on how long the ride has been running for; The hydraulic launch system does take some time to warm up. A 160 mph launch would not be possible, because there is simply not enough horse power provided by the hydraulics to power a launch of that caliber. Weight distribution throughout the train can also play a major roll in whether the train will roll back or not. Other times roll backs could be caused by computer error, where in this case the computer doesn't assign a correct weight group to a train, sometimes leading to a rollback.-Ethan "Emann"

Acually, they make it rollback in the morning on purpose, to be prepared for one. - Ceres3 03:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Ethan is correct, it is usually due to either elemental conditions of the weather, or a mechanical error in the weighing of the trains or the actual hydraulic system during under performing during the launch, as the hydraulic system is one of the more sporadic launching mechanisms, not always able to run with precision and giving varied out comes.

All of these mount to create rollbacks, usually more prevalent during the morning while the hydraulic system is still being warmed up/adjusted.

No I am not so sure about bringing the train back into the station after a rollback has occured.

Though the practices may vary from Six Flags to Cedar Fair, on TTD at Cedar Point, they simply have the train resume its pre-launch position, and rerun the launching sequence.

On a side note, it is indeed possible for Kingda Ka to reach speeds of 160 mph, as during the test phase of an hydraulic roller coaster, they test the coaster to its absolutely highest and lowest extremes, to see hwo the system reacts to the changes. For example, Xcelerator was able to reach speeds just over 115 mph during the test phases. Hyde244 00:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Hyde244, your wrong so shut the ƒu¢k up, please. You have no proof that it can reach 160mph so just stop where you are. Xcelerator did NOT reach speeds over 115mph, the speeds in that video were just a little over 100mph. The construction crew had trouble getting Kingda Ka up to 128mph. It may be able to reach 136mph but that is overestimating. Please, next time check your §hiт, before looking ignorant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.226.9 (talk) 02:03, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

I have seen a video of Xcelerator traveling at least 106 and flying over the top hat. TTD can reach 135 mph (at least that. I've seen the board display 135.), and I could see Ka breaking 140, but it doesn't launch at 160.Timetrial3141592 01:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Last time I was there, in late June 07, they experienced a rollback with the car in front of us. The operators did bring it all the way back to the station, and allowed people to get off if they wanted to. The person that got off, was booed by the waiting crowd... Ank329 14:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pronunciation

Can someone please record the pronunciation of "Kingda Ka"?

It is pronouced exactly how it looks

Pronounced: Kingder-Car.

That's not even close to how it's pronounced! King - da - Ka! Not very hard, is it?

According to Megastructures it is pronounced Kingder Car, although it does not make much sense. Speed2006 17:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

King-da-ka! Very simple. It was named after the tiger, but what if the tiger was named after the coaster, which was called Kingder Car, but since the coaster was named after the tiger which made the coaster be called Kingda Ka. Weird. Okay, I'll clarify it. What if the coaster and the tiger were named after Kingder Car. - Ceres3

To clear this up for posterity, the staff at Great Adventure have repeatedly stated that Kingda Ka (pronounced king-da kah, or 'kingdɘ kah is the name of one of the tigers in the new exhibit, and the coaster was named after him. First-hand information. fethers 03:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] May 5th 2006

Can I just ask why the loss of someone's mobile phone was mentioned, as I find no other link to it in the rest of the section?

It's possible that the phone had fallen onto the launch track and caused the breakdown. Dusso Janladde 23:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I'm pretty sure the tiger was named after the coaster...

...not the other way around! But according to 68.39.144.66's edit, the coaster is named after the tiger. Maybe Mr. Anonymous is a park employee, but I wouldn't bet on it. Dusso Janladde 12:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three Skylines

I tagged the claim that the skylines of New York, Philly, and AC as dubious. It would be good to get a source on this. It smacks of the kind of claim to drum-up publicity a la Rock City or as an urban legend. AC from Jackson seems to be the hardest to believe. Roodog2k 19:33, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


The statement is most probably true. From low altitudes seeing across the state is acutally very possible on a clear day (unfortunately in NJ they don't occur very frequently). The Atlantic City skyline can be seen at similar heights from further north in the state, the New York skyline can be seen from further south, and the Philidelphia sky line can be seen from the NJ shore.

I have real doubts about this. NYC would be the most likely, in my opinion, just because the buildings are tallest and the urban sprawl is greatest.
  • Jackson, NJ to NYC is almost 50 miles [1]
  • Jackson, NJ to AC is a little over 50 miles [2]
  • Jackson, NJ to Philly is a little under 45 miles [3]
Roodog2k 19:09, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Color of Trains

The article currently states that the four colors include light blue, dark blue, orange, and green, but later in the article "light blue" is replaced by "teal." Having never seen the roller coaster I don't know which color description is more accurate so I won't edit it. But for consistency and clarity someone familiar with the ride should either change all the "teal" references to "light blue" or vice versa. 74.73.41.31 05:47, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Teal is the light blue train. I don't know if the article should have the statement "teal". If not, take out the statement "light blue". Don't know. Ceres3 06:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

    The ride ops actually call that train the "Teal train".

[edit] Maximum Height ?

The article states that anyone whose head is higher than the seat back cannot ride, but that only one person has been denied admission because of this. Does anyone know, or can anyone find out, what the maximum height is? 69.121.226.35 03:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

I think maybe six foot 4, or maybe 6 foot 8, some one of those. Coastergeekperson04 22:38, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not specified because it would depend on one's torso height when they're sitting down, not standing height. A 6 foot 8 person with long legs would probably be able to ride, but a 6 foot 8 person with short legs might not be able to. Dusso Janladde 17:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biased

This article is overwhelmingly anti-Kingda Ka. Almost no facts about it are stated without some preface like "not unlike all other coasters" or "not unique to Kingda Ka". I find that commentary unnecessary and skewed. That's why I've removed such prefaces from the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mellowaim10 (talk • contribs) 03:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC).

uyashkxdsfld;sfljkvlkdxlcvdjfvkfjdsjdslfds;fdj;lslsdf;l;sdslkjsl;dljkljkdfkjdkjfl Aa1010111 22:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I cleared it up, and removed the neutrality notice. --Mooshykris 07:01, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Theft

Is it just me or is it gleamingly apparent that Kingda Ka is just a remake of The Top Thrill Dragster at Cedar Point. The only difference is the height, the speed, and the extra little hill that they just threw in there so they didnt get sued or something. Its so weak... no

  they can't get sued
  there are many coasters that are or are simular all over the world
  its made by the same company so there the ones who designed it
  the park got what they wanted
They were both made by Itamin AG, they were running out of ideas supposedly...--Live Oak Computer Lab (IP:63.194.136.248) 22:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
No. Intamin builds the things. The manager of Great Adventure just got steamed that Cedar Point got TTD, so xe (gender-neutral pronoun) called Intamin and ordered a slightly bigger copy of TTD. The hill is so that the general public won't catch on to the fact that it's a bigger TTD. And would it kill you to spell-check? Timetrial3141592 01:49, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some sources

I have found an article that might contain info we need sources for, but don't have time to sort out right now. USA article on opening day. --Tinned Elk 01:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protection

I think that Kingda Ka should be semi-protected. The page is vandalized by many anons and is constantly experiencing periods of vandalism. It should be semi-protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CPGACoast (talk • contribs) 20:33, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA quick-fail

Per the GA criteria, any article with a cleanup banner must be quick-failed. I urge you to address the issue brought up by this banner (lack of citations) and renominate this article. I also think that posting the entire press release could potential be a copyright violation, although I am not sure. My recommendation would be to use the information in the article and cite the press release as a source. In addition, the references should be consistently formatted and include at least a title, publisher, url and accessdate (preferably using the {{cite web}} template). Best wises, GaryColemanFan (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! My goal is to make Kingda Ka a featured (yes, featured) article. Hey, it can happen! --CPGACoast (talk) 19:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)