Talk:Stealth (roller coaster)

message: Any reason for the deletion of the external links?  I've reverted them back now, but if there was an actual reason then please say what it was.  Neutronic 13:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: The article states that stealth goes from 0-80mph in 1.9 seconds.It actually only takes 1.8 seconds so can you please update the article  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.32.4 (talk) 13:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: 2.02 g is the maximum accel force someone has recorded probably CosmicVortecs (talk) 18:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Accelleration

message: Some note should be made on the article about its constant closure. It has been closed for months now as the brake fins were damaged. They went up to early & thus broke as the train speeded over them. This is much less servere that kingda kas incident but i think it should still be noted. Lenny 08:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Whats wrong with it now?

message: I work at TP, and this is nonsense:
The nature of the problem has meant that Intamin AG has had to get invovled, which means it could be serious for all Rocket Launched Coasters built by Intamin AG.
Stealth is known to automatically send out email reports of it usage and any problems that it notices; somthing that not many coasters do, as it does it without any interation with Thorpe Park managment (it was Intamin AG that contacted Thorpe Park about the most recent issue after a email was sent to them from Stealth's ride computer, not the other way round).
...so I have removed it!--GoAround 11:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  recent probs 

message: 1200 riders a hour? I smell vandalism, but I cant remove it, because I don't know if it correct or not, can someone enlightened in the matter assist? Gherkin30 14:25, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Gherkin30 has a point, that does seem unreasonably high, and when I was last there (28th April 2007) I had to wait in line for nearly 2 hours just to get on it. Zanusi 11:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is that correct? 

message: "and to a lessor extent the ride also has the record for killing the most pigeons with a body count of 3 the first 2 birds where struck on the bunny hop then the third got knocked down on the launch on each occasion the bird gets brutally disembodied with body pieces and feathers everywhere and normally puts the ride out of action for a couple of minutes infact the first birds blood is still stained onto the support pillars on the bunny hop ==External links=="
1) The correct term for what you refer to as a bunny hop is actually an airtime hill. I also think the "blood" is in fact just the theming of the supports because thy're meant to have red on them to make them look old and fit in with the Amity Cove look.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.32.4 (talk) 21:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  correct language 

message: I added a brief comparison of the acceleration of Stealth with that of (supposedly) the world's fastest roller coaster acceleration (a roller coaster named Dodonpa in Japan). This seemed a relevant point, as it added additional context.
The edit was reverted, as it was claimed that the referenced article did not mention this (i.e. world's fastest acceleration). In fact, the article DOES mention it, see the below quote:
"(...) When it was opened it was the fastest roller coaster in the world. As of 2006, it is the third fastest but still has the highest acceleration at launch time (...)"
[quoted from article 'Dodonpa']
After doing some additional research, this appears to be verified at this link: 
So maybe there's an argument for including that as a citation within the Dodonpa article, but does this make it appropriate to restore the original edit within this article?? Feedback appreciated!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.152.254.247 (talk) 20:22, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparison with world's fastest coaster acceleration 

message: According to the Yorkie wikipedia page, Yorkie (Choc bar) used to sponsor this ride.  Presumably it doesn't any more, but is it worth mentioning this somewhere in this article also?--TimothyJacobson (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Yorkie

message: The time I went to TP (less than a week from this post) and rode stealth, there was a voice that could be heard from the trains immediately before departure. It was that of a little girl saying "to herself", "It's only a dream. It's only a dream. It's only a dream. It's only a...!" cutting off as the trains depart.
I was going to add that to the article, but seeing as that was my first and only time on the ride, I don't know if it's what normally happens or if it was like a special event thing or something. Can someone confirm that for me? SuperSonic (talk) 22:34, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  It's only a Dream... 

message: has anyone got a source on this ride reaching 4+ g's?
because doing some basic maths and using the formula a = Δv / Δt, 
then a = 35.763(m/s)/1.9(s) = 18.822 m/s^2 = 1.919 g
77.100.104.230 (talk) 00:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It is likely a fabricated spec. The article once said 4.5 g and I removed it, and then 4.8 g was added recently in this edit by an IP editor. I've removed it again. Needs a source to be included. --GoneIn60 (talk) 02:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  G-Forces 

message: The sources used are ones from LADBible, not a particularly reliable source, but also the fact that this article just summarises a TikTok with the only official statement being reassurance from a Thorpe Park rep. Needs to be removed IMO. JoelJSK (talk) 19:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for acceleration. 

message: on the article it says "1.9 via rcdb", however from thorpe park themselves (and on a sign) it states 1.8. Should i or someone that sees this update it to 1.8 with the citation being this CosmicVortecs (talk) 18:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, RCDB does not list the acceleration. Perhaps it did at one time, but it no longer does. Secondly, park claims released through social media platforms such as X (Twitter), or even claims placed on park signage, are not generally reliable enough for use on Wikipedia. We generally prefer coverage and confirmation of the claims by secondary sources, and RCDB publishing the claim is a good indicator it has been confirmed.For now, the photo in the article is fine. I don't think we need to go any further. If the park publishes something in more detail (not on social media), then perhaps we can use that and say "according to Thorpe Park...", but until then, I think we should avoid the claim altogether. --GoneIn60 (talk) 06:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acceleration on RCDB