Maybe it's just me, but I miss the days when Alton was the B&M show ground for models. For any park to have a strong reputation like that with any company shows a good, solid park in my opinion, and for the company to be B&M is just great. It shows a quality attraction, with innovative attractions and big ideas.
Nemesis obviously wasn't the first Inverted coaster, but if you ask me it was the first to really push the boundaries, and completely redefine what the concept meant. No longer was it just a gimmick by hanging people under the track. Suddenly there was purpose to it. The leg choppers, the landscaping, the near misses. Everything which makes Nemesis so great. No other B&M Invert had done this really. But after Nemesis, a few others attempted. The ride almost became a trend setter, showing that you could do something different with the idea.
Oblivion is still considered to be one of the best examples of the Dive Machine out there. It's simple, to the point, and doesn't mess around. It does exactly what the ride was meant to do, which was create a coaster with a vertical drop. No frills. Just the goal, and I think most would agree it does that excellently. Sure, it's not long and lacks inversions but does the Dive Machine need that? Is that what it was conceived to do? It serves its purpose and makes a bold statement. Is there any other Dive Machine which offers an experience similar to Oblivion? (And don't say it's clone, Diving Machine G5, as though the same, I doubt that is as effective without the hole and mystery created by the theme
)
Air is a brilliant example of what a coaster can be made to do when combined with technology. It really pushed the boundaries, and was a breakthrough design. It had its teething problems, as did Oblivion, but since then B&M have perfected the design, and apparently have offered to upgrade Air for Towers. Sure, it may not be the most thrilling flyer out there, or the fastest or the tallest, but the thing is it isn't meant to be. I'm sure if Towers could have got planning permission and wanted to they could have easily built something to rival Manta. But that wasn't what they wanted, and it wasn't what the ride is about.
Air, like Nemesis, is meant to go beyond a gimmick. It takes what other rides of its kind use as just a new trick and makes it the star of the show. The ride was designed and created to be a simulation of flight. On that basis it achieves it better than any other flyer I'd say. Just because the concept isn't in the same field as sister attractions, does that make it a bad ride?
B&M prototypes are generally good, solid attractions. Air is a bit of a black sheep with its issues really. At the same time though, when you're doing something that complex can you blame it? B&M have since rectified the problems, and if Towers give them the go ahead and pay the price it can be upgraded to be just as reliable and fast as the other examples around the world. Look at the other B&M prototypes out there though. Raptor for example. That gets a fair amount of praise, and that isn't exactly a simple, tame layout as many seem to be implying prototypes are (Seemingly based on Air alone). If Towers want it, and it is within the realms of reason, B&M can generally deliver it.
The prototype doesn't have to be some simple little coaster. It can be whatever they want it to be. I'm sure the first Mega Coaster from B&M wasn't a tiny little ride (Apollo's Chariot, followed by Raging Bull a few months later if you're wondering
). B&M's first Sitting Coaster was Kumba! I think that proves that they aren't afraid to throw big ideas out there in the first place.
If Towers' brief doesn't ask for a big, thrilling, unique coaster that will stand the test of time they won't get one. Simple. If they do however, they can create a truly amazing new ride, which becomes the envy of all other parks, and gains international recognition.
I would have no issue whatsoever with Towers having the B&M 4D prototype at the park. If somewhere else builds one first then so be it, that's fine. But it doesn't mean that we will get a better ride as a result. More reliable, less teething troubles, and a refined idea perhaps. But not a better coaster.
