Trevor Hite – General Manager of Chance-Morgan Manufacturing

The Steel Phantom, built by Arrow Dynamics, opened at Kennywood Park in 1991. When it opened, this coaster drew rave reviews and was hailed as a top-five coaster by many enthusiasts. The thing that made this beast so famous was the fact that it’s second (nope–not its first) drop was the lengthiest during the course of the ride. After plummeting down the initial drop, riders would careen up a second hill only to be dropped 225-feet into a natural ravine. The catch is that the drop dove right through the structure of the Thunderbolt, Kennywood’s respected wooden coaster. Following that tremendous few hills, riders would be greeted by numerous inversions. Keep in mind that they were still going extremely fast — around 80 miles per hour — after that first drop. Inversions aren’t usually meant to be greeted in that fashion. Over the years, the Steel Phantom became extremely rough, and popularity decreased. Still, however, the Phantom remained among the favorites of any enthusiast who had ridden it. Regardless, however, Kennywood called upon Morgan Manufacturing to revamp this ride while keeping a few of the existing parts. The other portions of the Steel Phantom would be dismantled, removed, and replaced. When the job was completed, the “new” Phantom — “Phantom’s Revenge” – would feature some great airtime hills, tremendous turnarounds, and tunnels. The inversions would be long forgotten. In 2001, the Phantom’s Revenge was unveiled, and it put a huge smile on the faces of many. I got a chance to sit down and talk with the General Manager of Chance-Morgan Manufacturing (the company behind this revamping), Trevor Hite. Here is what he had to say:

Brett Stevens: When did Kennywood Park first approach Chance-Morgan Manufacturing (Morgan Manufacturing at the time) about re-doing the existing Steel Phantom roller coaster into a new work of art? What did the first discussions accomplish, and what was your first reaction to this outrageous request

Trevor Hite: Early 2000. Kennywood did not at first think we would be interested, but they were pleased to have us look at the ride. Our first reaction was that is seemed to be a perfectly reasonable request, because we knew the ride had structural issues, and that it was rough. The increased inspection criteria had made the ride difficult to maintain.

Brett Stevens: Was the original plan to keep some existing parts of the ride and redo others, or was it to completely dismantle and redesign and build an entire new ride?

Trevor Hite: Kennywood came to us with the idea of re-using the mechanical side of the ride and replacing the problem points in the structure and track. We thought is was a good plan, as the mechanical is a huge proportion of the cost on a ride.

Brett Stevens: Did the outcry of the enthusiasts at the fact that Kennywood’s most popular ride was going to be replaced have anything to do with the final outcome?

Trevor Hite: It may have with the park, but we came in after they had decided to do the work.

Brett Stevens: Did Morgan Manufacturing and Arrow Dynamics contact each other at all during the process to clarify some things? If so, what? What was Arrow’s response and reaction to the fact that Morgan Manufacturing was re-designing their ride?

Trevor Hite: We had no contact with Arrow during the ride development.

Brett Stevens: Who was the team involved with this project, and what person took on each role?

Trevor Hite: Dana Morgan was the Principle, and as usual made the critical decisions with regard to plan and profile, structure, pricing, and aesthetics. Javier Natividad was in charge of the majority of the engineering effort including site integration and structure. George Olsen designed the restraint system. Bob Thomas and George Olsen designed the coach body. Steve Okamoto did the Plan and Profile, Elias Perez and Jason Blackmun detailed the track, and Tom Martin, Elias Peres, and Ron Alves detailed the supports. Bill Kelly was the PE. Mike Devine ran the construction project and was the site supervisor. I ran the manufacturing effort. Ron Sabattis ran the fiberglass manufacturing. Todd Manoff was in charge of assembly and site support after opening.

Brett Stevens: Was it Kennywood Park’s or Morgan’s decision to remove the inversions from the ride and replace them with tunnels, bunny-hops, and the like?

Trevor Hite: Kennywood.

Brett Stevens: Why add just an extra few feet to the second drop through the Thunderbolt and not more?

Trevor Hite: It is a great deal of work to thread an existing ride with limited 3-dimensional information. Also, we wanted to stay as close to the original drop as we could to decrease cost. It is possible we could have spent more of the ride between the thunderbolt, but I believe the park could not justify the additional expense.

Brett Stevens: What was the reason behind replacing the old Arrow Dynamics trains with new bodies? Was this to enhance the ride experience enabling the guests to get more of a rush, or was it just to cap off a redesign?

Trevor Hite: It was mainly to get a more open experience. The park also had a lot of complaints about the restraints on the ride (probably more due to a rough track profile than the restraints).

Brett Stevens: Keeping in mind all coaster projects your company has been affiliated with in the past, where does the rebirth of the Phantom rank in the mix?

Trevor Hite: It is very different and therefore hard to rank. I think the ride is one of the best out there, not just because of the ride itself but the terrain it sits on, and the park it sits in.

Brett Stevens: What was most difficult with the entire transformation?

Trevor Hite: There were many parts of the existing ride that were not where the data told us. This coupled with the difficult terrain made for a very difficult erection.

Brett Stevens: How could Morgan be sure the transitions from Arrow to Morgan track would be smooth and painless? What were the advantages/disadvantages of using the two track types?

Trevor Hite: The way we made sure the transition was clean was to pick a good transition spot. We also did not just bolt up the transition, we faired it into the existing track. The only advantage to leaving the existing track was cost, which is a very compelling advantage.

Brett Stevens: Who, if anybody, do you consider your greatest competition in the amusement industry as far as building roller coasters goes? What do Morgan rides (specifically the Phantom’s Revenge) offer that other designers/manufacturers cannot, and vice-versa?

Trevor Hite: We have great respect for some of our competitor’s ride’s and I think the competition is fairly obvious. Chance Morgan designs are, I believe, the smoothest rides in the industry. They are extremely low maintenance, and well priced in the marketplace. We have been seen in the past as less innovative with our ride design, because the market was there for our product line, and we had little motivation (for a time) to innovate. This is no longer the case however, as we are introducing many new ride designs into the market place. The creation of Chance-Morgan has increased our capacity both to create and manufacture new rides.

Brett Stevens: What is the new message behind the Phantom’s Revenge, meaning: Why paint it green instead of the original black? Why give it a new logo? Do you see the transformation as a complete rebirth for both the coaster and the park itself?

Trevor Hite: Ask the park, we do not choose colors or logos. I do know that the park is very pleased to have a new Phantom.

Brett Stevens: Relating back to Arrow Dynamics, were there any legal issues that needed to be cleared up before Morgan could attach their track to Arrow’s for the new design?

Trevor Hite: No, we did not use any of Arrow’s proprietary information.

Brett Stevens: Will the lap bar design be used elsewhere? Will enthusiasts be able to note any similarities between this Morgan hyper and future hypercoasters from the company?

Trevor Hite: There will be some similar elements on future rides. The lap bar will only be used for replacement coasters in the future, but Chance Morgan is releasing a revolutionary restraint soon for some of our new ride designs.

Brett Stevens: Did the final outcome of the Phantom’s Revenge not measure up to, meet, or exceed the original expectations? What were both parties (Morgan and Kennywood) both happy and not happy with?

Trevor Hite: Overall the project was well received by both Chance-Morgan and Kennywood.

Brett Stevens: Has Morgan been contacted to revamp any other Arrow coasters like they did with the Steel Phantom?

Trevor Hite: Other interest has been shown, but I can not discuss details yet.

Brett Stevens: We all know that space is limited over at Kennywood, but can you see

the park calling on you again for a new ride?

Trevor Hite: We have been in contact with Kennywood with regard to new Chance-Morgan rides. We enjoy working with Kennywood, because it is a great park with great people and lots of tradition.