The links weren't behaving for some reason Lofty, but I've fixed them now.
Yeah, I would assume the bottom picture is showing something in the maintenance shed. It won't stop the trains rolling off the end (with the outside the track wheel assembly used on this ride that wouldn't work), so my guess is maybe for allowing them to put the trains on? The smaller rail diameter and curved sections would help 'guide' the wheel assemblies into place.
If that's not the case, I'd be interested to know what it is for...
It's not going to be a "big grey tower" nor have an "industrial look". The tower will be brick on the outside like Fluch von Novgorod, but that will not be completed until next year (along with the indoor 'dark ride' section). That's why the park suggested that we wait until 2016 before returning to the park for some ERT.
Seems strange to me that Vertical Construction has started yet there seems to be no layout plans (available to us) or no no limits simulation. Is this typical of a smaller park like Hansa? Am i right in thinking major parks tend to get simulations out as early as possible for marketing purposes? Would be very interested in seeing this layout prior to completion.
Well, technically you're both right. It is over-supported, since the design code requires the structure to have some safety margin - which basically means you design it to withstand a force half again as strong as the strongest one you're likely to encounter during the ride's life time. With this "150 % reference force" as a basis, you design the structure to withstand that and then some, under the assumption that your materials are of a poorer quality than specified, just to be sure. Additionally, structural elements usually come in pre-defined sizes, and you always round up your theoretically required size to the nearest standard one. All this usually culminates in an end product that - theoretically - would be able to handle two or three times as strong forces as they are likely to ever be subject to under normal operation.
However, that's not to say those safety margins aren't required. A miscalculation here, a material fault there... if you had designed the ride to the bare minimum, it would be pretty likely to collapse or otherwise fail at some point. And juridically speaking, you don't really want to slack on the building codes either - one inspection, and your career outside the burger-flipping world would meet a rather abrupt end. So all in all, the ride is over-supported by necessity. However, it isn't more over-supported than it needs to be.