Jump to content
  TPR Home | Parks | Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Instagram 


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by trj820

  1. Looks like a small change visually, but I think it makes a BIG difference in the experience.


    That's the one part of the ride I thought needed re-profiling the most as that particular turn always felt like it was going to tear the train apart.


    I'm surprised that this part saw so much re-profiling though — it never seemed quite that bad at that spot.


    Screen Shot 2016-06-10 at 5.18.14 PM.png[/attachment]

    I for one, would disagree. My ribs were not a fan of that turn.

  2. Is it just me, or do these RMC rides seem to lose speed more quickly than their large GG counterparts? For the initial height of this ride, the last 30 seconds of ride was incredibly close to the ground.

    RMC's spend a lot of time close to the ground specifically so they don't lose speed. They all come roaring back into the station and are intense from start to finish.

    Well no, actually, Being close to the ground causes it to loose more speed, not less. It's low to the ground because that's how they like to build their coasters, an I must say: it works for them.

  3. The way that the speed of a coaster would vary throughout the track that it traverses is incredibly complex. In order to figure out the real average speeds, we would need to be a client of or on the payroll of the companies that design that specific ride, because while the principles of calculating the average speed are pretty simple (integral calculus; integrating the train's speed with respect to time and dividing it by the time elapsed that it takes to traverse the whole track) the actual equations themselves would likely be too difficult to do by hand. Average speed is extremely variable even on the same ride, because if the train is stacked for a minute, then that 0 mph speed over 60 seconds must therefore be included in the average to be accurate, thus bringing the average way down. It means less for the actual ride's experience, so combined with the difficulty of how to measure it, it appears to be much less marketable and thus less common knowledge because it isn't worth the computational expense to calculate it. (At least as far as my intuition can tell; though I have yet to be employed by a ride design company, I do have 80% of my Mechanical Engineering degree under my belt.)


    However, with a stopwatch program, Google Earth and Youtube, you can nonetheless come up with some VERY crude approximations of the average speeds of the coaster. Open up a video of any coaster who has recent and very clear Google Earth satellite imagery, and use a stopwatch to measure the time that it takes for the camera (thus the train) to traverse certain sections of track that are visible on Google Earth. Use Google Earth's Measure --> Path tool to determine the distance that the train traveled in the video for that amount of time that you decided, then divide that amount of track traveled by the time elapsed in that specific portion of the Youtube video, then you have the average speed for the train over that stretch of track. Then keep doing this for the rest of the ride, then at the end calculate the average of all of the speeds you recorded. (I'd say that the easiest way to determine landmarks in the Youtube video on where to pause that are also easy to find on Google Earth would be at every support frame for coasters like B&M's and stuff that tend to use simple tubular connections instead of a complex frame like on a wooden coaster, which normal human reflexes would not be able to get an accurate reading otherwise.)


    Why not just time the coaster from beginning to end with a POV and divide by the total length of the track? It might not take into account station and transfer track lengths and stuff, but if you're looking for a very crude measurement, you'll get something.

    While I'm not an engineer, I would side with chicken.



    Let's say you have a function (or group of functions) that defines the speed at every given point in time during the ride. You could integrate this to find the total track length.

    Now, I may be getting this completely wrong, but the average of a function between points a and b in the domain is just the definite integral from a to b divided by the absolute value of the difference of a and b. Thus, no matter what the actual speed function is, the average should be that same as long as the definite integral between say, start and finish (the track length) in in proportion with the change in the domain (the elapsed time).

  4. Morgan developed the new track for Steel Dragon 2000 that is superior to the old design, and the original Chance Hyperlite was shown with that track, and then they are building this with the old track style.


    For a company that has not built a ride in so long you would think they would bring out some new technology given the chance. It dosen't really matter if they have improved their skills at shaping the track, the outside design is still superior when designing wheel bogies.


    Inside wheel steel track is outdated, and outside wheel track is far superior.

    You have all the right to argue that the new track system is "far superior" than the old, but hammering it multiple times in one post doesn't really get the point through as to "why" you say it is superior. Your mention of Vekoma was a start:

    Vekoma don't build the old track style anymore, unless someone buys an standard SLC, Boomerang or Mine Train, but I would suspect that they are also moving away from the old track style in their future Mine Train coasters.

    I do see your point considering Vekoma's latest mine trains, even though they have a very close partnership with Disney and they basically do exactly what they tell them to.

    But mounts their trains on the inside...

  5. The backwards trains that were introduced at SFGrAm last year were brand new chassis that are made to go backwards. As far as I knew, it was only the chassis parts that were new, the seats were removed from the forward facing chassis and placed on the backwards chassis. I also heard that the park ran into a little snafu because when the "limited time" backwards trains ended, they just flipped them around, which B&M didn't really care for and forced them to put the normal forward facing trains back on.


    Coaster trains are not really meant to go backwards unless they were originally designed to do so. That's why Cedar Fair turned the racing Paramount coasters back to all facing forward when they took over as PTC even said themselves that their trains are only meant to travel in a recommended forward direction. B&M is probably more stringent on that sort of thing because of the "warranties" their coasters come with, although not exactly sure how Premier stands when SF turned the Mr. Freeze coasters around backwards. Probably not as much since their trains travel in both directions anyways on those shuttle coasters.


    Unless they've ordered another set of backwards chassis from B&M, Magic Mountain will be running Batman backwards this year. I don't see SFOT doing this until next year if their next in line to get the chassis.

    Wait, wasn't Premier involved in the reversal of Mr. Freeze?

  6. Love Christmas at Disneyland. I don't know that I've ever done Knott's at Christmas, but it looks like they do it right. Great report, Chuck!


    Wait! A Compliance Sign? When did "Snow White" get this posted?

    And is this (of course, the children...) the only attraction with such a sign?


    Important questions, Chuck.


    I saw them at a number of attractions.


    These are required to be posted at all attractions in California. Every park will have them in CA, typically the message is on the ride restrictions signs. In all my time at a park, I've never heard of someone asking for one, but I'm sure it happens.

    On rule I like to go by is that there are more things illegal or criminalized than there are legal in California.

    *Edit: For example, 300 foot tall chair swings named Windseeker.

  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use https://themeparkreview.com/forum/topic/116-terms-of-service-please-read/