greenspandan Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 right and what would you guys have said to people proposing a Giga Coaster 2 months ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coaster Cow Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 16,043. Without a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homeboy23 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 right and what would you guys have said to people proposing a Giga Coaster 2 months ago? Â That hasn't even been proven yet. I said earlier in this thread about if they wanted to keep this a secret why would they put a label that says giga for the public to see? Â Just because the label says giga doesn't mean it will be. It could be a code that they know what it is and to throw the public off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh Linn Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 right and what would you guys have said to people proposing a Giga Coaster 2 months ago? Â That hasn't even been proven yet. I said earlier in this thread about if they wanted to keep this a secret why would they put a label that says giga for the public to see? Â Because they didn't expect people to zoom in with their cameras on the shipping label? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalize Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 right and what would you guys have said to people proposing a Giga Coaster 2 months ago? Â That hasn't even been proven yet. I said earlier in this thread about if they wanted to keep this a secret why would they put a label that says giga for the public to see? Â Just because the label says giga doesn't mean it will be. It could be a code that they know what it is and to throw the public off. Â They underestimated how much free time the roller coaster enthusiast community has. Â What do you think this ride will be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
testtrack321 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Just because the label says giga doesn't mean it will be. It could be a code that they know what it is and to throw the public off. Â I think KD has better things to do with their time than planting fake shipping lables on washers. But that's just me... Â My guess? Little over 300 ft, no vertical lift, long out and back with some bowl stuff near the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homeboy23 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 A steel one... Â I don't believe any rumors until I see proof. Rumors are fun to hear though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
testtrack321 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 A steel one... I don't believe any rumors until I see proof. Rumors are fun to hear though.  Never said rumors, rumors have some sort of 3rd party info, I'm just pulling stuff out of my ass and calling it as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCS Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Here is one more reason to believe it is a giga  http://www.kdfansite.com/gallery/displayimage.php?album=53&pos=200 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpengeist04 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 My guess? Little over 300 ft, no vertical lift, long out and back with some bowl stuff near the end. Â ...So basically a 300 foot Superman (SFNE). I could definitely live with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacoaster Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Now I am only stating what the pictures are showing that peice i highlighter 2 pages back is clearly has supports for steps and connectsq for track that curve simultaneously. Those supporting the 45 degree (WHICH DOES MAKE SENSE) still haven't provide an explanation for that piece. YES I think a verticle lift sounds crazy.... But I do believe that its possible (thats what makes engineering fun). I am going to list my points Please watch all the supporting evidence in the Super Coasters video.  THIS IS LONG!!!!  OK First I am going to begin by saying this please take a lot at this video. I will be referencing this video to support my thoughts which support the vertical lift talk.  VIDEO (warning it is 90 minutes long for those with slower computers but I'm only focusing on a short segment starting at the 16 minute point.)  I for one am now favoring the belief that this ride will have a vertical lift.  First I want to say... clearly the is something wrong with the angled lift hill as there aren’t any support connectors on all but one piece. Second as someone said before going with the 11 pieces of track for the lift would barely make the 300 limit if angled.  Now!  For the one lift piece that does have a support connection on the support frame I can say it seems no different than Fahrenheit or kingda ka as they angle supports extending from the vertical frame. I think that one piece is going to be located toward the top of the lift . Look at Fahrenheit Fahrenheit The angle support extends downward from the vertical support located towards the top of the lift. In a sort of opposite example we have Kingda ka as seen here  Here the angle support extends upward to any apex from the vertical support towards the top of the assent.  Now I am going on a whim and saying that this ride will possibly have a 90 degree drop as well, making 2 towards ….similar to Fahrenheit or kingda ka… except, the complex support structure for the lift will not be necessary for the drop as there no worry for the cable life mechanism to fit nor for an elevator or stair support. Thus the double spine tracks to enhance strength. If u watch the video at 15:40 you can see the portion where Millennium force is highlighted and particularly at 16:03 you see that near the drop there are near vertical stairs connect in the same fashion as the angle stairs. So to those who think that you have a different support or stairs type take a look.... Also if you look at 16:07 you will see supports towers for the lift on each tower have a flanged base and have the same cross section for the majority of the upper portion of the support tower. I highlight this to say that there is no problem with Intamin simplifying this design and saying we can just place the track on the tower itself. That’s how I view these pieces of track. They look like track preassembled to the tower support. This cuts down on cost as you kill two birds with one stone. This way you don’t need extra track distance to cover the angle lift span and you need less supports because you just need one strong vertical tower thus the bulkiness of the these pieces. Lastly Look at 16:27 and see the supports for the elevator, they are also relatively the same as the supports for the staircases. So again can make any claims saying that the lift cannot be vertical based on the stairway supports. If anything pay attention to how the stair or possible elevator supports are attached to the frame not the track like they are on MF thus giving more reason for the bulky support frame. Again Intamin is smart. Plus Judging by the clearing it looks like KD needed to make a statement with this near coaster but in a smaller space that Cedar Fair had for MF. So to save space, why use a vertical lift, to save cost, why not go with a vertical lift, it all adds up. And lastly, I suggest that the other reason for the bulky strong supports is that this ride will have your typical full 20+passenger trains and thus the need for the cable lift at this height and extra support in the frame as opposed to building the support tower like Fahrenheit. Also a cable lift can do the job and hold the weight that a lift cant given these heights. Some may want to argue that a vertical lift hill won’t work with a cable lift, well a cable car works for launching which upon launching must accelerate the several ton trains while under around 4 Gs which is times the weight of the train. The average cable lift and its typical speed will not have to endure that type of stress. This account for a safety factor based on the other uses of the same technology I say a vertical lift is more than possible!!!!  I end with this LOL!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^Do you really believe that anyone is going to watch a one-hour-plus embedded video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalize Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 A steel one... I don't believe any rumors until I see proof. Rumors are fun to hear though.  Exactly, its fun to come on here and guess and in the end see if you were right. Normally when someone says there's no proof of something yet they have a reason to think its something else so I thought you might have some other theories to throw out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacoaster Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^Do you really believe that anyone is going to watch a one-hour-plus embedded video? Â Hey I posted the video for reference... I pointed out the times of the video to watch..... I never said watch the entire video.... you're comment was unncessary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^"Your" not "you're." Â An embedded video still has to load up and buffer, and could present a problem for members with slower Web connections. Frankly, I'm not sure the video was necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nosferatu Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 If this is going to be a vertical lift as some suggest, the tower has to be a lot thicker than those lift hill pieces. You can't have such a thin 300ft tall freestandig tower with a coaster train travelling up and down along it. If it really was the foundation peace for such a large lift it would be a lot bigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacoaster Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^"Your" not "you're." An embedded video still has to load up and buffer, and could present a problem for members with slower Web connections. Frankly, I'm not sure the video was necessary.  I'll take the video down then.... I was only sharing some thoughts I had and wanted to use points from that video, which i could not find in photos, to support my thoughts.... speculating if fun ... but you comments like yours take it away.  I appologize for even posting here  If this is going to be a vertical lift as some suggest, the tower has to be a lot thicker than those lift hill pieces. You can't have such a thin 300ft tall freestandig tower with a coaster train travelling up and down along it. If it really was the foundation peace for such a large lift it would be a lot bigger.  I don't think that piece in the picture is the foundation piece... in the pictures I posted about 3 pages earlier I stated in the picture that I believe it will be placed on top of wider flanged piece. I think the piece we see in the photo is only the beginning of when the towers starts widening out towards the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcjaco Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^ I applaud the use of the video for strengthening your argument, but Chuck is right. 90 minutes is a bit much. Â Although it's a youtube link, it can seriously slow things down for our users that do not have high speed internet connections. Â Secondly, I think you're taking this a little too seriously. Have fun! It's one of the rules here! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacoaster Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^ you're right... I didn't think it would slow down peoples computers or anything... I'll just post the link... just thought it would be easier for the reference to accomodate the points. I wish I clip it down to the the 16:00 point because its only about a 1 minute's worth that im focusing on of the video. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfc Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 ^I wasn't trying to discourage you from posting--only letting you know that the video link may have been a bit much. Â My apologies if I offended you. That was not my intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vacoaster Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 cfc All is well!  I changed the video to a link but moving foward...  In the picture I had fun sketching using a MF construction picture I am depicting how I think it could be a vertical lift as no one has explained this new support piece which seems will logically fit into the frame of the other track pieces in a vertical manner.  Intamin likes to push the envelope, if they do this, I would not be surprised. The frame of the track is massive, the pics don't do it justice as many have stated... If I compare it to HRRR vertical tower, the frame is large in cross section that the frame of the KD coaster track. BUT!!! keeping in mind this new piece which appears to be the beginning of a flanged base then ... I think the base of KD possible vertical support toward could end up wider in cross section than HRRR if we end up seeing wider flanged sections arrive in the coming weeks. The wider base would suffice for a solid support structure at giga coaster heights just as they do for MF's current towers shown here and here  Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalize Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I really don't know what to expect/speculate at this point, this is obviously going to be far different then any other Intamin ride we've seen in a lot of ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rollercoastercraziness Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I thought that i knew what this coaster was going to be like but not anymore! All i know is this is going to be a rollercoaster... Thats it!I just hope this is gonna be as good as it is sounding! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyuk200523 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Just to throw something into the mix, I am fairly certain it isn't a vertical lift, I will attempt to explain. Â Using a truss system to reduce supports is a great way of saving weight and materials, but the truss system has to go straight into foundations, kind of disecting the earth at the same 45 degree angle it is running at under the lift, if you stop that truss just before the ground and place a vertical support in there will be no strength in the support beams and will just collapse at the vertical support. Look at Bridge Designs with Truss systems, you will kind of see what I mean, if anyone is still confused, I will try to draw something which explains what I mean clearer. Â Andrew "I hate describing things" Shakespeare Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atem122 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I still don't get the whole vertical lift thing, a vertical cable lift sounds like it would be plagued with troubles, the only reason that there's only one connection piece is as I said earlier, the giant truss under the track Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now