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

Kings Dominion (KD) Discussion Thread

P. 766: Haunt Has Risen from the Grave

Recommended Posts

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

I really want to see that bottom piece that appears to curve out of the station. The angle that picture is taken at may exaggerate the actual angle of the curve, but we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

Not necessarily, if they use multiple block sections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

Not necessarily, if they use multiple block sections.

 

That would make the capacity per train no different than BLSC's....as for trains I definitely think we'll be seeing the 2nd gen mega trains that are now in use at SFNE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

Not necessarily, if they use multiple block sections.

 

He's saying that a vertical lift means a tighter pull-out which would cause extreme forces in the back seat of a long train. Just another reason why this wont be a vertical lift. I don't see how it's still even thought to be possible.

 

-Justin "Why does every new coaster have to have something else? You're getting a giga, it doesn't need to have a gimmick." Seabaugh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first drop angle looks like it's going to be in the 70 to 80 degree angle range. I found this out by looking at the main support (which I'm guessing is vertical) and comparing it to the track.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my vertical lift theory! take it or leave it.

 

 

 

 

And for these support connectors I think...It's bracing..maybe?

 

 

 

Whatcha think? Am I on to something =/ don't take my word for it though I could be completely wrong, I know nothing really.

 

He's saying that a vertical lift means a tighter pull-out which would cause extreme forces in the back seat of a long train. Just another reason why this wont be a vertical lift. I don't see how it's still even thought to be possible.

It would have a wide pull out though! we've seen the top of the lift track pieces.

 

so the track would go like this (imagine the drops like Millennium Force's). The support attached to the track would follow it round the top, making a strong arch shape.

 

 

See look here V this part would be when the arch support faces vertical again and goes down to the footer on the ground, and the track goes off, like HRRR.

 

 

 

You've got to imagine the track being less..vertical lol on the drop, put MF's drop in it's place. Hope this makes sense. It's the only way I think all the peices would fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope it's not a vertical lift. I don't think it is, but I really hope not.

 

TBH, Same 'ere =(.

 

^^ I'm with you, but I still think that the lift won't be entirely vertical, but more like 70-80°.

 

But if it was anything less than vertical wouldn't it need additional supports, IE, supports without track attached? To support the angled lift. And there would be a sufficient amount due to the height of a giga coaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope it's not a vertical lift. I don't think it is, but I really hope not.

 

TBH, Same 'ere =(.

 

^^ I'm with you, but I still think that the lift won't be entirely vertical, but more like 70-80°.

 

But if it was anything less than vertical wouldn't it need additional supports, IE, supports without track attached? To support the angled lift. And there would be a sufficient amount due to the height of a giga coaster.

 

That is why it is using the truss system. The reinforcement created allows for less supports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now I don't know what to think as far as vertical lift. I would think it's possible for a 300ft cable lift to go 90 degrees. Don't forget technology has come a long way in the last 10 years since Millenium Force. Back then if we said that Intamin could built a vertical lift, it would be laughed at.

 

Also don't forget tht Fahrenheit's lift is 121 feet and the supports holding it up are nothing fancy with just single supports. By doubling the height, beefing up the support structure with using 4 instead of 1 it could be possible.

I'm not saying that it's going to happen, but I don't think it should just be singled out because it never has been done at such a height.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

Not necessarily, if they use multiple block sections.

 

He's saying that a vertical lift means a tighter pull-out which would cause extreme forces in the back seat of a long train. Just another reason why this wont be a vertical lift. I don't see how it's still even thought to be possible.

 

Not only the radius of the drop and the pull-out, but I imagine that a long train on a vertical lift will generate an enormous amount of weight pressure on the catch car or whatever it is that pulls it. So I'm just saying, if it becomes clear that the lift is vertical then it will likely mean that the trains will be shorter.

 

Even with multiple trains, the capacity would still be limited. I mean look at Hypersonic, that was designed to run 4 trains and never did. Backlot and Volcano are designed to run 3, and rarely do. I think the park would really benefit the most from a big capacity ride with a big train rather than a gimmick like a vertical lift or a vertical drop. Hopefully Cedar Fair caught onto this.

 

Regardless, I'll be happy with the ride no matter how it's designed. Any new coaster of this magnitude is awesome news. But it's always fun to speculate and hope for the best possible scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not going to be done because it's nothing but a gimmick for starters & the ride has been confirmed as a giga coaster....NOT,I repeat not a vertical coaster as defined by the shipping information & the fact that the two rides are marketed differently on intamin's website.

 

 

We only have one month & three days to go until the announcement so everyone just needs to stop wasting so much time beating a dead horse here....the pieces delievered so far indicate a standard cable lift similar to MF's,BTW in Clint's last update there were smaller red supports spotted in the staging area along with the rest of the track so knowing CF part of the ride will probably have red supports even though it clashes with the track color.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that a dead giveaway that it is NOT a vertical lift is the fact that the lift pieces have supports for stairs. A vertical lift would not have that. (Fahrenheit has a spiral staircase)

 

JEFF

 

How do you know those "supports for stairs" are not actually supports for an elevator (ala Millennium Force's lift elevator)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A vertical lift on a coaster with such a great magnitude actually makes tons of sense if you think about it. It is an extreme space saver and allows for perhaps a longer layout. People have said that so much more could have been done with MF, but they have to realize that it already cost $25 million. Maybe with a vertical lift, parks can actually achieve that desired layout without running out of space and/or spending too much money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really think that vertical lifts would save money, at all. You can consider less support, but then you have to beef up supports on vertical sections as all the load is on those, rather than spread out... I would assume it would probably equal itself out in the way of cost...

 

However, the benefit of gaining all the space that a 45 degree lift would take up would be tremendous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I know, but I mean they could get more creative and have more to work with. Even so, though, with this new track style, less supports aren't just implicated on the lift. Less supports are required in the entire layout, so all in all, in theory they actually can achieve that desired layout without running out of space and/or spending too much money, as I already said.

 

I also like the idea that this new design doesn't put 300 feet coasters out of the question anymore for smaller parks with less land, space, and money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The new track style might require less support, but it requires more track metal, in essence equaling itself out cost wise. It is more useful to less support columns around, but the track itself requires a more rigid and built up structure, thus not really eliminating much in cost. You're basically just trading one off for the other.

 

It will be quicker to assemble, and requires less footer work, but still requires roughly the same amount of metal by having the rigid spines. You might save a little, but not enough to say "damn, we should have been doing this all along..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still disagree. If it didn't save a significant amount of steel, or even money in general, then why go to all the trouble to develop a completely new track style, when you could instead just stick with one you know works and has worked for years? I don't believe that there is as much metal used for the double spine or truss, as it would have taken to create supports for those sections for normal track without extra spine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This track system is a lot easier to manufacture (more standardized parts and less welding) which cuts the manufacturing cost compared to the Tri/Quad track.

 

So we have:

Less raw materials = savings

Easier to make = savings

Less parts to ship to the parks = savings

Lower number of foundations = savings

etc...

 

And all these small savings will add up to a big saving in the end, making the whole thing cheaper, or in a better way of seeing it getting a larger coaster for the same kind of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ yea but the lift angle *could* determine the length of the train. I can't see a vertical lift with an 8 or 9 car train. And a shorter train means a line that moves as slow as Fahrenheit's, and that would definitely suck.

 

Not necessarily, if they use multiple block sections.

 

He's saying that a vertical lift means a tighter pull-out which would cause extreme forces in the back seat of a long train. Just another reason why this wont be a vertical lift. I don't see how it's still even thought to be possible.

 

The weight on the catch car isnt an issue... Compare the force on the catch car pulling a train vertically up at moderate speed (15mph) as compared to catch ares that instantly accellerate a multi ton train from 0 to 120mph plus undergoing high Gs now you looking at a multi ton train times 3 or 4... as compared to a train at natural weight. Thus I feel a catch car pulling a train vertically is no issue... No should there be a concern about structure... Extensive material science and stress calculations are performed on all structures... if the St. Louis Arch can be built then why cant this vertical structure be built.

 

Not only the radius of the drop and the pull-out, but I imagine that a long train on a vertical lift will generate an enormous amount of weight pressure on the catch car or whatever it is that pulls it. So I'm just saying, if it becomes clear that the lift is vertical then it will likely mean that the trains will be shorter.

 

Even with multiple trains, the capacity would still be limited. I mean look at Hypersonic, that was designed to run 4 trains and never did. Backlot and Volcano are designed to run 3, and rarely do. I think the park would really benefit the most from a big capacity ride with a big train rather than a gimmick like a vertical lift or a vertical drop. Hopefully Cedar Fair caught onto this.

 

Regardless, I'll be happy with the ride no matter how it's designed. Any new coaster of this magnitude is awesome news. But it's always fun to speculate and hope for the best possible scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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