Fastest Lift Hill?

[Angle O. Descent]

Since Maverick's slow upwards LSM launch has been disqualified by our expert opinionists here, I would like to revise my post by picking both Skyrush and I305 as the fastest "lift" hill I've been on.

[rcjp]

I have to say I don't really understand why maverick's lift isn't a lift. Sure, LSMs are mostly used for launches but, to me, it can also be just another type of lift: we have chain lift hills, cables, drive tyres so why can't we have LSMs? Given that other types (such as drive tyres) are also used for launches (like incredible hulk's) I don't really see why LSM's can't be used for both launches and lifts and, therefore, are excluded from the "lift hill" category.

[Dr. M]

Now there's a question. Why did they use LSMs for Maverick's first hill, which are relatively unreliable, when a cable lift could be made just as fast?

[coasterkyle]

Now there's a question. Why did they use LSMs for Maverick's first hill, which are relatively unreliable, when a cable lift could be made just as fast?

 

Mainly has to do with the undercarriage of the trains, Not enough room for the earth magnets, skid plate for the drive tires, the electrical contacts to release harnesses, and add a Catch car dog to the trains. I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons why.

[Coasterbp]

Now there's a question. Why did they use LSMs for Maverick's first hill, which are relatively unreliable, when a cable lift could be made just as fast?

 

I don't think that they are unreliable... in fact, there's no moving parts at all, unlike a cable and catch car system.... LSM's in THIS case are probably more reliable than a cable system, IMHO...

 

-=CoasterBP

[Double0Kevin]

LSMs are incredibly reliable. Also, I would say Maverick's is a lift, I wouldn't call it a launch at all. California Screamin' has a LIM lift hill and I absolutely consider that a lift hill. Does the speed make it not a lift hill? Cause if that's the case i305, Skyrush, MF, etc are all just slow upward launched Accelerator coasters.

[rcjp]

^Exactly! Although the comparison between cable lifts and accelerator rides might not be the best as one uses an electric motor while the other one uses a hydraulic system I totally agree with you. Maybe if we take the case of all the coasters where the lift consists in tyres we could then say that, if it were just a matter of speed, they would be all slow drive tyre launches.

[Steveg1988]

In my very humble opinion, I would consider any system that shoots you up the hill to be a launch, where there is nothing on the hill to keep you going. A LIM/LSM lift hill would require in my opinion a continuous propulsion up said hill, versus the sling shot method of traditional launches. You're still being lifted up the hill versus being shot up the hill.

[Dr. M]

If LSMs are so reliable, then why is Maverick so unreliable? And why use cable lifts at all, why not use LSMs for all their coasters, is it the expense?

[gerstlaueringvar]

If LSMs are so reliable, then why is Maverick so unreliable? And why use cable lifts at all, why not use LSMs for all their coasters, is it the expense?

Remember Maverick is the first to use those new style of LSM and Intamin is famous for little problems here and there. iSpeed and Cheetah Hunt must be a lot more reliable I guess.

 

 

I think the reason why not using LSM to replace the lift hill might be:

 

1. Waste of electricity.

 

2. The train can't fully stop during E-Stop and it will roll back to the station at a low speed. To prevent trains hitting into each other, the train in the back can only enter the station after the train in the front had cleared the lift hill. That lowered the capacity. Solution might be adding a brake in front of the station like Maverick but it's a waste of land and track.

[rcjp]

^Plus the fact that, given the motor used on cable lifts is essentially the same as the ones used with chains only more powerful, they have been being used for quite a few years and so are already more developed (which can have benefits such as reliability and power consumption).

[gerstlaueringvar]

^Plus the fact that, given the motor used on cable lifts is essentially the same as the ones used with chains only more powerful, they have been being used for quite a few years and so are already more developed (which can have benefits such as reliability and power consumption).

The cable lift motor is much more complicated than chain lift motor. Cable lift motors need to run backwards but chain lift motors mostly don't have that function.

 

Reliability is arguable because Mega Lites also have a lot of problems on cable lift system. Again, Intamin makes kick ass rides with small problems here and there. As long as it's not a giant fail, it's okay.

[rcjp]

^I didn't know mega lites had problems. But then, most intamins do have quite a few now and then.

[bonsaiisuperstar]

Having i305 down for 2/3 of last season was almost a mega fail in my book. I suppose custom parts do take some time to make. Something failed with the cable lift if my memory serves me, a cog or gear?

[rcjp]

So, taking all the issues cable lifts can bring into consideration, it must all be a mater of power efficiency which makes them use this system instead of LSMs, am I wrong?

[Oryp]

As for Maverick, it would be reasonable to assume that LSM's were used for the lift because the hardware on the trains was already in the plans for the tunnel launch. It would be inefficient for them to use two propulsion systems that require very different configurations.