JonnyRCT3 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 ^I do see where you are coming from with the "converting a hyper" argument. There really is no "need" to convert any hyper, as most hyper coasters are the most popular rides at their respective parks. However, it's not completely impossible to do so either. I don't see why a coaster like Magnum with a lattice support structure, couldn't get this new track. I know that's not what you're saying, I'm just stating that possibility.
Moose Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I wonder how much steel is in this per foot compared to other styles of track. It seems like it would be much more, but maybe there is savings in manufacturing manhours.
COASTER FREAK 11 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Theoretically, this new track type *could* use less steel to construct. And by simply looking at the fabrication, is also much less labor intensive in the welding department. Comparing to something like Mack triangular track or the Intiman box track, I could see this being cheaper. Those have a ton of welds and cross bracing sections. But we have no clue if they are comparable structurally, which affects cost in a big way. There are really too many variables for people to guess, and without accurate costs of ride track , its really hard to say. We'll have to wait and see if RMC says its cheaper, or if the costs to parks just end up being cheaper.
KingRCT3 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 There are no traditional hyper coasters that come to mind that are so unpopular that a conversion of such scale and cost would be warranted. I always thought RMC could retrack Big One at Blackpool.
JonnyRCT3 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 ^Chance Morgan can already do that. They transformed Steel Phantom into an all-star coaster before RMC was cool.
robbalvey Posted September 25, 2015 Author Posted September 25, 2015 RMC has sent us the updated and and official renders of their new roller coaster type! “Train design by Coaster-Lab”.
KarlaKoaster Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 RMC's approach to coaster design is like a breath of fresh air. It's just like they have a roots to leaves approach to everything they do and don't just settle for developing existing ideas but instead start again and make the idea their own. I like that.
zdub Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 If I'm looking at that last picture correctly, it appears like each train will only have one wheel bogey, at the back. As in the same as the wood trains. If this is the case perhaps they will be the first to have an inverting hyper coaster? Or just allow for much more crazy maneuvers.
SFOGdude25 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I gotta say. Those trains are sexy. Can't wait to hear more about this concept when IAAPA rolls around!
gerstlaueringvar Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I think it doesn't have to be a monorail system for the whole ride. This system can totally go back to the two rail system at the low stress sections to save some steel.
Midgetman82 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 That design did feel slightly familiar to something Coaster-Lab would design. Awesome to see them part of something major like this! And those trains look niiice! I expect more launched coasters out of these thanks to the head-rest.
DoinItForTheFame Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Those trains look beautiful. I can't wait to see the first one of these coasters getting built!!! I am really expecting a highly insane ride. I mean... it is RMC after all.
rcjp Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I think it doesn't have to be a monorail system for the whole ride. This system can totally go back to the two rail system at the low stress sections to save some steel. That's what I thought too. And maybe for the brakes/drive tires sections it would be easier, but I guess they'll be the ones who evaluate if it's worth it or not.
chickenbowl Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Nobody's mentioned that the TRex track houses the wheel assemblies on the outside of the track (not the inside like IBox, Topper, Arrow coasters, and all other wood coasters). This new system is similar to the way B&M and Intamin make their coasters. Does anyone know what benefits that system has compared to the other?
ejot Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 The outside wheels were likely chosen to simplify the construction of the box. Inside wheels would require a more complex cross section like that on the right side, below. I doubt many other factors came into play as both designs have good, ahem... "track" records. 8 surfaces on left, 12 surfaces on right
chickenbowl Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 The outside wheels were likely chosen to simplify the construction of the box. Inside wheels would require a more complex cross section like that on the right side, below. I doubt many other factors came into play as both designs have good, ahem... "track" records. Yeah I'm sure that's a major reason, but it also added the need for a whole new train to accommodate the different track style. I'm sure there's more positive reasons we don't know yet! ps - SolidWorks is fun!
Coaster Hero Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 ^To be honest, I didn't even know Solidworks was capable of producing top-notch professional renderings like this until CoasterLab came around. Way to demonstrate the program's power! Those trains are freaking amazing, they look like a modern, sleek, and minimalist take on the wooden coaster train. I completely love it
XM Keeper Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 If that spine is hollow steel, which it probably is, this roller coasters are going to roar louder than a B&M.
Coaster Hero Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 ^It's HSS, basically meaning it's hollow with cross sections throughout; Yes, it's going to be very loud unless they do something to deafen the noise like fill the track with sand or such (Which, IMO would defeat the purpose of 1 rail track in the first place)
rcjp Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 ^That's what I thought. I've always wondered if filling B&M tracks with sand doesn't make it a lot heavier than normal and if they have to take that into account when designing the ride.
johnnyknottsville Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 It shouldn't add much weight since it's not actually sand but a Styrofoam pellets or beads that they use to fill the tracks.
Superbatboy Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 I had no idea there were so many engineers here...
Geauga Dog Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 Those are some very, very nice looking trains and it's great to see something new on the coaster scene. How would a traditional chain lift hill be incorporated on something like this given it's just one solid piece of steel?
chickenbowl Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 It's the rails, not the spine, that causes the roar on B&Ms. It's only the rails that are filled.
johnnyknottsville Posted September 26, 2015 Posted September 26, 2015 I had no idea there were so many engineers here... I don't know about how many engineers are here, but I do see we have a non contributing to anything smart ass in the house
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