BrandonR Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 It wouldn't surprise me, there's a lot of places the track likely needs adjustments or modified supports, such as here: http://www.coastercon.com/html/giant_c_29.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 It's not touching. http://www.coastercon.com/html/giant_c_7.html and http://www.coastercon.com/html/giant_c_14.html Oh, and check the site for pics of the rear of the train, too. Fins, baby! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkStitch626 Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 http://www.coastercon.com/html/giant_c_20.html Something in this pic is not right. The Right side rail has a massive kink in it that bows inward. Look from the bottom going up to where the silver small bolts are then look up VERY slow. It bows inward so bad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A113 Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 ^ I noticed that, as well as kinks in other pictures that weren't quite as easily noticeable. Looks like we have a janky ride on our hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyuk200523 Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 You've gotta remember, that photo was taken straight on with the bottom of the drop, but there is a slight twist on the drop (look at the top of the lift and the track goes off at an angle...... I think that is just the perspective, No Engineering firm would have design a multi-million dollar tracked ride with a kink like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 ^ If you look carefully at the pics taken from other angles, you can still see the warp. Keep in mind, though, that the other end of that piece of track hadn't been connected to anything, so it could've been fixed by the time they attached it to the next segment. ^^ That's why they run a gage meter around the entire layout before sending out the first train. That's why the ride goes through extensive accelerometer testing before the first people get on board. That's why they have to cycle the trains for however many hours with consistent results before the public is allowed on. I'm sure there is some tweaking that will be done in between (and possibly before) all of those steps. I still imagine that the ride will open late, probably just barely in time for CoasterCon in June. I can't imagine, with the amount of money, advertising, and hype they've given this ride, that SFOT will allow it to open until it's what they're expecting it to be: smoother, faster, and better than the original in its heyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkStitch626 Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 ^ I noticed that, as well as kinks in other pictures that weren't quite as easily noticeable. Looks like we have a janky ride on our hands. Oooh kinky . I just LOVE me a kinky ride on a woody! well its a wood at half mast . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CorkscrewFoley Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 I've never noticed that slight turn on the first drop...Bit off topic, or maybe not, does Mean Streak have that same slight turn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoasterComet Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 Will it have airtime or "forcefully wedged between a lap bar that I'm straddling, and a seat" force!? So many new coasters are like that - not real airtime. "uplift force" time though. ehhh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almightyfire Posted November 15, 2010 Share Posted November 15, 2010 I have been looking at this thing since the construction started. The first hill after the first drop doesn't seem to be as tall as before. The part after the first drop. Does that seem shorter to anyone else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandonR Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 I still imagine that the ride will open late, probably just barely in time for CoasterCon in June. I can't imagine, with the amount of money, advertising, and hype they've given this ride, that SFOT will allow it to open until it's what they're expecting it to be: smoother, faster, and better than the original in its heyday. Why do you think it won't open on time? The track work is nearly done, and I suspect it'll be complete within the next few weeks. That gives them more than three months for testing and tweaking before the park opens in March. Unless something is severely wrong, I don't see why it would be delayed until June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fooz Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 Will it have airtime or "forcefully wedged between a lap bar that I'm straddling, and a seat" force!? So many new coasters are like that - not real airtime. "uplift force" time though. ehhh... Restraints have changed (permanently). I'd wager that the only place you will find the airtime you refer to from now on is on older rides. El Toro and the likes have pneumatic restraints, and still manage to be insane when it comes to the perception of airtime (for me at least). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 I still imagine that the ride will open late, probably just barely in time for CoasterCon in June. I can't imagine, with the amount of money, advertising, and hype they've given this ride, that SFOT will allow it to open until it's what they're expecting it to be: smoother, faster, and better than the original in its heyday. Why do you think it won't open on time? The track work is nearly done, and I suspect it'll be complete within the next few weeks. That gives them more than three months for testing and tweaking before the park opens in March. Unless something is severely wrong, I don't see why it would be delayed until June. Go back a ways and you'll see posts (some from me) saying that I'm betting that the accelerometer tests are going to show that massive reprofiling will need to be done OR that the ride will have to be trim braked to death before it opens. I'm also still not sold on those minimal supports holding up the overbanked turns. Don't get me wrong... I sincerely HOPE that it opens with the park on March 5, I'm just not betting on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingoman Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 ^with the track work so far along now, who's to say they won't spend the next couple of months beefing up the structure? No doubt there will have to be a few things done to it but I'm betting if they are they aren't focusing on it just yet. I drove by the park today and the first actual overbank has track in it (the second turn after the first drop). It's really tight as it curves over the top. Looks pretty wild! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rcfreak417 Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 I'm not sold on some of the supports either, but I think they'll beef them up once they finish the track. As far as the G-forces, by the looks of it, it will be crazy, but I don't think outside of any extremes. Just pushing the envelope. No part of the ride screams "More intense than Rolling Thunder turn around on El Toro" or more G-force than Titan's helix. If anything, they may be equal to, but I don't see it being a huge issue. The cars look like they were designed to handle a significant uplift force, and the steel track won't wear as easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrandonR Posted November 16, 2010 Share Posted November 16, 2010 You know all of this armchair engineering is really kind of silly and pointless. Do you think they'd spend 10 million dollars on a project and casually forget that part of the track won't be able to support the forces? Or that they'd not run dynamic simulations and FEA on the structure and forces experienced by the passenger? I'm sure minor changes are likely, but major re-profiling and trimming? I'll say unlikely, assuming they did all the correct modeling and simulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zingoman Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Anybody here been checking out the IAAPA thread? It has been confirmed by Rocky Mountain themselves that the bolt plates on Giant's track are there to stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Anybody here been checking out the IAAPA thread? It has been confirmed by Rocky Mountain themselves that the bolt plates on Giant's track are there to stay. Well, that surely means that any worries that they won't correct the bowing-out on some sections of track is unfounded. If the bolts stay, that car has got to be PRECISELY in the right spot on the rails at all times with very little side-to-side variance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.J. Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 (edited) Anybody here been checking out the IAAPA thread? It has been confirmed by Rocky Mountain themselves that the bolt plates on Giant's track are there to stay. Well, that surely means that any worries that they won't correct the bowing-out on some sections of track is unfounded. If the bolts stay, that car has got to be PRECISELY in the right spot on the rails at all times with very little side-to-side variance. That's what I said too, in the IAAPA thread - there can't be any tolerance for error. I'm no expert, but I do have some knowledge of roller coaster engineering - I've been nerding out on the subject for years in preparation for a hopeful career in the amusement park industry after I graduate in Mechanical Engineering. But, I am not knowledgeable on Rocky Mountain's system, and so I have no idea how wide the running wheels are. They've most likely already thought of that though. I really want to see some testing soon... Edited November 17, 2010 by A.J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLund Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 ^Me too, except there we were chastised for not being "coaster experts"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fooz Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 I would thank that no sound observations could be made from pictures or structures alone. Doubt could be cast (such as in the case of the overbank supports) by one's preconception of what "practical engineering (or application of physics)" should look like. The reality of engineering though, is that the math paints a different, and certainly truer picture. You may think a certain thing looks incongruent with your idea of sound construction, when the pages and pages of calculations at Rocky Mountain engineering are sound, and the structure will be sound accordingly. Such are the dangers of "armchair engineering". (Or it could fall apart and you can laugh at me) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coasterfreak101 Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 ^That point right there I think really settles this. Nobody could tell before that there was that much room between those bolts, but if there is than there's no reason to worry. Plus, riding over those bolts would be a smoother ride than riding right off the regular wooden rails... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Do real wooden coasters fall off the top rails? No! Boardwalk Bullet has at least one place in the layout where the wheels are partially on and partially off the edge of the steel rail. Granted, it's between the final brake and the station, but it's there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
texcoaster Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 Plus, riding over those bolts would be a smoother ride than riding right off the regular wooden rails... It would also be smoother than riding the 2009 version of the Giant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston Thrills Posted November 17, 2010 Share Posted November 17, 2010 ^That point right there I think really settles this. Nobody could tell before that there was that much room between those bolts, but if there is than there's no reason to worry. Plus, riding over those bolts would be a smoother ride than riding right off the regular wooden rails... I've actually stated previously in this thread that there appeared to be enough room between the plates to mount a regular steel running rail, it just gets ignored, much like this will. In a month or so, people will be talking about the plates again. 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