The turn was very intense. I met a girl that passed out on the trimmed
version, by which I mean she didn't remember anything from the curve to the final brake run. That has happened to some people on lots of different coasters, so doesn't mean so much except again, that was with the drop trimmed. I came the closest to that happening to me on the untrimmed version, when I was hot and not feeling that good. Almost every other time I rode it untrimmed, I was sure to ride Backlot first to make sure I was up to it, also sometimes made sure to get a snack if I felt a bit low blood sugar-ish.
Thing was the duration of the force. Think of the strongest Gs on a coaster that last longer than a second, maybe not even that strong, but make them last 5 times as long. A weird thing I've experienced on Backlot's helix is to start graying out right at the top -- the force is decreased by that point but not enough after surviving the rest of the helix. You could be fine halfway through 305's turn and still start graying out at the end -- or a lot of times more a "tunnel vision" where you lose all peripheral vision, which seems different than shorter duration high-G response.
It's not something a lot of people can't handle, but why have your most expensive coaster not ridable for some people that fine on everything else?
But don't forget about the wheels. Not only was wear high, a wheel would get rough like it lost a little chunk and then went downhill from there rapidly. There was bits of melted wheel on the back of a rear seat for a while, and I think that was post-trims but before the wheel sprayers. Trying to operate the thing in hotter weather was hard on both the wheels and the passengers. It will be worse once the track gets some age on it, too. They downplay this concern but I think it really was deciding factor.
dragonskeep wrote:After hearing the interview with John Pagel I am left with the feeling that the drop will be trimmed less. I think the final version of I-305 will have a trimmed drop because of that turn. I hope they just let the ride remain intense, and it would be reguardless of the widening of the turn, just let it be what it was meant to be. I am going to ride this summer no matter what they do but for me it would be a real dissappointment if they trim that drop.
I wouldn't mind so much if there was a trim right after the drop. It wouldn't interfere with airtime and you'd hit 95 MPH for .1 second. But the speed does neeed to be increased on the 150' hill to at least "floater" air, so the turn still needs improvement. It would be very prudent to include some new spots suitable for brakes, even if not used, you can't put them on a turn or twist and there are almost no suitable spots that don't affect airtime. If there were 3 different trim locations, they really could each be almost unnoticable. Another approach would be to make sure the part of the track replaced doesn't need them, but have provision near the the end of that section. Again, this would allow less braking at the 75' hill -- and also maybe putting those after the hill in the valley or the next rise. Anyway, yeah, I'm somewhat concerned the changes won't be enough to avoid trims on the drop completely.
Brashnir wrote:Realistically, I can see several areas where we might see complaints, but they depends on exactly how this reprofile enlarges the turn. If they go with the quick and dirty method of simply adding straight track to extend the entry and exit points of the turn enough to fit the increased radius, someone will inevitably complain that these straight sections are "boring."
If they go with a better (and more fitting with the rest of the ride) method of a slight (10-degrees?) left turn at the bottom of the drop into a rollover to the right, followed by a wider 290 degree right turn, ending in another roll left and another 10-degree left turn exiting and pulling up into the 150-foot hill,
I don't think either will be the case. The left turns would give more "work" for the turn to do so no way. The drop starts banking before any turning starts, so unless they want to rebuild 1/3 of the drop (which might require starting by removing the top of that hill and working down), it won't be straight coming out of the drop either, but the banking could stop increasing at whatever is the "cut" point and a lot shallower curve could be used for the pull-out from the drop. I think the entrance to the 150' hill is where the track will be a lot straighter and more of the connect-the-pieces adjustment will be. Seperating the vertical accelerations from the turn itself will probably be part of the improvement.
The latest pics show less of the track removed from the bottom of the drop than expected, which really says the changes won't be that large, but I think this just might reflect the difficulty of messing with the drop. Once the track arrives, they might add temporary braces and a crane on the drop, yank that stuff out and put in the new as fast as possible.
I must love to type or something ....