adding a second train on Wicked Twister

As long as I’ve been on this site adding a second train to Wicked Twister has been sort of a running joke, but is it really that impossible? Hear me out. I’m not %100 sure on how the mechanics work for WT but if you made the loading section on the ride like a transfer track one train could be running while the second train is off to the side loading. This would require two lines, maybe a walk way traveling under the coaster to get to the beach side. I know it would be an engineering nightmare and would have to be a complete redesign of the ride system, calibration of the LIMs, breaking and Safety systems BUT could it be done?

I’m not saying this will or even should be done to WT just theoretical. This would obviously be a multi-million dollar project to retrofit an existing ride, but I think theoretically being able to double the capacity on a popular right could be worth it.

Just like Mr. Freeze did (1 circuit, 2 trains).

It would not be worth the money by far though, but is possible if it was designed originally into the ride. But as it stands now, capacity is fine as is for that ride.

I'm not sure I'd want to have a moving track piece on a ride that is repeatedly launching trains through that section of track. Way too much that could go wrong with the track sliding out of position.

Even on TTD, the launch isn't until AFTER the transfer track, kicker wheels are used to move it up beyond that.

KevinL332 said:
but I think theoretically being able to double the capacity on a popular right could be worth it.

It hardly needs one train let alone two. I don't think it is popular enough that having two trains would help with capacity.

^ I actually agree... I'm not a huge fan of the ride. but it seems like other people love it. I don't ride it much so I'm not sure how bad the line gets.

If engineered from the start and built in from the beginning then yes it could work, but not now, as mentioned above. I see what you mean tho if capacity was a problem on the ride

Not to mention all of the above but also the ride has to recharge a certain amount of time between cycles also.

JuggaLotus said:
I'm not sure I'd want to have a moving track piece on a ride that is repeatedly launching trains through that section of track. Way too much that could go wrong with the track sliding out of position.

Even on TTD, the launch isn't until AFTER the transfer track, kicker wheels are used to move it up beyond that.

This is why Thirteen at Alton Towers and Verbolton at Busch Gardens makes me worried.

Transfer tracks are a non-issue and a solved problem, but in most cases trains move slowly over them. I think Freeze launches out of the station (correct me if I'm wrong, I've never seen it), but it's in one direction and one time. The impulse coasters cross that track at high speed, five times. Imperfect track alignment would do a real number on the wheels, not to mention put the fin alignment at risk.

I can think of a pretty cool way to do it with only one station. Track locking systems are a solved problem. Disney and Universal, to name at least four, have track switching systems that are reliable enough for high speed operation.

How? Put the two track sections on a turntable. Load one train while the other is running. The problem is that the queue would have to be kept well back from the track so that nobody would be hit by the train when it swings around. But then the arrangement could allow for a longer load time so perhaps everyone could just board from the queue rather than using shotgun loading...

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Are you talking about a track-switching system like the Vekoma flyers (Firehawk at KI)?

Another problem Rideman. The needed cool down time that the in station LIM's need due to the initial high torque launch.

The 60 second delay after the train parks isn't there solely for a load/unload cycle.

Red Garter Rob said:
Another problem Rideman. The needed cool down time that the in station LIM's need due to the initial high torque launch.

The 60 second delay after the train parks isn't there solely for a load/unload cycle.

tcgolfer said:
Not to mention all of the above but also the ride has to recharge a certain amount of time between cycles also.

I feel like I said something similar... No one pays attention to me though. Ha

It has nothing to do with recharge. So it's not the similar. ;)

You could fire the train time after time if the cool down for heat generated wasn't an issue.

Actually the way I was thinking of was similar to a Wacky Worm I once rode in Brooklyn, NY. (Can't remember whether it was Astroland or Deno's). Putting the whole train on a turntable and spinning it around solves the LIM cooling issue because both station track sections would have to be equipped with the station LIMs.

The biggest problem is the space that would be required for such a long train.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Red Garter Rob said:
It has nothing to do with recharge. So it's not the similar. ;)

You could fire the train time after time if the cool down for heat generated wasn't an issue.

Well played.