Any word or thought on a ride for 2006???

How steep is the LIM hill on CS?

I don't know off hand. Here's a picture that shows a train on the "lift" section. The launch is in the foreground, and the lift is back on the left hand side of the Mouse outline.

http://www.visionsfantastic.com/visions/dlr/dca/pp/Picture-062.jpg

(And, you guys don't want to start throwing around degree counts. Trust me.)
*** Edited 8/3/2005 2:54:55 PM UTC by Brian Noble***

Professors don't count! ;)

Haha - its nice to hear intelligent banter from someone finally as opposed to simple bashing. Thanks for that.

About the force req'd for the vertical lift... The equation for force is F=mg, where m=vertical mass vector; and g=gravity (9.81m/s^2). So, if a 100-kg mass is pulled up a 45-degree hill, the force on the cable = (50kg)x(9.81m/s^2) = 490.5 Newtons. So, lets assume the train weighs 500kg. Pulling that train up a (45-deg) lift would require 2452.5 Newtons. Pulling the same train up a vertical lift would require double that force, or 4905 Newtons. Now, include an appropriate safety factor (say 40%), and your total force req'd would be 6867 Newtons. Now, this is all assuming that the train weighs 500kg (about 1100 lbs), and I really have no idea what a coaster train weighs.

Since we have double the force req'd, the cable could be assumed to be double the diameter (approx.), and cost twice as much.

Thoughts?

When MF was announced their weight was given as 19 tons empty, but at CoasterMania one year someone for Intamin claimed they weighed 28 tons. Not sure how there is 18,000lbs of discrepancy between the figures. Maybe 19 was in metric tons empty and 28 tons was loaded and in (US) tons.

Dragster's trains are ~5.2 tons empty.

OMG, ur so smrt. I wish I had that fancy fizix stuff.

I've noticed that the more people throw around their creditentials around here and the more COMPLETELY USELESS equations they start throwing around, the less they really know what they're talking about.

You say a vertical lift is impractical because you'd be moving 15 miles per hour on your back. Okay... you ever lie on your back in bed? Is that uncomforable? What about if you're doing it for a whole thirty seconds or less? The comfort factor would be in the seat design. Not a major hurdle.

The argument that a vertical lift would be implausable because of Newton's Law of all things is completely silly. Here's a question: how do you think elevators are lifted? How are buildings constructed? How are heavy payloads lifted? Yup, all of them by cables, all of them are lifted vertically. You make it sound as though there's no such thing as an affordable cable to lift a coaster train up a hill. The cable would be the LEAST difficult thing to engineer of the whole works.

A cable doesn't have to be twice as thick to support twice the weight. It is all in the braiding of the cable and the materials it's constructed out of.

Personally, I don't care if you're Steven Hawking himself. Don't toss physics around just to make yourself look more creditable. Your calculations in the above post contributed absolutely nothing to the conversation at hand. Is it really necessary to tell somebody who took 7th grade science that if they lift something straight up it's going to require more force?

Thats pretty heavy... so, the cables on MF have to pull (approx) 90,000 Newtons! Thats impressive... so, a vertical lift would have to pull 180,000 Newtons! WOW!!! That would be impressive...

Personally, I don't care if you're Steven Hawking himself. Don't toss physics around just to make yourself look more creditable. Your calculations in the above post contributed absolutely nothing to the conversation at hand. Is it really necessary to tell somebody who took 7th grade science that if they lift something straight up it's going to require more force?

At least I'm trying to stimulate CONVERSATION, rather than bashing...

I realize that doubling the cable diameter doesn't double its capacity, its an integral equation. I'm trying to simplify things a little.

The argument that a vertical lift would be implausable because of Newton's Law of all things is completely silly. Here's a question: how do you think elevators are lifted? How are buildings constructed? How are heavy payloads lifted? Yup, all of them by cables, all of them are lifted vertically.

Huh? Whats an elevator?

From dictionary.com

el·e·va·tor
1. A platform or an enclosure raised and lowered in a vertical shaft to transport people or freight.

2. The enclosure or platform with its operating equipment, motor, cables, and accessories.

From dictionary.com

el·e·va·tor
1. A platform or an enclosure raised and lowered in a vertical shaft to transport people or freight.

2. The enclosure or platform with its operating equipment, motor

Ahhh, okay... wait, what? I don't get it...
*** Edited 8/3/2005 3:57:24 PM UTC by djDaemon***

Fine then, use a train that is half the weight of millenniums train and the total force would then again be 90,000 Newtons.

Also, for the uncomfortable factor, just have the seats tilt like they do on "X" and be at a comfortable position.

Soooo... uh... I was just wondering... (now this may be a tad bit "off-topic", but I thought I'd give it a whirl and throw out a question because i'm such a risky person) But... Any word or thought on a ride for 2006?

;)

Is it just me, or is this topic getting a little off topic for like the hundredth time!?!?!
*** Edited 8/3/2005 6:55:05 PM UTC by RollerNut***

I don't really know a whole lot about the trains and such, but could they make a train that much lighter? I assume that at least some of the weight of a train is added solely for speed, but how much?

Good point on the comfort factor.

They could by making the trains half as long (but that would really cut into capacity). I'm sure there's materials that could be used to make it lighter, but it would probably also drive up costs. Would it be cheaper to use a forged steel chassis or cut weight and use titanium?

Where are you willing to sacrifice cost for weight?

I dont' know who you were agreeing with on the comfort, but I'd have agree with John about it being all in the design of the trains. Sitting in Mean Streak trains for a vertical lift would suck, but if they were dragster seats, that wouldn't be too bad.

Besides, going up 500 feet at 15 mph would only take ~22 seconds (of course, that would mean the lift would take longer than an entire ride on Dragster, but thats a different thread). By comparison, it takes 47 seconds to go from the bottom of Magnums lift to the top (1:01 overall from station to lift) and Millenium also takes about 22 seconds (to get to the top, add a couple seconds to each to get the actual release time).

Yes they could make the trains shorter or lighter. That would help...
Although I would go with lighter since it wouldn’t take a chunk out of the coasters capacity.

And I think a 65° lift hill would be perfect instead of a 90° lift. I don’t think the comfort factor would be bad. I agree with you John on the design of the trains. Dragster seats would help.:)

*** Edited 8/3/2005 5:31:15 PM UTC by TTD 120mph***

Yes, I was agreeing with John about the seats.

Further, I agree about using alternative materials for the trains, but that would most likely never happen, just because the expense is incredible.

But, how much (if any) of the train weight is "filler"? (i.e. added to make the train heavier for speed)

I doubt if there is a whole lot. Just look at Milleniums Construction Gallery. Not great pics of everything in the train, but just the sheer amount of steel used for the joints should be a pretty good indicator about how the rest of the train is designed. And these trains are very minimalist too, so its not like there are lots of dead zones on the trains where weight could be added.

*** Edited 8/3/2005 5:37:43 PM UTC by JuggaLotus***

Thats probably (at least mostly) true. Its a shame that plastics haven't yet reached the point where they can be used in place of steel. Talk about a weight savings! Not too sure about cost, though!

Anyway...

At 65-degrees, the lift hill footprint would be 233'(+). MF (at 45-deg) would have a footprint of about 300'... so that could actually be feasible. Where in the park could they fit a lift hill with a footprint of this size?

There used to be a picture of an undercarriage from one of Millennium Force's cars. It showed huge steel plates welded to it.

I don't know if there are similar weight additions to the cars on the Superman: Ride of Steel coasters. They may have added the plates to MF to help with its inertia, or it may be standard on their mega/giga trains.

But if the extra weight is used to help the trains maintain their speed, why would you want to remove it for a coaster that has a layout? Why not assume a similar train would be used?

But if the extra weight is used to help the trains maintain their speed, why would you want to remove the it for a coaster that has a layout? Why not assume a similar train would be used?

Maybe they could trade off a little bit of that extra weight, since they'd be gaining a bunch of speed with the whole 500' drop factor. They could still probably achieve a speed of 150 or more, but I don't know enough about physics/dynamics to figure that out in my head...