Brakes?

I have to say that these brakes are trims. To me, that is the only logical explanation. Here's why;

-If the hill is the point of no return(PONR), which is most likely the case here, then the speed going over that hill is moot. The only reason brakes would be added is to slow the train to prevent excessive positive g's, hence trim brakes.

-If the hill is not the PNOR, then the designers would only want to crest it AT speed. Otherwise, the train would have the potential of valleying at some other point in the ride. The thought of this hill not being the PNOR is extremely unlikely, otherwise the combination of train weight and 'false-fire' speed from the launch causes too many possibilities that a go or no-go brake could be used for.

To me it DOES appear that there is a slight slow down in speed as you watch the video.

I am not sure that I have explained that the best, but I'll try to re-explain if needed.

^ The first hill of a coaster is always the tallest. That would make sense in this case too. The first hill after the launch would have to be the tallest. If it doesn't clear, it can go back to the launch (not sure how that will work with the big turn before the hill, but oh well).

I'd assume that there is a critical speed at which the train must be traveling as it leaves the launch, so that it can complete the course. If the train hasn't reached that speed by the end of the launch, a signal will be sent to the brakes telling them to stop the train. The train would be stopped, and will then roll back into the tunnel for another launch.

However, this scenario would throw a pretty huge monkey wrench into multiple train operation, I'm afraid. Unless, of course, there is more than one block in the midcourse launch area.

DBCP said:
Theoretically, would putting a brake there decrease the amount of airtime one would experience on that hill?

Anybody? :)

Isnt there a nominal(if Im using the term correctly) speed for airtime?

If so, as long you hit it, air time!!:)

I would think that the amount of airtime you get would be directly proportionate to your velocity and the angle... Right? I'm thinking vectors... Yes, no, maybe?

JuggaLotus said:
^ The first hill of a coaster is always the tallest. That would make sense in this case too. The first hill after the launch would have to be the tallest. If it doesn't clear, it can go back to the launch (not sure how that will work with the big turn before the hill, but oh well).

I would agree that for a standard lift, that the first hill would have to be the high point because you have virtualy no momentum until you go over the hill. And any momentum you did have would be counteracted by friction loss.

However, for a launch, you could have a substantial ammount of momentum going over a hill. I say could and not would because of rides like TTD where the hill has been maximized to break a record. However, on a ride like Maverick they may be using the speed to give you air time in which case you could potentialy have a higher hil, banked turn, or other element further along in the circuit. You just wouldn't go through that element at the same speed as the first hill.

*** Edited 9/20/2006 10:42:43 PM UTC by Jason Hammond***

The problem you run into though is that if you have enough energy to just barely clear that hill, and the next ones taller, you're going to valley. If that first hill is the tallest you're guaranteed to make it the rest of the way. Nothing says it has to be tallest, but it makes more sense (to me).

Actually TTD no there isnt. There is no single speed amount that causes airtime.

There is a critical speed that can be reached but it is dependent on the radius of the downward curvature of the track at that given point. The critical speed is the square root of (32 times the cosine of the angle at that given point times the infinitesimal radius at that point) assuming the radius is measured in feet.

Since the radius of curve is never really constant on this ride, the critical speed changes at every point hence most airtime hills are parabolas. btw, the critical speed is just the speed in which you are in perfect zero g.

However you can overshoot that speed and still get airtime. If thats what you meant then yes TTD, then yes.

As for what DBCP said in his earlier post, theoretically there are too many unknowns to deduce to one possibility. There are however two scenarios and theoretically it is one or the other.

One, you would be right in that assumption. If and only if the brakes slowed the ride to a point below the critical speed. The ride would follow a curve much wider than free fall would merit causing a less-than-zero-g feeling hindering airtime.

Or the other scenario. The braking starts as it is moving in what seems to be a straight line of ascent for a moment and the brakes continue until the train crests. Assuming the critical speed is below 70 mph, the brakes would slow the ride to the proper speed promoting smooth airtime. However, in the process it will actually add to a more potent airtime feeling. As it hits the trims, the train is still climbing the hill in a straight line. If you look at the dynamics of deccelerating a train that is still moving upward vertically. There is an added vertical component of force and acceleration in the downward direction. This is the same direction as gravity causing the train to start falling away from the rider (newtons first law) and create an added sensation of loftiness. This is true for all instances of uphill motion and may be the reason the trims are not on the downward side of the crest because that WOULD take away from airtime.

If that is dificult to fathom, then imagine the opposite. Instead of braking while climbing, imagine launching while dropping its the same dynamics and same principle. And how awesome would that be?

My best guess is that the brakes are simply for slowing the train to an appropriate speed as to not break G force constraints as per design and to negate unecessary structural wear. Definately not a block function, I would frown at any engineer who did that.
*** Edited 9/20/2006 11:17:16 PM UTC by Kceovaisnt***
*** Edited 9/20/2006 11:22:35 PM UTC by Kceovaisnt***

They definately aren't a block section...and, with what little I understood of the above post (haven't gotten to physics yet, that's next and 4th term), it sounds to me like these brakes are more for making sure the sensations and ride experience are right even more so than keeping forces in check (though I guess they really go hand in hand).

On second thought, I have no clue what I'm talking about, so just ignore it if it really is stupid.

It's not trim brakes that would ever be turned off!!! The first hill on the ride only gets you up to approx 57 mph. If they turned them off after the tunnel you would be going at a way to high rate of speed (70 mph) (which the speed you are going could clear about a 200 foot hill because if you think about it, magnum reaches 72 mph off of a 200 foot drop and this hill is less than 100 ft!!!) You'd have some major whiplash problems!! It sounds to me that they have it go so fast right there is just to make sure it clears the hill without rollbacks and the brakes are there to slow it down to the speed that finishes the the ride at a perfect speed they need it at... This makes sure that after the trains are launched from the tunnel, they will always be going at the same rate of speed (because the brakes put them at that speed) needed to have it clear the last part of the ride without problems.

Yeah, I think thats what I meant Kceovaisnt. Because every coaster has hills that are designed differently, the speed at which you experience air differs as appose to a larger coasters hill. It is indeed a matter of what coaster it is, the design of the hill, and the speed of the train throughout the hill.

*** Edited 9/21/2006 5:48:11 AM UTC by TTD 120mph***

I really think you guys are over analyzing things. My simple theory of just putting the brakes up to stop the train on a failed launch makes the most sense to me. Consider:

1) The max speed of the launch can be accurately controlled by the LSM.

2) Only a failed launch (train going too slow) can happen, the LSM won't let the train go too fast.

Logically, since the train can't go too fast, the brakes wouldn't be trim brakes. It also wouldn't make sense to launch the train too fast on purpose, only to slow it shortly after the launch.

The only thing that makes sense to me is that the brakes are used to stop the train if the launch fails.

You and your crazy, crazy logic.

Ah, the logic, it burns!! And the math!! Wait, I'm in advanced math, and I'm not that dude who the teacher creeped out with the curriculum! :)

lol! nice.

If it can't launch too fast, why can it launch too slow?

Power cuts out? If the power were to die at 90% speed, it may have enough to get over that hill, but valley somewhere mid ride where its harder to evac. In the event of a power outage, the brakes should snap closed, stopping the ride. Then the train could be released back into the launch area where passengers can be safely unloaded.

From the new pics on PointPixels.com, it almost appears that section of track is going to have LSMs on it too. VERY strange.

Doug, I like the spooky night shots of Maverick.

Also as halltd stated it looks like there are LSM mount pads near the top of the hill leading into the pond, very interesting indeed.