"Dragster" Layout Idea

This implies that the easiest to engineer would be back to back top hats, because assuming the train makes it over the first, at the bottom of the top hat velocity is just about a constant going into the second element. It would be difficult to do one later in the course because of loss in energy and greater speed variance. Just build the second top hat smaller than the first to account for losses. In fact, the second should be easier than the first, because the first acts as a speed filter. Launch velocity is more susceptible to misfires, and differences in weight between trains. This can be adjusted by sensors to make the narrow safety window of the first top hat. If the train makes it over the first, it is going to go over the second. What happens in the unlikely event that it does not? Most coasters are susceptible to gullying, the only places a train is probably going to get back around the circuit after being stopped is at the block breaks. Anywhere else, you connect a winch, and pull the train over the next hill, not that good of idea when the next hill is another top hat. The other option is just do the same thing when a train gets stuck in a sticky point of the track in a conventional coaster. Disconnect the articulation between trains, remove the up-stops, and use a crane to lift each car off the track and place it back in the station. If a park really does not want to risk hoisting trains off the track, the second hill can be made lower to insure velocity in to the top hat, and use trims to get the train to the proper speed, or the converse and LIMs. The real question is would a second top hat really add that much value and quality to the ride? I am not sure it does. Also, continuous box beams, and support infrastructure may be more expensive than just a turnaround. And, what about forces? You are launched, your head is forced against the back rests, then you hit the 90 degree vertical that exerts a backward force on your head and neck, but it is already supported by the head rest. Cresting over the hill and heading in to a free fall naturally places your head in a foreword position, heading in to the second top hat. Then you have a greater change in angle snapping your head backward. Most people would not consider this fun, and may potentially result in some whiplash claims. So, now you are back to spacing the top hats out, where losses and speed become a real factor, and compensating for it with LIMs or whatever new systems those crazy engineers come up with becomes a cost factor. -j

I bet they will intertwine. Monty did mention at Coastermania that they were in a position to be more creative with the space they have.

------------------
Blue people fly sideways when it rains....

Wow. Nice post j, just try to use paragraphs next time. ;)

------------------
"Meh."
Wicked twists: 9
Danger: Hgih Voltage!
*** This post was edited by Majin Heero 9/10/2002 10:41:17 PM ***

Yeah, I hear ya...;) I am sorry about the paragraph breaks turning up missing, they apparently did not come across when I did a copy paste from the clip board. Sorry.

-j

These ideas sound reasonable. At the same time, I was told there would never be a hyper coaster and a year later Son of Beast was announced. I also remember hearing there would be no looping wooden coaster. A lot of people believed that the lay down coaster could never be possible. Expense is a factor here, but if you have a ride that is designed so it's track rides on the same structure multiple times, I think the idea is somewhat reasonable. It may not be likely with this ride because it is on the second rocket coaster I know of. If they started becoming a standard, I could see Cedar Point being the first park to try and come out with a double tophat rocket coaster. You never know..Six Flags could pick up on that idea in cases where they cannot reach the same height as Cedar Point. Realistically thinking, what else does everyone think this ride will do after the top hat? Adding another coaster that consists mainly of overbanked turns seems a bit hum drum for a park like Cedar Point. Looking at the main features of both Millennium Force and Wicked Twister, it seems as if this ride adds nothing more to the park then a top hat instead of a traditional hill. Wicked Twister has the launch novelty that "Dragster" is suppose to have. Millennium Force has the speed, first drop, and overbanked turns. I remember a lot of people saying that Millennium Force is just a great drop and overbanked turns when it first came out. I think both Millennium Force and Wicked Twister are great rides, but will Cedar Point be adding anything new with this one other then a little more height, speed, and a top hat?

I would surely think that being launched at 120 MPH in a couple of seconds woudl be a lot different then getting launched at a little over 60 as WT does on the first launch now.

That along with....

Going straight up over 400 feet with amazing air at teh top and then plunging back down 400 feet again is plenty of a ride for me.

That is of course if those are the stats for "Dragster"

------------------
Welcome back Magnum riders how was your ride?

---

Craig the Coaster Freak said:
I think it's gonna launch, do a HUGE top hat (that will turn it back to the station), then hit the brakes. Short and sweet.

---

If it's a dual racing you may not be far from it. Any more and we're looking at a $40 Million + Coaster(s).
*** This post was edited by Snoopy 9/11/2002 2:00:52 PM ***

I'm not denying a difference between speed in the launches. I'm just saying the general idea of the ride from what we have been hearing is just a bigger/faster version of what they already have other than the top hat.

Snoopy: Not really... The 200 some foot tall Xcelerator was only $13 million. Considering things like track length, etc, I personally can't see this project going over $20 mil.

------------------
Tommy Penner - Variable X
Cedar Point FanBoy since 2001.

Yes, and a dual would make $40M which is what the quote was about.

Duel.