RMC Streak Photo Update - May 7, 2017

I would bet the I-Box track has significantly more structural strength than tubular track on a design like Gemini or Mine Train. The I-Box track almost becomes part of the structure and adds strength and rigidity that tubular track can't.

I'm going to pose a question that might border on heresy for some with regards to replacing steel track: Could this be a possibility for hybrids such as CCMR to "fix" those awkward Arrow transitions?

Examples of awkward Arrow tranisitons that come to mind are a lot of Mine Ride's turns especially before the 2nd lift, Gemini's entrance into the helix, and Corkscrew's turn into the corkscrews.

Probably the best example of this, to me, is Loch Ness Monster at BGW. I like the ride for its surroundings, but the last half of the ride is bordering on painful because of the twists not being smooth transitions.

Anyway, I'm just curious if anyone would think that would be a good idea for Mine Ride to be retracked by RMC to give a smooth experience. I'm more than likely dreaming, but I'd love to see what they could do with it.

I don't see any reason why it couldn't be a possibility. Depending upon how it is attached to the structure and how a company like RMC would go about the task, it could take longer or shorter amounts of time.

The question of if it would be a good idea is less clear to me. Yes, it would absolutely smooth everything out, make it more enjoyable from the standpoint that the transitions glide more than they jerk, but the question then becomes, is it worth it from a monetary perspective? At which point, you would have to convince me.

I will say that some current and former "big deal" rides suffer from those awkward transitions, and perhaps keep them from being as popular as they once were. For example, my dad won't ride any of the Arrow Dynamics coasters with me, except maybe Gemini. He specifically cites *gasp* Magnum for being too jerky, especially on the bunny hills. I still love Magnum, and make sure to ride it whenever at Cedar Point, but I can see why it isn't an enjoyable experience for him.

I understand the Magnum is jerky argument too but to me that's what makes it unique. It's smooth otherwise.

Agreed. I may or may not be a bit more sturdy than my dad, so I definitely don't mind it at all. Which, I always find the situation ironic, because Mean Streak and Magnum were the first two "big" coasters he took me on back in the day. Now he can't stand Magnum, and he always had a bit of a hatred for Mean Streak too.

Çp4€và04 said:

Cheers to a fun 200 pages! We all know drone and private property policy better because of it ;)

It would appear I spoke to soon!

Act 2 was a long read and was if anything entertaining. I understand why folks don't enjoy it though.

Legality and morality on this issue is what it is. I see both sides. Personally I don't want them over the park at all, I don't care if you're a pilot or not. There was a time when my biggest fear was smacking into a bird now it's a drone. I've used a couple and didn't find anything unsafe about them other than the possibility of a mechanical/user error.

Obviously the chances of anyone nailing into a drone at CP is next to nothing, but as they gain popularity who knows. Aside from CP installing surface to air missiles not much can be done to begin with. That's the scariest part for me.

Just when the topic was getting back on track.

Cargo Shorts said:

As someone closer to GP than enthusiast on the spectrum, what makes an RMC I Box coaster different than a traditional tubular steel? Are there elements or other characteristics that can only be achieved with the flat track?

RMC cuts their track shapes, curves and all, straight out of sheets of steel and welds them all together with next to no bending required, resulting in very strong, very rigid track sections with much less stress pre-built into the steel. Tube steel in contrast has to be bent into shape before being welded to track ties, making it slightly weaker structurally than box track.

CP Rundown reports track is starting to be laid down again. It's almost to the MCBR.

EDIT: In light of this update, it occurred to me that I hadn't posted a layout of the ride's progress in a while, so here's another:

As always, the yellow arrows denote the path of the original ride, while the red dashed lines show where RMC track has been placed so far.

So it appears to be a triple-up into the brake run. Though that pic only shows the 2nd and 3rd "ups."

Leave the Arrows alone, the transitions are what give them character. Changing that would ruin the rides.

Thinking about the potential for retracking CCMR or even Corkscrew, I just don't think it would be worth it for the money. I don't think retracking would increase ridership or be enough of a draw for Cedar Point to make the investment. For CCMR, I would think they would much sooner just replace it with another ride. A Gerstlauer launched family coaster like Firechaser Express at Dollywood would be ideal in my book. Cedar Point could probably use some development of their appeal to younger people and families as it seems like as of late their installations haven't focused as much on that. Corkscrew, I'd love to see them do something with it, but it is also an iconic ride for it's flyover inversions. That might be worth retracking and new trains, and at the same time if you're going to do that you might as well put in a new ride and try to include some flyover elements on the midway in similar fashion.

So we have a double down, 2 double ups, a triple up, a speed bump, 2 monster air hills, a wave turn and an 88ish degree first drop. The FAA might have to regulate the airtime on this thing.

JCoaster25 is right. Alan Schilke said one of the big advantages of the IBox track is that what he designs on the computer is exactly how the track ends up in the field - there are almost no imperfections in the track due to manufacturing. Back in the days of the early Arrow coasters like Mine Ride, they literally bent pipes and held them up to a piece of wood or something used as a template. If it wasn't quite curvy enough, they bent it some more, etc. It was much less precise than the manufacturing processes that exist today.

This is an interesting interview with Schilke that was part of an Arrow documentary. At about 5:57-8:54, he talks about the advances in ride engineering that took place during his career and how the fabrication needed to catch up to that. That's what B&M was able to do with their better manufacturing processes. Starting at 22:23, he talks about how the IBox track takes that to the next level.

So, what's everyone's opinion on if this will be a 3 lap retrack following the original layout, or a 2 lap course?

I've seen it mentioned a few times on here about a 3rd lap, but never could see it it in the pictures posted. The pictures always looked like it would only be 2 laps to me. Having now been to the park last week and seen the work done, I can see the argument for a possible 3rd lap.

^Currently, the most recent ledgers (the end of the third inversion) show the track will spit out right alongside the two stretches of track that border the park, headed away from the station. Also, the old home stretch right before the brakes has been cut down to what look like a couple of bunny hops that lead to the brake run. This makes it very likely we'll see a third lap.

BillO said:

Thinking about the potential for retracking CCMR or even Corkscrew, I just don't think it would be worth it for the money. I don't think retracking would increase ridership or be enough of a draw for Cedar Point to make the investment. For CCMR, I would think they would much sooner just replace it with another ride. A Gerstlauer launched family coaster like Firechaser Express at Dollywood would be ideal in my book. Cedar Point could probably use some development of their appeal to younger people and families as it seems like as of late their installations haven't focused as much on that. Corkscrew, I'd love to see them do something with it, but it is also an iconic ride for it's flyover inversions. That might be worth retracking and new trains, and at the same time if you're going to do that you might as well put in a new ride and try to include some flyover elements on the midway in similar fashion.

I absolutely agree with your assessment - it wouldn't be a big draw. I do want to keep Corkscrew around because of just how iconic it is. But, at the same time, business is business. I just don't think it would be practical or worth it to re-track, as you mentioned.

And, Pete, please forgive my sacrilegious post. ;) I still like the Arrows, just the way they are.

BillO said:

Thinking about the potential for retracking Corkscrew

Re-tracking? No thanks. New trains? Yes, please.

^ Totally agree, corkscrew is good as is, new trains would be nice. Even if they just gave the seats and OTSR a refresh on corkscrew it would be a huge improvement.