Steel Vengeance

So yea SV ran 3 trains for a little bit yesterday for like 30 minutes... I was on maverick and found it odd that the transfer shed was completely empty. I get off the ride and walk over and the shed was infact empty... no trains. They stacked on the brake run every single time, but it was still 3 trains because the ride wasn’t down. The MCBR didn’t serve as a block based on the speeding up of the lift hill when the brake run was clear. I am confused as to why they did it so spontaneously, or why they would bother doing it with the mcbr not being programmed. The ride did go down for like 30 minutes when I was halfway through the line because a drive tire broke since I literally saw the mechanics playing with one. When the ride reusmed operation it was back on two trains. Very odd but it was 11:40 and they probably just wanted to empty the line out.

Seems odd for that to happen without a bunch of testing first which supposedly no one has witnessed?

Having the third train on would be advantageous if for no other reason than to get the next one in there quicker. With two trains, even if they wait until the previous one hits the brakes (which is a waste of 20 seconds in itself since they're ready way sooner), the station is idle for a long time since it takes about 45 seconds for the next one to get in there. I assume that would be cut down by having one stacked closer behind. It's crazy how bad this ride is currently set up from a capacity standpoint. Still seems like something was screwed up somewhere along the way at a very basic level in order for it to still be this bad. That the midcourse still isn't capable of being a block is just bizarre.

MDOmnis said:

Seems odd for that to happen without a bunch of testing first which supposedly no one has witnessed?

Having the third train on would be advantageous if for no other reason than to get the next one in there quicker. With two trains, even if they wait until the previous one hits the brakes (which is a waste of 20 seconds in itself since they're ready way sooner), the station is idle for a long time since it takes about 45 seconds for the next one to get in there. I assume that would be cut down by having one stacked closer behind. It's crazy how bad this ride is currently set up from a capacity standpoint. Still seems like something was screwed up somewhere along the way at a very basic level in order for it to still be this bad. That the midcourse still isn't capable of being a block is just bizarre.

I can confirm it testing 3 trains in person on july 12th when I was there. It was one of the days that it wasn't open for early entry.

The only possible explanation is the train can’t make it back from the mid course from a stop. That’s such a massive fail. I feel bad for Cedar Point and the guests waiting in longer lines. There’s no excuse.

^^There are actually plenty of other explanations. Sensor issues, brake/blocking issues, evacuation issues should the ride stop there fully loaded and not start again. We don't know what it is. It could be what you stated. But to say that is the only possible explanation is simply not true.

Remember - after the collision on Opening Day many things seem to have been reprogrammed in terms of a braking perspective. We don't know where the progress on three train operation was prior to that and how much the work that needed to be done to simply get back to two trains delayed/negated what had already been done in the preseason.

coast said:
The only possible explanation is the train can’t make it back from the mid course from a stop. That’s such a massive fail. I feel bad for Cedar Point and the guests waiting in longer lines. There’s no excuse.

I can’t imagine that would be the case. In an e-stop or power loss situation it would stop at the mid course. Sure they could unload there and pull it through, but I can’t imagine that large of engineering failure. Could be the case but I would think it has more to do with the short amount of space to park two trains behind the station and the speed it would be at when it hits the first set of brakes.

Why can't we just give Cedar Point the benefit of the doubt that they are trying to resolve these issues as fast as possible. They paid a crap ton of money to install this ride that is supposed to have a high capacity. I highly doubt Cedar Point is just being lazy and saying eh we will fix it when we aren't busy with other issues. Top Thrill Dragster's cable went out of its guide and literally melted through a bunch of sets of brake fins last year in October. They had the ride running in 2 weeks after that. They could have easily just closed it for the season and dealt with the other issues in the park. There is zero way that the MCBR is too low. The ride trims to a near stop some times and you will still slam your thighs in to the lap bar on the second half. Every single aspect of this ride besides the track and wood is a prototype. Of course it is going to have major issues. Any new B&M will have constant problems as well.

Cedar Point GCI said:

Every single aspect of this ride besides the track and wood is a prototype. Of course it is going to have major issues. Any new B&M will have constant problems as well.

I don't think anyone is blaming Cedar Point. It's still on RMC to deliver what they promised at this point. I just find it very interesting and curious that it's been such a saga to get the ride running to full capacity. To me, it's impossible to (mathematically and timing wise) get to 1200 riders per hour unless the midcourse is a block and if that can't happen, it has to be a major screw up at a very basic level somewhere along the way. Why it was not a block from the preseason on is a mystery and it still persists even as they've made other braking and programming changes along the way. There's no way they leave that long straight section of track there unless it was supposed to be a block. I don't think they intended it as just a breather for riders.

Right, the midcourse brake certainly is supposed to be a block and I think the train certainly can complete the course if it stops there. It picks up a great deal of speed on the hill following the brake. This is an interesting situation, the industry has been doing multiple block coasters since the old relay logic days, it should be very straightforward to run three trains on SV.

For those of you worried about the speed that the train comes off of the midcourse with, I present to you this explanation of speed and height, from over on Coasterbuzz: https://coasterbuzz.com/Forums/Topic/dollywood-lightning-rod/2

Bakeman31092 said:

Regarding the lift hill speed question:

It's all about the exchange between potential energy (due to gravity) and kinetic energy (the speed of the train), with a little bit of energy lost along the way due to various factors, such as aerodynamic drag, friction in the wheel bearings, rolling friction between the tires and the track, flexion of the track and structure, etc. The problem becomes very simple if you ignore all of the energy losses, so that a train's kinetic energy at any point is equal to whatever kinetic energy it started with plus whatever amount of potential energy has been converted, based on how far the train has fallen.

Potential energy U = mgh, while kinetic energy T = mV^2 / 2, where g is the constant acceleration due to gravity, h is the vertical fall from the high point, V is the train's velocity, and m is the mass of the train. Setting them equal, the masses cancel, and you're left with energy in units of feet (which aren't actual units of energy, but in this case they are since the masses cancel): h = V^2 / (2g). So if you want to know the effect of the train's velocity at the top of the hill on its velocity at the bottom, simply convert the velocity to feet, then add that to the height of the drop (again, ignoring friction).

Take Millennium Force for example. You have a 300 ft drop and a lift speed of about 13 mph. 13 mph (19 ft/sec) equates to about 5.65 ft of energy. As you can see, 5.65 ft is insignificant compared to 300 ft, so the difference between the top speed during normal operation and top speed if you got stopped at the apex of the hill and then just barely crept over is minimal (95.6 mph vs. 94.7 mph). The fact the Millennium's top speed is 93 mph means that it loses a little bit of energy as it navigates the first drop. Long story short: a 13 mph speed difference at the top only results in a 1 mph difference at the bottom when you're talking about a 300 ft drop. Kind of interesting.

What Jeff said about the bullets is correct, but the key difference is that in that scenario, you're talking about the amount of time it takes for the bullets to hit the ground, not the speed at which they do. While the dropped bullet and the fired bullet hit the ground at the same time, the fired bullet will hit at a much higher speed, because you gave it all that kinetic energy to start with.

So, the train will drop off of the midcourse and build up quite a bit of speed again. If someone has the height of the midcourse, and knows how fast it is going when it drops off the midcourse when the brakes do not grab at all, it should be a simple plug and chug problem to find the difference in velocities between the untrimmed MCBR and the total stop MCBR.

I didn't really think anyone was truly arguing that there isn't enough energy for the train to return to the station from the MCBR. I know it was thrown out there as a potential problem, but mostly just because it would be on the checklist.

No, but people were losing their minds about "TEH TRIMZ!@"

There is a definite increase in intensity when there aren’t trims. It is a totally different ride in my opinion. I don’t see a logical reason in running them when there is no track that can be damaged, or any rough spots.

Maybe wheels.

Based upon my experience last week when I rode SV 3 times, the train slowed/grabbed slightly at the MCBR. I thought to myself, wow, imagine if this coaster just 'coasted' through this section vs. slowing down how the 2nd half of the ride might be even better. I don't think I'd want the train to slow down/grab any more then it did when I rode, let alone stop. I'm sure the 2nd half would still be good, but, in my opinion, not as good as intended or could be.

That being said, I'd rather wait in line a bit longer and have the park maintain the 2 train operation, then going with 3 (if it meant having to stop the train at the MCBR).

Maybe, if this issue is 100% on RMC, they'd be willing to install some type of launch at the MCBR (similar to the 2nd half of Maverick, etc.) on them. Now, how cool would that be! :)

Three trains wouldn’t require the train to stop at the mid course. Think: Raptor, Rougarou, etc.

When I rode on Sunday, the MCBR did slow the train quite a bit, but the drop off sped it back up. Not as intense, but still fast enough.

CPVet said:
Three trains wouldn’t require the train to stop at the mid course. Think: Raptor, Rougarou, etc.

Huh?

I’ve worked Raptor before and I can assure you that if the Main block is occupied with a train for whatever reason, then it is required that the train behind it stops at the MCBR. MCBRs are not there for decoration.

Yes, we all know you worked at the park. My post was obviously referring to those rides when they’re running as intended, which I’m not sure mijmic understood. Maybe he did- I just read his post as saying that three train operation would always mean a train would stop in the midcourse.

I don’t think anything in your post was “obvious”, but that’s neither here nor there.

I know it’s too early to tell, but have there been a lot of major projects announced yet for RMC for next year? Or do you think we can see them spending time on TT and SV during the off-season.