The Engine Removed on the cars

Engineers are trained to build complex things. If the space shuttle blows up, you don't see a report that says - "It's complex piece of machinery. It can't work all the time." NASA's engineers don't stay employed very long if thats their attitude.

Are you comparing the Space Shuttle to a roller coaster? There are a million differences, a big one being the budget for each.

I was using that as an example. If you want, I can use a car. If something doesn't work on my car, I don't want to hear from the dealer that it is a "complex machine". If thats the case, then they have "incompetent engineers".

Now, I realize things break, but saying it is a "complex machine" is not an excuse.

That, and half the shuttle fleet has disinegtrated,along with every person on both spacecraft.

I'll take Cedar Point's safety record over NASA's anyday.

MrScott

Cars break all the time. I can't even get into my mechanic without making an appointment a few days in advance, so business must be good. Sometimes cars run for 250,000 miles without any major issue. Sometimes you have it in the garage every 10,000 miles and finally dump it at 80,000 miles because you're tired of taking it in for repair, thank you, Ford Taurus. Does that mean the engineer(s) responsible for designing the Taurus are incompetent?

Park enthusiasts don't get to hear the whole story. I suspect that if the ride mechanics, engineers, and everyone involved sat down and discussed the in's and out's of Dragster in a public forum, we'd all have a different take. It's not as simple as, "those dummies don't know how to build a roller coaster."

Things break. I understand this. But using "complex machine" as the excuse for it breaking is BS. I'm sure we haven't heard the full story about each breakdown, and I don't claim to know the cause of each breakdown. But why is it other coasters can run in the 97% plus uptime range, and Dragster is STILL struggling to be in the upper 80 range?

Is Dragster not the most complex ride in the park? Would it not be a bigger deal if this was Iron Dragon having the trouble?

You're upset at the simple explanation, that it's complex. But you're passing simple blame, that the designers are incompetent.

TTD 120mph is right. A honest talk with any of those guys would probably change some opinions. Would you still be disappointed that it has its problems? Probably. Would you have a new appreciation for what happens behind-the-scenes? Most definitely. Maybe if you win that lunch with Monty Jasper, you'll come out singing a different tune. :)

Nice Info:)

Am I crazy or having selective memory? I distinctly remember the tires NOT spinning. Then a day or two before the incident I noticed one of them spinning and telling whoever I was in line with "Those aren't supposed to spin".

Interesting, nachos! I didn't quite know too much of Cedar Point in '03, and thus wasn't there to see anything of the sort. Of course, it is possible that they just used some weird method of securing them.

I missed the tires by a few days! Darn it.....>_>

I want to know why they don't just get rid of the ugly mounts on the back of the train. They no longer serve a purpose, and make the trains look worse.

The mounts serve a dual purpose as the back bumper. I believe TTD's bumpers are important due to the way the trains move around the stations and park on the storage track so close together.

Its late night here, but I swear I didn't see one post about weight being a factor. EACH tire weighed 50lbs. and I'm sure the mock engine weighed close to that as well. Thats at the VERY least 100lbs. and the darn trains can barely make it over the top hat at times now. So I'm pretty sure weight was a BIG factor in the decision. But those are just my two cents!

And about the "bumper" theory...I worked on TTD. TTD as 3 brake safes and proxies. The comp. knows where the trains are and them needing bumpers is not a big factor. And parking them at night....Not possible to rearend one unless the computer fails, again has to do with the proxies. Just thought you'd like to know

*** Edited 8/19/2006 5:54:03 AM UTC by CrazyCoasterGuy***
*** Edited 8/19/2006 5:55:28 AM UTC by CrazyCoasterGuy***

I've always wondered if the back cars weighed more with the themeing, or with the 2 seats and 2 extra riders.

CCG - when you're talking about 9 ton (approx 19,000 lbs) trains, a difference of a couple hundred pounds is negligible.

^Then tell me why we took 2 rows of riders out when the trains insisted on rolling back after rain or in cold weather or b/c the ride just decided it didn't want to get it up? Because that sure as heck is JUST a couple hundred pounds....Lets think here junior. But I only worked on the ride durning all this so what do I know, right?
*** Edited 8/19/2006 5:24:00 PM UTC by CrazyCoasterGuy***

Except that in removing the theming and adding 2 riders (plus seats and restraints) ADDED weight to the train.

Will adding weight to the back cause a roll back, not if you can get the middle of the train over the apex of the hill. If it is close though, having the off set in weight can help.

To everyone who says "why can't the tires come back" it's lawsuits, pure and simple. If it happened again, and one went flying toward witches wheel, slammed into it, and killed people, Cedar Point would be in DEEEEP crap because it was a known issue with prior failures. Now why they didn't keep the engine and spoiler I don't know.

http://www.cedarpoint.com/_upload/inside_the_park/rides/roller_coasters/top_thrill_dragster/construction/Construction156.jpg

It looked good with just the engine and spoiler

EDIT: forgot I don't have to [url] markup this site *** Edited 9/6/2006 4:25:03 AM UTC by liebevision***

Its amusing to me that CP couldn't keep "fake" wheels, tires and engine on their train when Blackpool Pleasure Beach was able to put a real F-1 car onto their coaster and not have it break. :)

And yes, I realize it only ran once (or a couple times) compared to TTD's every so many seconds. But, its still funny.

Click here for pics