Tony/Tyler Teasing Us Again...

Well, I did just finish my english exam when I wrote that so I was in the mood for another long post thingy. I take things like that seriously, I tend to do that sometimes, it has do with coaster withdrawl or something;)

Plus I'm hoping that some 'high upers' are reading this stuff and taking my advice... my dream:)

Screamomatic said:
I've been around wood and steel for a looong time, and trust me, a floorless(or any B&M) wouldn't and couldn't be held up by wood... not unless you used three times as much wood as Mean Streak.

A floorless track weighs (more or less) the same as any other coaster's track. The only real difference between a standard coaster and a floorless is, well, the lack of a floor on the train. So, technically, it could be considered lighter.

If you are talking about wooden track, well then that's obvious - it could be done, but its extemely unlikely.

Besides how would they support the inversions? Not only would look like s**t, but it just wouldn't hold, they would have to use sooo much wide structure it wouldn't be worth the money.

See http://rcdb.com/ig584.htm?picture=15

Also, because the extra 1000 pounds or so added from the floorless trains and the steel track, the wood wouldn't last as long as it would with a wooden track coaster.

I'm still left wondering where all of this extra weight is coming from?

Now Gemini and CCMR are diffrent because the track is so thin and light wight, something B&M can't duplicate.

Actually, steel has gotten considerably lighter and stronger over the past 30 years.

Whoever mentioned the idea first was talking about using a wood support structure to hold up B&M track. B&M track is extremely heavy, and the trains probably weigh more than Millenium Force's trains. I do not think a wood structure under B&M track would be at the least a very unwise financial desicion because of how much wood would have to be supporting it.

Well, in his post, he simply said that a floorless could not be supported by wood.

Thanks for clearing up the confusion.

Im the person who brought it up first, and it was a joke. I was talking about how much I like Gemini, and how I always wanted another coaster like that (steel track, wood frame)...especially for Frontier Land, just because I think it fits the theme. Someone ran with the idea a little more than I expected, though. :)

I had also mentioned that I think it would be harder to fit a steel structure to a Frontier theme as compared to a wooden structure. If we're going steel...im picturing something...all black. Maybe with an "ironworks" theme.

Are we forgetting the White Water Landing had a steel support structure?

I'm still not following the logic here as to why wood couldn't be used on a B&M coaster? Since this goes under the assumption that they wouldn't change anything and would just replace their steel supports with wood (which makes no sense). I'm pretty sure B&M's engineers could design a track that would work with wood supports AND floorless cars, not to mention loops are possible with a wood coaster.

And how are floorless trains really that much heavier. Do you have some documented proof from your extensive work with wood and steel that shows how much coaster trains weigh?

Are you sure, Pete? Woodn't a Frontiertown ride need to be constructed with wood. Otherwise, it woodn't fit in, right? :)

*** Edited 1/27/2006 3:40:40 PM UTC by Walt***

Ahh, but there is a loophole in the provision allowing for rides whose vehicles are wooden in appearance.

Yeah, yeah, whatever. You build you're floorless wooden coaster and see how long it lasts, I don't need to prove anything to anybody.

All I care is that CP actually does something for 2007, you ever wonder that they might do nothing at all, or add another Flat ride?

You forget how lucky you guys are, most of you guys live right near CP while I'm stuck here in cold Canada waiting for Paramount Crap Wonderland to open.

I think "nothing at all" has been pretty much ruled out.

JuggaLotus said:
Do you have some documented proof from your extensive work with wood and steel that shows how much coaster trains weigh?

Screamomatic said:
Yeah, yeah, whatever. You build you're floorless wooden coaster and see how long it lasts, I don't need to prove anything to anybody.

I guess that's a "no".

You don't have to be a structural engineer to figure this one out...;)

Since I don't have all the quantitative figures, I'll explain myself qualitatively.

Wooden coaster superstructures are specifcally designed to carry the loads created from its track and train. In order for that same superstructure to support some B&M track, it would have to be altered (i/e by adding more supports) in order to carry the heavier loads.

How do I know that the loads created would be heavier?

Well, it's pretty intuitive to think that per unit length, wooden track is much lighter than B&M track.

I'm unsure of the weight of a wooden coaster's trains, but I would think that a floorless train would be somewhere around 8 tons (empty) like Raptor's. The weight distribution between the trains is also a factor. While wooden coaster trains may (I say may because I don't know) be heavier than B&M trains, their weight is also distributed over more track footage (because they are longer), cutting down on the force exerted on each vertical support.

Between the combined weight of heavier (per unit length) track and shorter track footage for the train's weight to be disbursed, I think that it's evident that the wooden superstructure would have to be reinforced for it to be able to the support the loads created by using B&M track instead of traditional wooden track.

With all of this said, I think it would be an poor decision to try to implement something like this.

--Structural Civil Engineering Student

*** Edited 1/27/2006 8:10:58 PM UTC by CP_bound***

I thought the answer was common sense, so thats why I didn't put a super strong argument, you think I'm going to go to the trouble just to do reserch and prove something I don't have to? I saw something somewhere where it had the forces and stuff, and I remember seeing something about steel being 5x stronger then wood or something of the sort...

Besides we've had or fun with the idea, but logically I don't believe it'd happen, if the coaster had a colour scheme like black Mamaba it'd fit in nice though.

And them building "nothing at all" is not going to happen, I agree with that, what if they also built another flat ride next year though(with an RC) Because I think the spot where calypso is would a good spot for Huss Giant Top Spin! Then again, I haven't been there in a while so I can't remember if the spot is infact big enough... but it'd have a good generic theme.
*** Edited 1/27/2006 9:02:40 PM UTC by Screamomatic***

There you go. But to fit into the Frontier Land theme we could call it the Rattler...oooohh...;)

Ah the speculation.

Someone asked to see the WWL site on OnPoint? The only answer? "In due time....in due time".

Between the combined weight of heavier (per unit length) track and shorter track footage for the train's weight to be disbursed, I think that it's evident that the wooden superstructure would have to be reinforced for it to be able to the support the loads created by using B&M track instead of traditional wooden track.

Here is an idea, have a steel superstructure that is hidden by a wood one. The wood superstructure would not have to support much weight (the steel would be holding all the weight). Paint the steel to match the color of the wood, and when you look at it, all you would see was the wood. Instant wood coaster, with all the benefits of steel.

I don't see CP going through the added cost of covering a steel coaster in wood, but a park that centered more on the THEME of a ride, might go to the extra expense to make it fit in.

My .02 *** Edited 1/30/2006 4:55:39 PM UTC by Morté615***

I don't see CP going through the added cost of covering a steel coaster in wood...

True, but its still just as likely that they would do that as it is they would build another wood coaster after the "maintenance nightmare" that is MS. *** Edited 1/30/2006 4:58:34 PM UTC by djDaemon***

JuggaLotus said:
I'm pretty sure B&M's engineers could design a track that would work with wood supports AND floorless cars, not to mention loops are possible with a wood coaster.

I think if this design were to be thought of it would take more then a year to come up with. I'd rather see them make a floorless with the wood concept and make it like Gemini with tight turns and quick dips and such. I mean I know PKI did it very well with Son Of Beast but it would be a different story considering this would be B&M track. You do bring up a good point Juggalotus. I just think this would really have to be thought up thats all I can say.

And you don't think they've been working on the concept for the old WWL spot until now? The designs have probably been finalized since at least middle of last season, and thats just the final, "Ok we are going to tear out this and build this". They've probably been working on ideas since 2004 if not earlier.

Does anyone else think that this whole wood floorless thing is just a horrible idea? A steel coaster of any kind could be easily be put in while making fit the general theme of the area. Although im sure B&M engineers could in fact design a wooden supported ride i dont think they would be dumb enough to do so. It just doesn't make sense.