Too Tall?

How tall do you think Cedar Point coasters or rides could go, in the future? Is there a special height limit due to safety reasons?

-----------------

As Ron Toomer once said "The Only Limit Is What People Are Willing To Get On."and I hope I got that right.

"Hi,I'm Peter Graves."

Well, save for the caps, yes. :)

I imagine that, past that, there has to be some height limit for structural soundness, because something 400 feet tall would probably take supports 10-20 feet in diameter, which would be, well, HUGE. (Though I am not claiming to be an engineer, this is my best guess...)

Aside from that, Burke isn't too far away, certainly not far enough to constitute a lack of FAA height restriction. Though that would mean that the standards for coasters and buildings (I.E. Terminal Tower) would be different. I'm not sure about that either.

Well, if you're thinking of airports, don't forget the Sandusky airport (made famous by the movie Tommy Boy! ;) ), if you want to call it an airport. More of an airstrip with a few hangars.
Actually...

Intamin is making a 400+ footer in Germany right now using the same support structure used for MF.

Intamin CEO stated at Coastermaina that the design used for MF could safely support a 700 foot lift hill without modification and complete safety of the riders would remain intact.

If I remember correctly...
-------------
June 11th, 2001 - Gemini 100
VertiGo Rides - 82 Farewell my good friend..

700 feet, wow...

Coming in 2011: Millennium + 11 Force XL-700

A 700-foot tall coaster would be INSANE!!! :) :)

Count me in!! ;)

-----------------

The 400 foot coaster is not being made, for the last time! It's going to be 325 feet if they ever do build it!

Yes I do believe the 700 foot thing is true I have heard the same thing myself that you could use the structural design of MF could be built up to 700 feet with no problem.

"All Your Base Are Belongs To Pugsly."

Ever see an un-guyed broadcast tower? Some of those are 1,000 feet or more. These days most have guy wires on them, but if you look at the kind of structure used for the unguyed towers you realize there really isn't much of a practical limit in terms of maximum height.

What becomes your limiting factor is what you can do with all that energy. The trick is that as the ride gets taller and faster, the curves have to get progressively larger to limit the G-forces on riders. Which means that the available footprint becomes a major concern.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

Agreed with Rideman. The issue becomes how long does it take to bleed off all of that speed? You might have to run the coaster track down the causeway and back up the other side. Not only that but are their materials (such as rims, wheel coverings) that could hold up to the abuse that would entail.

If memory serves the MF wheels had to be changed not long after opening. Another issue would be the lift hill. Even though MF takes a steeper incline than most, it still takes up a lot of land. Parks going higher might have to look at vertical "elevator style" lifts to conserve space.

Although I do not agree that CP has a space problem, I do think it is becoming more difficult to find space for a Magnum or MF sized ride, unless something were to wrap around the parking lot.

Actually in building larger rides the two main points are the track assembly, and support structure, if those two are done right you can make them work together to create a very strong structure and or ride in this case. So really any within reason height is possible, but it really comes down to one thing $$. I mean where not going to orbit these suckers "sigh"

Then you have the trains, and yes a whole new concept in high speed bearings will have to come into play in order to build such tall and fast attractions. The first ground based ride to reach 550+ I make the bet it will be a launched coaster! That is the only practical application, and allows to make due with less land space, but also I would say I expect to see more heartline coasters developments come into play as those designs can allow the coaster to allow more aggressive use of elements and limiting g forces used against the body, and can run tho a tighter foot print.

This is the future of thrill ride concepts right here at CP's sister park. http://www.westcoaster.net/update.php?id=0417021 "Xcelerator"

*** This post was edited by futurepoolboy on 4/19/2002. ***

But as far as stucture goes, I know a lot of those really tall radio broadcast towers have fallen in storms because they were too tall. If they build coasters taller, weather will become more dangerous that it is now.

-----------------
You are the Weakest Link, Goodbye.

It would take a really really strong wind to bring down 6 or 7 towers at once connected to a continuous steel beam.

A lot of these newer radio twoers are just like Vertigo towers. They are either really thin all the way up with a smaller base then the top of the tower with guy wires to hold them or they are wide like a very thin and tall pyramid. I would say the thin pyramind shape ones hold up a lot better. I don't see to see very many guy wires around them if any. If you ask me, I think the Thin Pyramid towers look a lot like MF's Hill support structure. Same with the high voltage tension towers. Those high mettal towers with the wires on them. They also look like MF's support structure and they are one of the more engineeringly sounds structures as far as I know.

I would say MF's support structure can hold up to a 700 coaster like Intamin says if the towers are as sound as Intamin syays they are.

-----------------
- Chris -
http://www.thepointol.com/~simplycp

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums app ©2024, POP World Media, LLC - Terms of Service