Top Thrill Dragster 2022 Status

PyroKinesis09's avatar

I'd say if they start putting up fences behind the tower and bring in cranes there. But I doubt, even if full removal is the plan, that they would do such a thing during the regular season.

Kevinj's avatar

If a full removal happens it's not being reimagined, it's being replaced.


Promoter of fog.

vwhoward's avatar

Which is technically a reimagining of sorts. I'm very unsure of what is happening now.


Joe
Eat 'em up, Tigers, eat 'em up!

That bare bones launch track though. Like toothpicks!

Kevinj's avatar

I fully expected the launch and brake run to be gone if they are doing what I expect; a replacement of the launch from aircraft carrier to something else.

What's being taken away isn't surprising, but the pace they are moving at is; mainly because there is some suddenly nearly forgotten construction happening up front.

I don't know about the rest of you, but the mystery of the whole thing is fun. It's nice not to be spoiled for once, and brings back memories of the days when TTD 1.0 was originally being built.


Promoter of fog.

I agree, it’s been highly entertaining getting little updates and piecing together clues. Not really upset that’s there hasn’t been an announcement with renderings. The mystery is fun!

Frog Hopper King's avatar

I agree with Pyro. If they start to take down the structure of the tower I would think the future of the attraction is very different than what has been previously speculated.

I have an uncle that works for Nintendo, and he told me that they are building an exact clone of TTD right next to the old one for racing dragsters. Pretty cool.


Frog Hopper 2022

djDaemon's avatar

I don't think the amount of track removed is out of step with a conversion to LSM, especially if the assumption is correct that a longer launch would be needed.

It's hard to conclusively determine based on the angle, but in CPN's 5th picture it appears that on the launch side track has been removed only to about 60 feet "up" track of the launch building, which is still ~30 feet short of where the pusher disengages from the train. In other words, it appears that even with all this track removed, they still haven't removed the entire launch section of track - or perhaps they have removed the entire "launch" length, since the pusher slows before the end of the launch track according to Dave's excellent technical writeup - which in either case would not be enough track length for an LSM launch, again assuming LSM will need more runway to get to 120MPH.

And on the brake side, it wouldn't be unreasonable to start braking the train far sooner than it had been previously, for at least two reasons. One, it's probably a good idea to slow the train sooner so that by the time it rolls past the queue it's going much slower than in the past, given the reason it's been SBNO. And two, this could potentially give them an extra block zone before unload.


Brandon

As some have speculated (and wished for) maybe the quick pace is because there will be some type of tunnel or enclosure built around the launch section or brake section or both with theming/lights/et.. They will need more time to add those elements. This is more consistent in my opinion with a "reimagining" compared to just a new launch system.

I like where your head is at with the enclosure but aesthetic wise that just simply isn't gonna do it in my eyes. That would be hideous, especially given the attraction's prominence on the midway front & center.

I'm still not following the thought here behind mitigating the risk of flying objects from the midway/queue. This attraction was built to mimic a top thrill dragster on a dragstrip. If you've ever been to an actual top fuel event, there are no enclosures covering the drag strip. You assume a risk by attending...and I'd go on a limb to bet your odds of injury at that event are far greater (read: nitromethane fuel).

If I'm CP in this situation, I see a clear duality:

  • [Option 1] maintain the existing launch system(s), require ugly modifications (tunnel, fencing, move the queue, etc.),
  • [Option 2] remove the problematic systems for something with fewer moving parts & better reliability.

Millennium Force zooms past the queue and midway at 90+ mph. It has been doing so for 20+ years. In fact, many of CP's rides intentionally fly past the midway.

This was in my eyes a move to mitigate further unknown risk.

djDaemon's avatar

magdrag95:

If you've ever been to an actual top fuel event...

I feel like "but there are way more dangerous spectator events" is not a compelling argument to the underwriters, nor would it be a convincing defense in an injury settlement.

Nevertheless, the tunnel idea as a means to make the ride safer never made sense to me, assuming the idea is to reduce the likelihood of a projectile from making contact with a guest. A projectile ejected from the ride could in theory travel in many different directions outward from the ride, and only a relatively limited number of those paths include where people are watching or queued, so the likelihood of the projectile making contact with someone is relatively low. Put a tunnel around that same ride and you've all but ensured that the projectile will make contact with a rider, since you've trapped the projectile in an enclosure with a train full of riders.


Brandon

magdrag95:

Millennium Force zooms past the queue and midway at 90+ mph.

It does not. It's going considerably slower there than at the bottom of the first drop. Which physics says is the fastest point on the ride.


June 11th, 2001 - Gemini 100
VertiGo Rides - 82
R.I.P. Fright Zone, and Cyrus along with it.

I agree. Enclosing the ride is completely useless and does not prevent injury to the riders.

Seems to me like when this is all set and done it will no longer just be a launch, up the tower, down the tower, breaks type of ride. If they’re going through all of this it makes sense to give the ride some unique elements.

If Intamin is not involved in the project my thought is the entire track will be removed, including the track on the tower, and whomever the new manufacturer is will utilize their own track. Which makes me think can RMC utilize their T-Rex track for this application.

Last edited by SRE123,
Kevinj's avatar

Brandon literally just typed out (per the tunnel) what I was about to. You make the ride safer by making sure pieces don't fly off, not by enclosing those UFOs in a tunnel.

I don't know why, but I hadn't thought about all the track being removed but the tower staying, with all new track coming from whoever is doing the reimagining.

That makes a lot of sense.

Last edited by Kevinj,

Promoter of fog.

vwhoward's avatar

I've been thinking and hoping that all along. Full track replacement. A possibility but more of wishful thinking on my part.


Joe
Eat 'em up, Tigers, eat 'em up!

Red Garter Rob:

It does not. It's going considerably slower there than at the bottom of the first drop. Which physics says is the fastest point on the ride.

Are you sure about that one? I was always under the impression, and based on a lot of marketing material I've read, it maintains damn near 90 mph throughout the course. That was the purpose (and appeal) of skipping forgoing a MCBR in the layout....

Kevinj's avatar

Pretty sure. Then again it's Rob. You are right to be wary of anything he says about the park.

Just push play.

https://contrib.pbslearningmedia.org/WGBH/conv16/conv16-int-rollerc...index.html

Last edited by Kevinj,

Promoter of fog.

vwhoward:

Full track replacement.

If they do replace all the track, (really wishful thinking) why not add a few feet to take back the tallest record.

Because changing the tower design might be more difficult and the footers might not accommodate the added height

Hudson:

If they do replace all the track, (really wishful thinking) why not add a few feet to take back the tallest record.

I'd say its a very safe bet that they are far more concerned with a safe and reliable launch/braking system than any records, which honestly only mean anything to a select few.

Last edited by Tennessee_CP_Fan,

Nick

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums app ©2023, POP World Media, LLC - Terms of Service