Track officially uncovered at Breakers Express

While I understand your reasoning, the truss example is invalid. Trusses are traingular because rain and snow needs to not be on your roof. And, traingles are easier to build than semi-circles.

The box track is more structurally sound, because is is made of traingular pieces within itself, and because there is more mass to absorb and distribute the forces.

Dude, I'm not talking about roof trusses.

Definition of the word Truss:

truss: In architecture, a structural framework of wood or metal based on a triangular system, used to span, reinforce, or support walls, ceilings, piers, or beams.

Intamin track is, for all intents, very much truss-based. As I said before, I'm sure the triangular track is sufficient for everything, as it TOO is made up of triangles within itself, though the box-track seems more important structurally. Remember, I linked to a picture of triangular track at the base of MF's drop - there's about 4 g's of forces there on a 19+ ton train, I would say that track is pretty damn strong.

Of course you didn't understand what I meant by structurally, either. What I mean is that it seems to have an almost self-contained support system, meaning it can theoretically hold itself in place while using less supports, which is why it can stand so freely on the towers of WT (Although they DID have to add those extra supports, it's still way up there on its own). Make sense? It also may explain why we see triangular track in a lot of the lower spots, moreso than anything up off the ground - though I'm sure there are exceptions.

I never claimed that any of this was the real reason for the differences, it's just what makes sense to me.

Here's the wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truss

It includes roof trusses in the description, but I assure you I'm still not talking about roof trusses.

-Josh

*** Edited 5/26/2006 7:07:25 PM UTC by e x i t english***

I heard a rumer that there is white track sitting on trailers down on 1st. Anyone else hear about this?

e x i t english said:
There have been entire rides constructed of flat track in the past that have held up just fine.

You mean like Wildcat? A ride which pulls more G's than MF, yet uses flat track throughout the entire ride.

Might be more G's, but it's Less Mass and for Shorter Durations.
*** Edited 5/30/2006 5:36:44 PM UTC by Jason Hammond***

I agree with djDaemon. There is less mass and area on triangular track to absorb all the forces a 19+ ton train would exert on the track. And it doesn't matter if it is a roof truss or not. It still supports some kind of structure. And aren't boxes also based on a triangular system? If a triangular track can absorb as much force as you say it can, then box track can absorb twice as much, since triangle+triangle=square. And Wikipedia can't always be trusted. Any idiot can put anything up on those pages, making the entire source invalid. The page you sent the link for is probably accurate, but Wikipedia still can't be trusted.

I feel much better. :)

JuggaLotus said:
You mean like Wildcat? A ride which pulls more G's than MF, yet uses flat track throughout the entire ride.

Yeah, that example works, too. I had Intamin rides in mind when I said that originally - but yeah. Look at the original Superman:ROS coasters, the ending bunny hills are flat track too. It's odd.

What's the weight of an MF car compared to a WC car? Not expecting them to be equal, but you can't compare the train on MF to the car on WC. The whole train isn't acting on a section of track all at once, however one car (its 4 wheel-sets) can.

Yes it is acting on the spot all at once, but imagine four more Wildcat cars coming after the first one. Yes, it puts all of its weight on one section of track, but the MF train exerts the weight on the track car after car. I guess what I'm trying to say is that MF has a long train running over the section of track, while the cars on Wildcat are on and off the track in less then a second. The weight is exerted longer on MF.

Yes. The force is sustained until the car passes, but it is one car at a time. The entire 9 ton train isn't acting for 2 seconds over a 5 foot section of track. Each 1.2 ton car is acting on that 5 foot section for .3 seconds. So the duration is still 2 seconds, just not a 9 ton train pulling 4 g's, but rather a stream of 1.2 ton cars pulling 4 g's.

(numbers are contrived and probably not accurate, just meant to show the difference between an entire train and individual cars)

On a side note (since we're talking about g's.) Does anyone else want to ride that centrifuge that they were showing in the NGC show yesterday?

*** Edited 5/30/2006 3:43:31 PM UTC by JuggaLotus***

Let's just put it this way. When a Manufacture is contracted to do something. (regardless of trade) They will try to do it the most cost effective way. For Example: If intamin spineless track would have been enough to support Millennium Force, they would have used it. They would not have spent the extra money on Box Track if it was not needed.