Update: August 3

There's not enough room. Period.

If you look at this picture, there seems to be alot less than 4 or 5 ft. to work with.

http://www.pointbuzz.com/Gallery.aspx?i=4680

Edit: Dial up^

*** Edited 8/4/2006 6:14:18 PM UTC by CP fanatic 2400***

CP fanatic 2400 said:
If you look at this picture, there seems to be alot less than 4 or 5 ft. to work with.

http://www.pointbuzz.com/Gallery.aspx?i=4680

Edit: Dial up^

*** Edited 8/4/2006 6:14:18 PM UTC by CP fanatic 2400***

I can't get a good reference to measure the distance between the two closest poles. It looks to be about 10-12 feet between the poles (less between the footers, but it's the distance from pole to pole that counts). For those who have been there or have tried to calibrate the distance more accurately (if we had a good estimate on the diameter of the closest footer, that would be helpful), does 12 feet sound accurate?

Maybe. But that's certainly not enough room even if it is.

Width of track ~ 2'
Width of overhand ~ 3.5'

So, that means (from center) the train would extend out 4.5' from the center, and keep in mind that this is a conservative estimate. That leaves 18" between your arm and a steel pole.

Now, go get a ruler and measure your arm.

djDaemon said:
Maybe. But that's certainly not enough room even if it is.

Width of track ~ 2'
Width of overhand ~ 3.5'

So, that means (from center) the train would extend out 4.5' from the center, and keep in mind that this is a conservative estimate. That leaves 18" between your arm and a steel pole.

Now, go get a ruler and measure your arm.

You know, you don't have to be such a snide little shi*t. I am asking legitimate questions. And you may be wrong (as inconceivable as that appears to be to you).

As an additional point, the width of the poles at the front of this picture is not dispositive because the train would be in a bank at this point. Haven't others observed that the outside footers widen as you move down the line? Again, I'm just questioning whether these supports necessarily rule out an Intamin windwalker design a la Port Aventura. *** Edited 8/4/2006 6:39:44 PM UTC by veritas55***

The track is more like 3 1/2 to 4 feet wide...making even less clearance. (I know arrow track is on 48" centers, Intamin is a little narrower but not by much)

Had a dream (...or maybe not, but some ppl get flamed for what other ppl think are stupid guesses)... that the two rows of parrallel supports will be for a lift hill, and the low row of footers in between will be a mid-course launch. Just a fun thought. No idea if it holds up, I´m not an engineer of any kind. ;)

Don't forget when you guys are discussing cleanances that you have to account for arm reach. Even if the train physically fit between the support poles, there has to be even more clearance so you can't TOUCH the columns as you zoom past.

veritas55, There is not enough room.

He isn't being snide, he basically proved you wrong and you can't accept that. He wasn't rude to you in anyway.

You obviously don't like it when people think differently then you.

Paradroid, I think you're 100% correct about that lift-hill/launch setup. Just to clarify that I don't think you're crazy at all.

Where's the love? Be good, guys. Let's not make this thread a mean one. Hugs all around!

I wouldn't want to hit a beam while my arms are in the air! That would hurt. It would hurt bad.

A friend of mine thought that the trains might be different and that's what they mean by new direction; but I told him the same thing: it's just not enough room.

Paradroid[DK] said:[/DK]
Had a dream (...or maybe not, but some ppl get flamed for what other ppl think are stupid guesses)... that the two rows of parrallel supports will be for a lift hill, and the low row of footers in between will be a mid-course launch. Just a fun thought. No idea if it holds up, I´m not an engineer of any kind. ;)

A fun thought indeed. And different-which is what we all think this coaster will be. How tall of a hill do you think we could anticipate if it werea mid-course launch?

http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=main/8/21514593719.jpg&s=f10

Windwalker trains are roughly 18ft wide. (The pic is from Intamins patent application, this is a variation of the one that is being built, both are identecal except the seat locations in relation to being above/below the train)

djDaemon said:
There's not enough room. Period.

Except for maybe a storage track. Look at Iron Dragon and Corksrew. Those two have the ability to put trains under the station. This new coaster could be the same.

Thus, I see an elevated loading platform happening here. Only one coaster at CP is truely at ground level....Blue Streak.

It will be quite interesting IF this is not a station !!!!

Except that i have never seen a train enter the storage track by means of a highly banked turn at one end and a hill at the other end. ;)

j2k95sunfire said:
http://putfile.com/pic.php?pic=main/8/21514593719.jpg&s=f10

Windwalker trains are roughly 18ft wide. (The pic is from Intamins patent application, this is a variation of the one that is being built, both are identecal except the seat locations in relation to being above/below the train)

So a Windwalker is like the X in California? My friends rode that and said it was so much fun & Cedar Point needs to get it!

Not really, the only thing like X that it is is that the seats are on the outside of the track. The seats dont rotate like on X.

Huh? You mean the seats on a Windwalker don't rotate like the X does?

Do you know of any examples of a Windwalker, then?

There are no working examples of the wingwalker yet. Port Adventura will be opening one for 2007.

X, on the other hand, can be melted for scrap metal. I hate that God- forasken ride.

I just said the same as e x i t. Can´t delete my post... Just gonna sing a little song then... lalalala -there!
*** Edited 8/4/2006 8:16:11 PM UTC by Paradroid[DK]***