Alpengeist Pilot Coach??

Oh come on... send a 2-car train through an RCT track or CoasterDynamix and then send an 8-car train. The 2-car won't make it.

Oh come on... use RCT for its physics engine?

Ever wonder why on cold mornings Dragster trains get front loaded? It's to move the CoM up in the train so it actually makes it over the top hat. That zero car is a negligable amount of mass compared to the rest of the train. I don't buy that.

It's probably just for tracking resons. All roller coasters have a zero car. Even arrow coasters. Its just designed differenatly. The zero car for B&M is for tracking. Other than that it would be just 8 cars connected which could wobble quite a bit since they are sitting on just two wheels. By connecting the first two it makes it four but they still roll just cant move up/down or kleft/right. The zero car on an arrow is underneath the first car since its directly under the seats in the front as long is the back which is where the second car connects. Its probably for tracking and thats it.

-cofan101

You and Jeff are operating on two completely different wavelengths, John. What Jeff is attempting to point out is that the zero car increases the length and weight of the train, which in turns aids in increasing the momentum of the train. The reasoning regarding weight can best be explained by simple physics:

momentum = mass * velocity, or, in physics terms, p = mv.

This means that even if the velocity of a train remains constant, adding mass (the zero car) will increase the momentum of the train, which basically means that the train has more "oomph" allowing it to overcome wind resistance, friction, and other forces acting upon it. Even if the mass of the zero car is negligible compared to the overall mass of the train, physics dictates that the overall momentum will be significantly increased, as the additional weight is multiplied by the velocity.

While the zero car does push the center of gravity farther back in the train, the momentum gained reduces the need for the front of the train to pull the it over the top of the elements... center of gravity would only play a significant role if the train virtually stopped at the top of a loop or hill, which definitely does not occur on the ride. Using Top Thrill Dragster is a poor example, as the front-loading is used to overcome a different obstacle than the B&M engineers were concerned about.

Edit cofan, you're completely incorrect. Alpengeist is the only B&M ride to implement the zero-car being discussed, so clearly it is not necessary for tracking purposes. As several members have previously mentioned, the zero-car is set up identically to the front car of any other B&M train, except that on Alpengeist there aren't any seats attached.

*** Edited 11/28/2005 3:14:45 AM UTC by PhantomTails***

I'm very familar with the concept of momentum and other rudimentary physics concepts.

Let's look at it like this, though. A train weighs many tons, yes? The total weight of the boggies, seats, passengers, wheel assemblies, etc is very large. How much help do you think adding an extra boggie at the front of the train is going to do to add momentum to the train? That amount of mass up at the front is so slight compared to the rest of the train that it's not going to matter.

It's like taking a large number, let's say 1,000,000 and adding 10 to it. 1,000,010 is close enough to 1,000,000 that you'd round it off to 1,000,000, right?

If B&M is concerned about the momentum of the trains the better approach would be to distribute the extra mass evenly across the whole train. That way you don't have an oddly balanced train. Add weights to the bottom of every seat, build the train more massivly, or simply require that only fat people ride.

*** Edited 11/28/2005 3:20:09 AM UTC by Michael Darling***

You guys have put to much thought into this,

The reason for the zero car is to provide something for you to hit your head on when you enter/exit the train.

This provides much needed comic relief for those waiting in line, and for the rides operators.

Is anyone able to comment on the sound of the lift? Some coasters implement a small generator somewhere in the train that will lift the anti-roll back pins anytime that the train is moving forward. Perhaps Alpengeist has, or was intended to have this feature, and the generator and wheel were to be in the nose car. Admittedly, this would be the first I have ever heard of B&M doing this if it were true, but it would make perfect sense.

The lift sound has changed since the ride opened. However it has nothing to do with the zero car.

The lift was very quiet during the first season,however I believe the anti roll backs were "adjusted" to make it louder.

I good operator or mechanic can tell if something is in need of adjustment just by listening to the sounds the train makes on the lift.

...getting pack on topic :P

My personal guess is that perhaps it's a question of providing more safety. In the event of a low-speed collision, that extra zero car will prevent the legs of the front-row riders from getting potentially crushed by the back of the train it hits.

It's only a guess, though. And why would no other B&Ms have it? Maybe all the others trust the block systems and programming more. ;)

John, no one knows the answer, and you're the only one who seems to be pushing for the center of gravity thing, which, quite frankly, makes absolutely no sense. If you want to argue that the weight of the zero car doesn't add significantly to the momentum of the train, I'll argue that the weight of the zero car would change the center of gravity so slightly that it really wouldn't matter.

Fun and OBX, (most, if not all) B&M trains have a piece of nylon or similar material on the anti-rollback mechanism that softens the impact, thus reducing the noise of the train going up the lift. When the nylon wears down, the anti-rollbacks become noticeably louder until the pads are replaced by maintenance.

I'm not pushing for it. I'm saying that if it's there for extra mass (which I still say it's not) it's just going to make the train oddly balanced. Neither the longer train nor the higher momentum argument makes sense in application.

All the zero carl on Alpie is, really, is the same first car on every other invert, just without seats on it and it has to be for tracking purposes. After hearing the other bogus theories, that's the only one that makes sense to me.

Or perhaps the ride was originally supposed to open with 9-row trains but they found they were either too heavy/fast or that the forces created in that first row were too high so they removed that row of seats?

Seems like the simplest answer to me ;)

*** Edited 11/28/2005 5:26:03 PM UTC by Mamoosh***

Note to self...Please post new a topic about the zero car on Alpengest on the second Thursday of every month!

This is great entertainment. We've got dueling "idiot" takes and complete disagreement across the board.

...and to think I never even read any of the prior posts about the phantom car...I never knew what I was missing!

P.S. I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but I'll keep it to myself as watching the "back and forth" is so much better than a boring conclusion! :-)

its there because the first two row/cars/sets of wheels lock up for stability. like mentioned before, the first car on arrow trains have its own full set of wheels, front and back, attached to the car. the follwing cars have jsut one set on the rear, but gets the stability of having the front set because rear wheels are supprtign the weight of the front of the following car. B&M only haveing one row per car can't have two seperate rows of wheels on a car so they lock up the front two. anther example of B&M's zero car is on ALL hypers. they all have the pointy, sloaped car up front.

^ the zero-car on Arrows is actually in the back of the train.

---

Michael Darling said:
In a low-speed situation if the CoM doesn't crest the hill, the train won't. All you're doing by back-loading the train like that is making it more likely to roll back in a low-speed situation.

---

This is actually not correct at all for a symmetical hill like TTD's. If the train is CENTER loaded, the CoM travels higher (and thus, take more energy to get up there and thus, is more likely to roll back) than if the train is either FRONT loaded or BACK loaded. The best situation is to load in from the ends first (front row, back row, 2nd, 2nd to last, etc.) which keeps the CoM lowest as it crests the hill.

It seems like loading the front allows the train to pull over a hill it would barely make if you loaded the back, but it takes more energy to get the train into that position when it's front loaded rather than back loaded (the CoM is higher in that situation).

Summary: The CoM of a front loaded train acheives the same height as the CoM of a back loaded train. Both are higher than an end loaded train and lower than a center loaded train.

Why they front load the trains rather than loading the ends (which would allow the CoM to stay lower) is beyond me. Maybe because friction actually exists in the real world.

---

ApolloAndy said:
^ the zero-car on Arrows is actually in the back of the train.

---

More like a Zero-Bogey, not a car.

---

Jeff said:

---

Fun said:
The nose car will prevent the first two passenger rows from alligning, like is the case on B&M Floorless and Flying coasters. You'll notice that the individual rows thereafter will articulate freely.

---

That's the stupidest thing I've read. The bogie is not any mechanically different than any other car, aside from the fact that it has no trailer to another car. It has been widely speculated that the reason for the zero car is to lengthen the train, in order to allow its momentum to carry it through the giant elements.

---

Uh. No. YOUR reply to his accurate observation is the "stupidest thing I've ever read." What a way to make it look like you know more than he does while in fact it's the other way around.

He's (Fun) correct. The zero car serves as a substitute alignment with the first row of the train on Alpengeist. This was done to allow articulation between the first and second cars - which could have been done on Alpengeist for many a reasons, but I don't know exactly what it is.

It's as easy as looking at certain pictures Jeff. Every B&M inverted coaster that does not have a zero car (which would exclude the obvious, our topic coaster) has its two first rows of cars fixed to each other. There is no articulation between the first two as it is in the rest of the rows of cars that follow them. That's the same setup on B&M's Floorless coasters - the first two rows of cars are also joined together, much in the way Arrow looping coaster trains have that tail wheel assembly that trails behind the train. B&M's stand-up and sitting coasters have cars that all freely articulate because of a lead/zero car.

You'll be surprised to see that if you actually did a small follow up on his comment rather than just immediately shoot it down as some "Stupid" idea, which ironically, was a lot less "dumb" than yours, then you'd see that you were wrong and are too quick to make yourself look like a know it all for show! :)

Good job, Kraxaxel, there's hope for you yet ;).

To Jeff's credit:
A) I know it's not personal.
B) I too have kicked the cars in front of me on Inverts during tight turns.
C) I did not specify that the "prevented alignment" applies exclusively to relative pitch of the wheel carriers. And that sharp vertical turns will cause the carriers to fall out of alignment. But for the most part, they do align horizontally.

As apparent in this photo, the front wheel assemblies will NOT tend to align in lateral turns: http://www.coasterbuzz.com/rollercoasterphoto.htm?i=2410

To My Credit:
I've helped rebuild B&M trains. I do have hands on knowledge of the cars and wheel carriers.