B&M Four Seaters?
Speedy said:
Yes, I believe it was indeed a Fabbri. A portable fair type one infact. What was nice about it was that the fairground had an ocean view (del mar fair), the ride didn't require any more tickets than other rides, and the ride stopped at the top for like 20 seconds (probably not true in theme parks though). It had bad capacity though. Probably only like 10 seats total. Compare that to the typical 24-48 on Intamin and S and S towers.
Sorry, but S&S towers only have 12 seats each so it isn't really that high capacity.
-----------------
SFNE Central- Online Six Flags New England Resource
Devoted Intamin Lover for Life!
-------------
2003-Gotham City @ SFA presenting Bathroom the Ride-Please remain seated at all times
Yes, many S&S rides are complexes. Actually, S&S does offer 16 passenger seating. They offer 3 models I believe: 4 abreast all sides (16), 3 abreast all sides (12), and 4 abreast and 2 abreast (12). The 16 passenger model is on Maliboomer at DCA. It makes a 3 tower ride have the same capacity as the 4 tower ones (although likely only 1 ride program), but its a whole lot cheaper.
And no, the fair ride I talked about was not a chance slingshot, it was the fabbri i'm 99% sure of that name. They hold you for longer at the top when youre at the fair b/c there is no waiting in line.
4 across intamin river plunges (perilous plunge, hydro revenge) are also social, but you can't turn to the side with those restraints on perilous plunge.
B&M makes 2 across trains for wooden coasters BTW.
Intamin Fan said:
most of the crews at Great Adventure are every bit as good as Cedar Point.
When I was there over the summer, the crew was stacking all three trains of a three train op. on Medusa. The Nitro crew can be really good (usually when Landon is around), but in general the crews at GAdv. are pretty bad. This is speaking from my 5 visits this year.
-----------------
What I was saying was, that the four seat design saves space--so you can have more people on a shorter train than your typical 2-abreast trains. If the manufacturer wanted to, they could really add capacity without a dramatic increase in train length.
Compare MForce trainsets with, say, and 9-row B&M. See the difference?
-----------------
Is that a Q-bot in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
-----------------
Be polite and ignore the idiots. - rollergator
You must be this dumb to ride Viper. -SFGAdv.
Those who touched on articulation and better maneuverability are right on. Notice how tight B&M trains can perform curves and snap back and forth? A two or three row train can not do that. This is the same reason GCI has switched to single-row articulation trains (Millennium Flyers). Since GCI builds tight twisters (so far anyway), single-row articulation cars work *much* better for the course because they can maneuver tight curves more easily. The four-across trains are simply a style preference on B&M's part, and allowed them to build tight, compact layouts like Iron Wolf or PGA's Vortex. B&M *could* use two-row trains, but the whole style of B&M rides would have to change.
-Nate
Or they could have used normal 2 -across seating and done the same thing... which wouldn't have been as drastic.
I still say it's to pack as many people into as small a train, thus increasing overall capacity.
-----------------
Is that a Q-bot in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
Combine those two, General Public and coasterdude, and I believe that that's be pretty well spot on.
Firstly, you have a short train, meaning that the ride is a lot more dynamic. The short length means that the forces are consistant; banking, transitions etc can be more accurately calculated for optimal smoothness. If it were two per row, on an 8 car train, it'd be 16 people on each car, which isn't too much, so make it 4, you've got a fairly decent number.
At the same time, to allow the trains to have maximum flexibility and ability to navigate smoothly tighter transitions, they have one set of wheels per row, whereas Arrow, Intamin and so on, have two (or three) per set, which significantly decreases the trains ability to navigate tighter elements.
While I'm here, I'll add something about the track.
From what I can tell B&M use a significantly wider track guage than Intamin (http://americacoasters.com/Photos/SFMW/10.php vs. http://www.rcdb.com/installationgallery541.htm?Picture=2). I wouldn't argue that B&M's track is stronger than Intamin's, though relative to train weight, Intamin would win hands down.
*** This post was edited by auscoasterman on 12/4/2002. ***
Okay, I guess if you look at that way it is *somewhat* due to capacity - a train composed of two-across, single row cars would make the train excessivly long, so B&M wisely put four seats in a row. The motivation for this switch, however, was *not* because of capacity, but to allow the tight maneuvers seen in many B&M rides.
-Nate
If the question was about Vekoma Dutchman this would not even be an argument.
The short train with short cars adds up to two things. It is able to perform sharper maneuvers all the while keeping the G's more consistent throughout the ride. It's as simple and easy as that.
It is definitely not to increase capacity.
Maggie at CP with 6 cars of three rows each (36 total peeps)has the same capacity as Raptor with 8 cars of 1 row of 4 seats ( 32 total peeps) and a shorter ride cycle.
Both however have a higher capacity then Millenium Force but this is based more on track lenght then any other factor.
-----------------
Coming in 2003-The Spawn Of Magnum!
I AM WITTY!
-----------------
Is that a Q-bot in your pocket or are you just happy to see me?
-Nate
*** This post was edited by coasterdude318 on 12/4/2002. ***
-----------------
A day is a drop of water in the ocean of eternity. A week is seven drops.
MagnumForce said:
Both however have a higher capacity then Millenium Force but this is based more on track lenght then any other factor.
Not doubting you, but I don't see why this happens. On all three rides, the load station is the bottleneck and always has a train, but on MF, it's only a load station, not unload and load. This should, in theory, make the bottleneck point on MF faster than the bottleneck on the other two. Right?
-----------------
You must be logged in to post
