*shake shake*
It's most definitely a...
"try again later"
These magic 8 balls are a waste of money! Funny how they're just as credible as most of the "sources" I read about on this site. :)
That's not to say I don't think it's a flyer, it probably is. I just find it humorous how many buzzers have these "sources". I find it even more humorous that when someone guesses something right, they then claim to be "in the know".
Here's the extent of my 2002 park "knowledge":
I'll be visiting as many parks as possible and now I might have to add SFOG to the list. That's a fact you can put money on!
.
*** This post was edited by Lord Gonchar on 12/3/2001. ***
http://www.rcdb.com/installationgallery87.htm?Picture=4
To make this look completely like a pretzel you just have to change the side that the train enters and exits from. On Montu you enter the element on the left, cut up and over to the left and do down and around to the other half loop and cut over and around and back out the right side.
Now imagine if you came in from the right but still went through the element from left to right. The track coming into it would cross over and up to the right side, the half corkscrew/halfloop, halfloop/half corckscrew combo stays the same and the coming out you cross under and leave the area from the left side.
I'm in a hotel room without my RCT disc and I haven't gotten No Limits yet, but I'd imagine you could make one of these rather easily and when viewed from the same angle as the Montu's Batwing in that pic, it'd look almost exactly like a pretzel.
Did that make sense?
It's easiest to describe in RCT talk but would actually look much better in No Limits with a little work. In my mind it's not nearly as sharp as the half cork / half loop combo. I see it as more gradual - almost like mirrored diving loops with the first half being a diving loop and the second half essentially being a diving loop in reverse order with the exit cutting back under the track that is the entry into the element.
I hope I'm using descriptive enough words to make this clear. In my head I can see it very clearly, it's just now coming out as well in words. Is anyone following my descriptions here?
*Edit added below*
I'll make another half baked example here. Check out this mantis photo:
http://www.joyrides.com/cedar_point/full/mantis3.htm
I'm assuming some knowledge of elements and Mantis by readers here. In this picture you can see Mantis' diving loop (the big element that takes up the top left quarter of the photo and is cut off on the left side) Just mirror this exact element on the exit from the element (right behind the photo building) - you'll end up with a huge pretzel looking element that if entered in the flying position would take you for one full inversion. You'd enter flying, be flat on your back and the bottom of the two half loops and exit in flying position again.
A minor stretch of the imagination to see it, but it's painfully obvious in my mind (and a tad frustrating to try to express it)
Then again, I could be totally wrong :)
*** This post was edited by Lord Gonchar on 12/3/2001. ***
take the Mantis example. I'm assuming that the riders will be in the flying position at the top of the inversion as well as going into the element itslef so the first part will essentially be a banked hill. but which way will it bank? to the outside so that you experience negative g's or to the inside so that you experience positive g's.
in my mind it might be better if you go in one way, then come out the other. again, let me explain. say you bank the entrance so that the riders get positive g's. then the spine is pointed more or less toward the exit. then you have the exit banked so that you get negative g's which means that, for the most part, the spines will touch each other. this way you don't have to worry about riders hitting the exit while going through the entrance because they're being banked away from it. it also helps because its one inversion with two sensations.
btw, I know how you feel because I can see the thing very clearly in my mind, but I'm not sure if I'm expressing it properly.
-----------------
Knott's Berry Farm Cuba ~South Park
I never thought about it. You have a good point. The direction of the twist would make a hug difference. However I'm not sure it matters as I now see what Mamoosh is saying and he may very well be more correct than my guess.
Mamoosh,
I e-mailed you. I like your idea for the pretzel loop. I think I see what you're saying and assuming you entered low, swooped up, did a half loop / half loop combo and swooped back down and out, then it would look just like a pretzel from the side! Essentially with that inversion you'd be doing a front loop but on the inside of the loop. All coasters I've seen that loop do a back loop (back up over themselves and around) where this on would go down under itself and around but still be on the inside of the loop if entered in a flying position. Very cool.
http://coastergames.net/screenshots/full/1161.jpg
Still, I dont know very well how it could be done in flying position!
Lord Gonchar: You may very well approach the inversion low, rise up, and then dive head first as I explained. To be honest I was so enthralled with the layout and inversion that I didn't pay much attention to the approach and exit. You're right, tho..that would look like a pretzel.
Wow, another take on what could easily be considered a "pretzel loop"! To do it flying all you have to do is imagine the track in the approach and exit to te pretzel inverted. It'd work just fine. That's also very close to my inital description except I had the train leaving in the same direction it cam from, while Mamoosh (still the one I think is correct) has it entering from the side and leaving the opposite side.
3 totally different inversions that could all be considered "pretzel loops" - so where's our coaster designing gigs? :)
Still have to go with Mamoosh on this one. Make the approach and exit to the element parallel to the element instead of perpendcular and I think you have B&M's version.
Closed topic.