Check this loop out.

Thursday, August 28, 2003 9:56 PM
Take a look at this inversion on the Texas Tornado at Wonderland on rcdb. The loop structure at the top of the loop is considerably taller than the track itself. Any other coasters out there with an inversion like this? Can anyone explain why the supports are designed at the top of the loop to extend like this?

http://www.rcdb.com/installationgallery254.htm?Picture=2

------------------
Arena football has arrived in the Windy City. Go "Chicago Rush"

+0
Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:04 PM
My only guess is that the loop was originally like the one behind it but it may of been to intense so the loop was lowered a little bit.

------------------
#1 Canobie Lake Park Fan!!! My top 7 coasters:
1. S:RoS @ SFNE 2. Montu 3. Yankee Cannonball 4. Kumba 5. Gwazi 6. Cyclone (SFNE) 7. B:DK

+0
Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:21 PM
Chitown - It's a Hopkins ride. It is in its nature to be bizarre.

MikeMir87 - lowering the loop would make it more intense, unless the bottom of the loop was lowered as well.

------------------
Ask about my references

+0
Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:52 PM
Agreed, lowering the loop would make it more intense. My only guess is that the trains weren't making it all the way around so they shortened it. But I'm sure anyone who knows anything about physics would prove me wrong.

~me

------------------
S:ROS; SFNE. Ride it, and you'll understand.

+0
Thursday, August 28, 2003 11:03 PM
Once I saw the title of this thread, I knew what coaster it would be about. I need to get out more.

You guys basically all have it right. Hopkins designed his coasters as he built them. That's why they're not really that great. I can only speak about Desert Storm, which I've ridden.

The track on the second loop on Texas Tornado used to go through the entire thing, but the train would often roll back in that element, so they had to modify it. There's something about rolling back on the second inversion on Hopkins coasters. I hear Desert Storm's favorite place to roll back is the second inversion, the loopscrew.

------------------
I was asked to describe X in one word. The word? -- OhmygoshwhathaveIgottenmyselfintothisisthescariest
thingintheworldhelpmeIamgoingtodieAHHHH!!!

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 1:07 AM
Is this the same Hopkins as in the water ride manufacturers?

The loop behind the 'odd' loop isn't that normal, either - the exit (or entry) is far higher than the entry (or exit), with the track again extended away from the structure, this time at the bottom.

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 5:16 AM
Yes, the very same one.

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 5:26 AM
Didn't this coaster get an nominee for the ugliest coaster a few weeks ago in a thread?

------------------
"You know its a good ride when you come into the final brake run wiping tears from your eyes."

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 5:52 AM
Probably got some votes, although I would have voted for Deja Vu. That thing is fugly- the structure looks like it was designed without any planning, the trains are bulky and hideous and there are cables going all over the place. It mimicks something I would have drawn on the back of my notebook in high school when I knew nothing about coasters except the fact that I liked riding them!

What haux says is correct, at least according to what I have always heard. ACE's Guide To Ride states that the coaster was promised for under $1 million and Hopkins delivered... I suppose that $1 million budget didn't allow for proper engineering. Not to trash Hopkins coasters or anything (they are coasters, after all), but I rarely hear anything good about them, so its no surprise to me that they ar no longer in the coaster business.

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 6:19 AM
That loop is just bizarre. Thats the only that comes to my mind looking at that loop.
+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 6:44 AM
Actually, it's kinda like an Arrow teardrop loop in a Schwarzkopf loop frame.

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 6:51 AM
I always assumed that Hopkins had designed a loop support structure with a standard radius, and that they would modify the track to fit inside each structure as necessary. I've never ridden a Hopkins coaster, but I would think a chimpanzee would be able to tell that the train could not make it through this loop if the track was flush with the box support.

------------------
-Mike B.
Son of Hulk
------------------

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 6:54 AM
but, it worked on Roller Coaster Tycoon!

------------------
--Maddie--
What do I Listen-To?
May the Schwarz be with you.

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 8:52 AM

Vater said:
I would think a chimpanzee would be able to tell that the train could not make it through this loop if the track was flush with the box support.

... and after telling you that, the chimpanzee would probably throw its own poop at the loop.

------------------
Ask about my references

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:01 AM

Chernabog said:
but, it worked on Roller Coaster Tycoon!

That's because almost everything works in RollerCoaster Tycoon!

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:06 AM
Not my stupid handymen... lazy jerks.

------------------
Ask about my references

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:09 AM
I was actually thinking along the same lines as Vater. Perhaps it's cheaper to have a standard size loop structure to avoid re-tooling costs for custom radii. However, if the rollback thing is legit, I suppose I'll have to believe it. If that's the case, it's a huge design flaw.
+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:28 AM
Check out the bottom of the first drop. It looks like it just turns slightly to the left with no banking. PAIN!

Hopkins coasters are funny things. They are huge design flaws, Rollerhammer. Like I said, he designed them as he built them. Desert Storm is a perfect example of bad design. If you have No Limits, you may understand this. The coaster "pumps" through the course. The radii of the inversions and turns are not perfect, so somewhere, the coaster shifts to follow the course. In the first vertical loop, it does it, and if you're not prepared for it you'll get slammed. I learned to hold on after that! At least it's got lap bars.

Are those PTC trains I see on Texas Tornado? I'd love to ride that coaster and those trains.

------------------
I was asked to describe X in one word. The word? -- OhmygoshwhathaveIgottenmyselfintothisisthescariest
thingintheworldhelpmeIamgoingtodieAHHHH!!!

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:30 AM

Vater said:
I always assumed that Hopkins had designed a loop support structure with a standard radius, and that they would modify the track to fit inside each structure as necessary.

A quick search of the RCDB reveals that none of Hopkins' other looping coasters have that sort of box-spine, though. In fact, it looks like they tried a little bit of everything through the years. Maybe they sold their coasters as "Authentic Reproductions" of other manufacturer's rides. Wonderland got a Schwarzkopf knock-off, Ghost Town in the Sky bought the "A-Row" model . . .

------------------
--Maddie--
What do I Listen-To?
May the Schwarz be with you.

+0
Friday, August 29, 2003 9:32 AM
Adventureland got a genuine "Intaman"...

------------------
-Rob
A.C.E. member since 1990
Posting @ Coasterbuzz since 2000
E.C.C. member since 2002

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...