Hydra Inversion Count

Tuesday, May 10, 2005 2:42 AM
So, here's my contribution to the great "Is it, or isit not, an inversion?" Debate! The official inversion count for Hydra is 7. However, after riding Hydra, I think it should be at 4. This is where the debate enters. IMHO, an inversion is a complete inversion (head square over heels/feet). However, both the cobra roll ( http://www.rcdb.com/ig2528.htm?picture=19) and the dive loop (http://www.rcdb.com/ig2528.htm?picture=17) fail to completely invert the train, especially the dive loop. This may just be me being picky, but I just wantto see what othersthink of the inversion definition and count.

BTW, the jojo was awesome!!!!

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:34 AM
I see your point, TwinsGP, but I think that I will count them as inversions. I have wondered what people thought about this as well.

That Cobra roll is so different from anything I have ever seen before, but I think that some people will not see how unique it really is.

*** Edited 5/10/2005 7:37:49 AM UTC by dexter***

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:36 AM
Didn't we just have this debate in the Hades thread?

Dictionary.com says this of an inversion.

It says this about being upside down.

Not to sound rude here, but what you think in this matter is irrelevant. If something is an 'Official' count, and your feet are indeed over your head in all of those elements, which constitutes an inversion, much like an overbank, which is still technically speaking an inversion, then that would be 'Official', and your opinion would have little value to anything/one but yourself.

:)

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:39 AM
From the pictures and videos I've seen, the "dive loop" resembles more of an overbanked turn than anything. I'd put it in the same class as Mantis'/Chang's Inclined loop...

*** Edited 5/10/2005 8:41:36 AM UTC by BullGuy***

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:06 AM
I agree that the Dive loop shouldn't count as an inversion. Its more like B&M's version of an overbanked turn. I'd count the cobra roll as 2 inversions.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:20 AM
I think this coaster was specifically designed to confuse inversion counters.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:58 AM
I personally like the "Its an inversion if the park calls it an inversion" method.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 8:41 AM
Actually, this would be B&M's version of a overbanked, no?

At least it felt that way in 1999 (party over, whoops, outta time).

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:40 AM
Okay, new rule. 90.01*-135*=Overbank; 135.01*-180*=Inversion. We'll split it in half to be fair. That dive loop looks like it is pushing it.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:43 AM
I agree with Coasterfantom2, the Cobra Roll barely slips by as inversions. The Dive Loop however does not count as an inversion to me and reminds me of the sprials on the Giovanola Stand-ups. Photos here:

http://www.rcdb.com/ig52.htm?picture=5

http://www.rcdb.com/ig52.htm?picture=4

http://www.rcdb.com/ig53.htm?picture=1

Although they are not as steeply banked on at the top, but very similar. Either way if you count them as an inversions or not is still looks like a lot of fun and unique ride. *** Edited 5/10/2005 1:44:41 PM UTC by SONiC Senshi***

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 9:48 AM
Seeing as the inclined loops are technically called "oblique loops" and this is technically called a "oblique dive loop" I would say you have to put it in the same category.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 11:22 AM
teckno, wouldnt the hammerhead element on Nitro be considered their overbank? i think it is.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 12:50 PM
Ride it, you're right.

Tekno, the turn on Raging Bull is not an overbank, but the hammerhead seen at the bottom of this picture is.

Silver Star at Europa Park also has one seen here.

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 2:04 PM
Admittedly, the same nerdly thoughts crossed my mind when watching video of Hydra: That isn't even close to an inversion, for crying out loud!

That said, we've been successfully looping for 30 years now. Are we still that obsessed with inversions?!? Obviously, from a marketing standpoint, we are. But if we achieved 7 inversions in 1988, why is it still a big deal in 2005? Shouldn't inversions be as old hat as height and speed?

I know enthusiasts could care less. They'd love a high-quality 3-inversion ride... like Storm Runner. But does the GP still get hooked by this stuff?

I prefer the nomenclature of "elements" as opposed to "inversions."

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:22 PM
So we take "inverted elements" and for the sake of not typing so much, call them inversions.

Otherwise I agree with you. The number is not so much to me as the feeling you get and the originality. Like Raptor. The layout is perfectly done and the elements original (a cobra on an invert) that it didn't matter if it had 7, 10 or 2 inversions, it was just done really really well.

+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:06 PM
I'm gonna sound stupid but... Whats the Jojo?
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:09 PM
The zero-g roll that occurs directly after Hydra's station, before the lift.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 4:46 PM
As long as it's a really cool, fun ride, that i can get off of and say "I want to ride again!!" then I don't give a rat's arse how many inversions there are. Perhaps you all should feel the same way too instead of being uber-nerdy and arguing over the number of inversions there are ;)
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 6:10 PM
Topics like this make me feel like a dork for comming to this site. Maybe I am one.
+0
Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:50 PM
^Nah, its true. Debates like this are *above average* geek factor.

Its almost as bad as an "how many credits is a racing coaster worth" thread.

+0

You must be logged in to post

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