I 305 gets trim on the first drop

Captain Hawkeye said:
There was no "test" Maverick or I305 to see how it would operate.

What color is the sky on your planet?

mlnem4s said:
I am sorry but I completely disagree with your idea that Intamin doesn't necessarily know better what they are designing...

To me, Maverick was an epic failure when that whole issue arose, this isn't the 1970's when the whole looping phenomenon was born.

So which is it? Do you disagree and think Intamin knows what they're doing all the time? Or do you agree that the Maverick thing shows they don't?

I don't place all the blame with Intamin. I suspect the truth is much more 'grey' than anyone here is painting it to be.

But at the end of the day, the coaster didn't ride like one of the involved parties wanted it to. That's indisputable as long as the trims are on that drop.

So who screwed up?

Another question to be answered...

So there is/are metal brake surfaces going down the drop on Intimidator now.

Has anyone announced that this is the way the ride is going to be?

The nature of those magnetic braking systems is that they are not 100% accurately predictable. There are a lot of variables to be accounted for, and the usual procedure is to put them in place and adjust them as necessary for the actual ride conditions. Maverick is a good example; I am pretty sure that there is a different number of trim brake fins on it now from when the ride first opened, and there have been changes made to the number, composition, and spacing of the fins. That's just what we can see. What is less obvious is that they may have cut, ground, repositioned, or otherwise altered both the fins and the magnets on the trains.

Do we know now that Intimidator is giving the kind of ride that Kings Dominion wants, or are they going to be tweaking it throughout this season?

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

LOL@Mamoosh, my thoughts exactly. The "test" is called the engineering software that puts the design through its paces before the first piece of metal is fabricated.

I will conclude my discussion on this topic by saying clearly, to me, there is a problem at Intamin with their engineering software when we see time and time again "issues" with all of their attractions, unlike B&M and others who seem to nail it right from the get-go. I compare I305 now to the situation of a true freefall drop ride versus an S&S powered drop ride, they just aren't the same experience. I really enjoyed I305 in its natural form and would have made an effort to visit KD more just for that, now that I know it is neutered I wouldn't make such an effort.

There is a youtube video that shows the comparison of the animated POV and the real POV. Its perfectly accurate until the first trim break. Obviously those POV's are never perfect, but they are close enough to show that what Intamin calculated and what the ride actually does are completely identical, and there was no miss calculation.

The only exlanation that i have for why this ride is "too intense" is that Intamin simply thought humans could tolerate mroe g forces.

mlnem4s said:
I really enjoyed I305 in its natural form and would have made an effort to visit KD more just for that, now that I know it is neutered I wouldn't make such an effort.

It's natural form. Meaning with trims during the course and not on the lift, of course.

Not sure how it can be both ways, man. Do trims neuter or not?

Looks like intamin in lacking in their structural engineering dept. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the trims on I305 and the removal of Mav's roll because of wear and tear on the trains? This seems to be a recurring theme, with the structural modifications that were made to Wicked Twister and then Goliath in The Netherlands.

Does anyone know the radius of I-305's first turn?

Assuming it is 150 feet, then, for a train going 94 mph, the riders would experience approximately 4 g's for the duration of the first turn (approximately 5 sec). According to this article, that is more than enough to trigger greyout, or even G-induced loss of consciousness (G-LOC). Figure 1 is quite interesting. It suggests that there is a transition point between 4 and 5 seconds of sustained g's that make greyout or G-LOC more likely.

Reducing the train speed to 90mph results in 3.6 g's (still assuming a 150ft radius). This could still induce greyout in some of the population.

Edit: As a point of comparison, 6FMM's Goliath and 6FoT's Titan helices (60ft radius) have sustained g's for a comparable duration. Entering the helix at 55mph would result in 3.3 g's for about 7 seconds. Entering at 65mph would result in 4.7 g's for about 6 seconds.

Without having had my post-lift-trim ride, I would guess that the G's are probably more comparable to the pull-out of Millennium Force's first drop. I only grey out on that once or twice a year.

^would having an empty stomach influence a grey-out on Millie? That's the only time I've ever greyed-out on a coaster and it was actually a cool experience!

Thank you Captain Hawkeye for the voice of reason and common sense. Every product has a "prototype" for testing before it goes into production or service and with unique roller coasters, the parks purchase and install the prototype. This wasn't totally unexpected by anyone.

Isn't the real problem with the wheels (on going maintance)?

I'd also like to point out B&M's Mantis has/had trim brakes on it's drop too!

I would bet these types of challenges were expected and for now they've decided to add trims to the drop. I don't think it will remain like that forever, it's just a short term fix.

Good point on Millie, she's due for a fresh coat of paint no doubt.

The reason for the Mantis trim is actually debated. I tend to side with the "add a few seconds to interval" reason. You can read about it here:

http://www.pointbuzz.com/Forums/Thread/13242.aspx

As for "expecting" challenges like this, I can't imagine any company buying a multi-million dollar product would be okay with significant design flaws. Although there are always risks.

I can't believe how delutional fan boys of B&M can be. If you want to add a few seconds of interval, wouldn't the ride be more enjoyable if it were added on the turnaround before the drop instead of 30 feet off the crown in the middle of the drop itself? It was added for the exact same reason they are now on I305. The good news is that those trims are adjusted and even removed, so I don't view the addition of the trims as their final long term solution.

If you have risk, then you also have to expect the solutions to its cause.

Going through the first turn felt to me like the same sustained g-load of Dragster. That was my perception the first time I rode it on April 2. Mind-blowing.
Mantis had no trims yesterday...Magnum also. No guests=interval less important, lighter trains..

RIP I305 ( In my book)

Thom25, did you actually visit the link? I guess you are calling the CP VP a liar then. Also, as Joshua mentioned, the Mantis trims aren't always on. In particular, if you get the first ride of the day they are often off, because (gasp) it turns them on/off based on interval time!

It is sad that Intamin could not get this right... Sure, there are always tweaks to be made... But you are going to tell me that they did not expect that G load on that first turn?

Im sorry, but a trim down the entire first drop (which it is) is a buzz-kill for me. Having brakes mid-ride is one thing, but down the first drop is just horrible and ruins the best part of the ride.

I am sure the ride is still awesome, but Intamin really should do a little more research on the forces of their rides prior to construction. Always issues somewhere with structural problems or forces on their rides which they have to tweak later on.

B&M adds trims all over the place, sure. However, they are more so trimming to match the design speed of the ride versus having to slow it down because of excess speeds causing wear, damage and excessive forces on the rider. Big difference.

Just my opinion, of course.

I see Gonch's point that Intimidator was originally not riding as either Cedar Fair or Intamin (or both?) had intended. It doesn't change my opinion that putting a trim on the first drop will most likely negatively affect the ride experience. I haven't ridden it since opening day, so I don't know. But the thing that kills me is that I've been on more intense rides that have not been altered--my grey-out on Titan was more intense and lasted longer than the first turn of I305, and that was with the pre-helix midcourse brake bringing the train to a full stop. Although I suppose the MCBR was set to stop the train for that reason--to lessen the intensity of the helix; and thus could be considered 'altered', much like I305 is now.

Whatever the reason for the trim being added, it's disappointing. I'm glad I at least got to ride it in its original form.

SteveWoA said:
...Intamin really should do a little more research on the forces of their rides prior to construction.

B&M adds trims all over the place, sure. However, they are more so trimming to match the design speed of the ride versus having to slow it down because of excess speeds causing wear, damage and excessive forces on the rider. Big difference.

No, there is literally no difference. Both companies are, post-built, altering how rapidly the train navigates the track. Regardless of the reason, doing so is a result of imperfect planning.

That said, it's almost impossible to design & test something on a computer and have that something behave identically in real life. You can only do so much planning, then you have to test, and then make adjustments based on those test results (which is what we're seeing here).

Thom25 said:
I can't believe how delutional fan boys of B&M can be. If you want to add a few seconds of interval, wouldn't the ride be more enjoyable if it were added on the turnaround before the drop instead of 30 feet off the crown in the middle of the drop itself? It was added for the exact same reason they are now on I305

Your accusations are unnecessary, and your conclusions are wrong. I sat in a Q&A on a Dragster construction tour in 2003 with the VP's of ops and construction and maintenance, and they told us it was to maintain interval, a problem that was pretty serious when they ran three trains in particular (just ask anyone who got the hard stop in the safeties uptrack of the transfer). And how do you put a brake on a turn where the train is not straight and not going fast enough to make any difference?

djDaemon said:

No, there is literally no difference. Both companies are, post-built, altering how rapidly the train navigates the track. Regardless of the reason, doing so is a result of imperfect planning.

That said, it's almost impossible to design & test something on a computer and have that something behave identically in real life. You can only do so much planning, then you have to test, and then make adjustments based on those test results (which is what we're seeing here).

I understand what you mean, however, my point was a little different. I know that both companies "refine" the rides once built with various wheel compounds, trim brake modifications, etc... But Intamin seems to push the levels of modifications. You are going to tell me they did not expect that turn to be too small of a radius for the speeds at which they would be ridden at? That seems to baffle me a little bit.

B&M (for the most part) do not require the same level of structural changes (Xcelerator...The Impulses), significant post-trim brake additions (I-305), restraint modifications (S:ROS, Perilous Plunge), train redesigns (Shoot the Rapids), track redesign (Maverick) and trains 'issues' (Expedition Geforce) that Intamin usually end up with.

My point here is that B&M is superior with design and development of the rides they produce. Intamin always end up having SOME issue or another which result in hefty modifications of some sort.

Don't take my post as being all serious and "know-it-all" either, I don't mean to come across that way. I am just sharing my "thoughts" on Intamin. The rides they produce are excellent, but they sure do have plenty of issues...