Kings Dominion announces Intimidator 305

TTD is a 90 degree drop and no one has fallen out yet.

^Its not just a question of how steep the drop is: its also a question of how fast it gets steep: its called forward momentum. Theoretically you could make a 60 degree drop feel steeper than a 70 degree drop. This also explains why TTD isn't suppose to go over the top hat too fast because it would have too much forward momentum. From looking at the video this ride seems to get steep very fast. Must faster than MF does.

And as for the U shaped lap bars. I don't understand how load times could be any longer than with t shaped lap bars.

I don't remember how steep El Toro's first drop is, but I will say that I felt stronger air on that coaster than any other in the 300 I've ridden so far. And the lap bar held me in just fine.

Wow! This looks like a great ride. Definitely an excellent addition to any park in my opinion. It is crazy though that it took 10 years to get another 300 footer out on the market (minus TTD and KK). I really hope to get a ride on this sometime.

As for the theme, I happen to be a long time roller coaster enthusiast and I always frowned on motorsports because I only watched them on TV and I felt that they were just plain boring. But a few years ago I took a chance to go see a race in person for the first time and I can't believe how much I enjoy it now. I found a new favorite hobby in racing and it's nice coming back to this site after being away for awhile and seeing how parks and technologies have grown.

I prefer other forms of racing over NASCAR, but I think it's pretty neat that this partnership was formed. Perhaps we'll see more of this kind of thing in the future. As far as the references poking fun at Dale's wreck at Daytona that ultimately took his life throughout this thread are concerned, I find it quite unnecessary no matter how much you don't care for NASCAR.

I hope that this ride will fulfill its guest's adrenaline needs the way that driving racecars did for Dale. Great addition KD!

ApolloAndy said:
I don't remember how steep El Toro's first drop is, but I will say that I felt stronger air on that coaster than any other in the 300 I've ridden so far. And the lap bar held me in just fine.

El Toro is the wooden Ride of Steel. The airtime is absolutely.....bizarre (Oh!)... ;)

I had a good idea of what the park meant by shoulder straps. I just couldn't remember the name of the ride until yesterday. I rode Inferno at Terra Mitica last month. I think this might be what they're talking about.

http://rollercoasterfreak.com/Inferno.jpg

^Wow Jason, I sure hope you're right about that. Ridden too many with the Mavy-type OTSRs already (about 5-6 rides) - they'd be OK I suppose on a strictly out-n-back-y type layout, but once they start with inversions other than vertical loops, or strong laterals, I end up with the neck-punch that kinda detracts from the fun factor.

If the ride turns out to not have the mav-style restraints, Bill... I can ride with you, and punch you in the neck to make it feel more authentic, if you'd like. :)

^Thanks, Josh, but no.... ;)

Whatever happened to the lap+ankle/shin they had on RoS after the SFNE incident? Those were "the next-best thing to being there"...

Bill said:
Intimidator's designers fell into the same old trap:

1) A marketing need for a height record.

2) A cramped footprint .

3) The need for short supports to save on total cost.

What do you get? A G-force laden, ground hugging Spaghetti Bowl. Congratulations, it's an inelegant disaster. I mean, honestly? A turn-around DIRECTLY after the plunge? That's almost as bad a design flaw as having a long lift hill into the station at the end of a ride. Or having a break run at the bottom of the first plunge. Why even bother with a record breaking plunge? Why not just launch people at high speed into the turnaround?

In fact, why not just have the trains smash into a brick wall at the bottom of the first hill? Now that would make for some good G-forces!

Awful.

When are capricious ride designers going to admit that they need to take their designs through focus groups? It's as if they're a bunch of pseudo-scientific narcissists with no regard for pacing, ridability, or likability and with no accountability for their designs. Just sad.

Well if it weren't for that alleged no compete clause B&M is said to have with BGE then KD would've gotten the carowinds model instead.

GIGAFORCE01 said:
And as for the U shaped lap bars. I don't understand how load times could be any longer than with t shaped lap bars.

It is not so much the shape of the bar be it U or T, it is about the limitation of the person that can fit inside the restraint. With tighter restraints, it takes longer to get everyone secured.

I have never had to do a walk of shame, but El Toro was the tightest fit of any coaster that I have been on. Building a ride for the US market and not recognizing that many people are much larger then they were 10 years ago is not addressing the needs of the parks customers.

DaveStroem said:

Building a ride for the US market and not recognizing that many people are much larger then they were 10 years ago is not addressing the needs of the parks customers.

Here! Here! Dave.

We should also eliminate Math and Science from the school curriculum because we arent doing as well as we used to 10 years ago.

Raise your torches everyone! :)

ApolloAndy said:
I've gotten a good whack on the side of the head on the last curvy section of Storm Runner. Also on the twist on KK, I've been hit. I can't say I know what will happen on I305, but I'm pretty sure a lapbar only restraint system would be better.

Isn't this the same sort of complaint most associated with vekoma SLC's?

One of the problems with El Toro is that while every lap bar has a go/no-go switch on it, there is only one indicator for each car (four seats). So when a car is !ready, there is no way for the operators to know which seat is having problems, so their tendency is to push way too hard on the wrong lap bar.

Personally, I think having the lap bars way too tight also makes people think the ride has more and more violent airtime than it really does. It also makes it hurt quite a lot in places where it shouldn't. When I made it to Great Adventure last year, I had a lot more fun on Nitro than I had on El Toro, and I am an airtime nut!

Anyway, ASTM F 2291:6.4.3.8 has this to say about the most restrictive class of rider restraints, "required" on a Class 5 ride, which is basically anything that has -Gz for more than 0.2 seconds...

(1) Number of Patrons per Restraint Device--A restraint device shall be provided for each individual patron.
(2) Final Latching Position Relative to the Patron--The final latching position must be variable in relation to the patrons, for example, a bar or rail with multiple latching positions.
(3) Type of Locking--The restraint device shall be automatically locked.
(4) Type of Unlocking--Only the operator shall manually or automatically unlock the restraint.
(5) Type of External Correct or Incorrect Indication--An external indication is required. Detecting the failure of any monitored device shall either bring the ride to a cycle stop or inhibit cycle start.
(7) Redundancy of Locking Device--Redundancy shall be provided for the locking device function.
(8) Restraint Configuration--Two restraints, for example, shoulder and lap bar or one fail-safe restraint device is required.

There are some interesting tidbits in there that are relevant to our present discussion. Of particular note is item (5), which means that an electromechanical system must decide whether the restraint position is "correct" or not and must indicate to the operator, and must inhibit cycle start if the restraint position is "incorrect". But contrast that with item (2), which requires a variable restraint position. You see what this means? It means that if we assume (as is implied in requirement (2)) that the restraint must be adjusted to the size of the rider in order to adequately restrain the rider, then in order for requirement (5) to be met, there has to be a single position which is a minimally "correct" position for the restraint. If that is the case, then that position has to be set to be "correct" for the SMALLEST rider who can be permitted to ride. That is, the minimum lap bar setting for ALL riders has to be the position which can be minimally considered "safe" for the SMALLEST rider who can ride. Is it any wonder, then, that the lap bars on El Toro are set to be *too tight* for almost all adults? Furthermore, given that particular requirement, does the requirement for an interlocked "go/no-go" system not contradict the requirement for an adjustable restraint? If the minimal safe position is set based on the smallest rider, would that not end up being the minimal safe position for all riders? And if that is the case, what is the benefit in making the restraint adjustable?

I'm just sorry I never had an opportunity to cast a negative vote on that particular standard...!

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

ridemcoaster said:
We should also eliminate Math and Science from the school curriculum because we arent doing as well as we used to 10 years ago.

Ha! Awesome. :)

^^That is an excellent point Dave. Though I'm not smart enough to come up with an equally compelling solution. The only thing I can think of off of the top of my head has many flaws.

Have a minimum safe setting for the average large adult that can reasonably fit in the seat and add an additional factor of pressure detection. The seat needs to be closed until there is a certain amount of "push back". Of course the problems with this are, how do you decide if someone can reasonably fit in a seat and then how do you keep people from putting additional pressure on the restraint themselves. I.E. someone wanting to keep the lap bar a little lose lets out their gut until the ride leaves the station? Have the ride shut down if the pressure ever lets up throughout the ride?

See I told you it was a bad idea. :-p

BATWING FAN SFA said:
Well if it weren't for that alleged no compete clause B&M is said to have with BGE then KD would've gotten the carowinds model instead.

That's incorrect on so many levels.

DaveStroem said:
I have never had to do a walk of shame, but El Toro was the tightest fit of any coaster that I have been on.

I told you Dave MF was way more forgiving than ET!

Thankfully this year I had multiple inches of space between the U-bar, which made things perfect. Never again will I be riding ET if I'm sniffing 200, which sadly last summer I was!

RideMan said:
One of the problems with El Toro is that while every lap bar has a go/no-go switch on it, there is only one indicator for each car (four seats). So when a car is !ready, there is no way for the operators to know which seat is having problems, so their tendency is to push way too hard on the wrong lap bar.

I finally got Jill on ET this year, and due to one of our party being a "big guy" (darn you AV Matt, hehe) - she pretty-much hated what ranks as one of the most hardcore airtime machines in existence. Every one of us got stapled beyond belief - 3x worse than my previous worst rides on ET. To call it uncomfortable would be a lie - it was downright painful. :(

If every seat has a sensor, why not give every seat an indicator? Seems almost too sensible - can't be THAT much additional expense...

All it would take would be a microswitch and a small LED light mounted at each row of the train.