New Roller Coaster Technologies

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqHQ-Caz9UM

Stats:
represents 142ft high, 1,660 ft long coaster.
Track inversions: 4
Passenger inversions: 5 (2full, 3partial)
Total degree of passenger roatation independent of track rotation: 900 degrees

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmV35sdvOPA

Stats:
represents 142 ft. high coaster, track length - 2,800ft, spine length - 2,100 ft.
number of tracks - 1, yes only one routed in a 21st century moebius arrangement (2 tracks are combined into 1 track, trains switch places).
track inversions (full circuit) - 13
pasenger inversion(full circuit) - 8

I am currently seeking a licensee/buyer.

Would you ride them?

Jordon, add a {/url} but use [ ] after your youtube addresses to make them into links.

The concept looks interesting. Good luck.

21st century moebius arrangement

What's the improvement over the 20th century moebius arrangement? :)

Very interesting concept you have there. :) Best of luck in your endevor.

I do have one question regarding the control rail. How does the rotation "information" on the rail get transfered to the actual seat rotation?

Interesting concepts

And I'm also confused about the control rail for the first design, but well, just in need a clarification. Did you eliminate an up-stop wheel on the "rotating axis"? Despite reducing on parts, I could see this being a maintenance issue with respect to fatigue and wear-tear on the track/train

-I'll try to complete that link

- previous "moebius" coasters were truly were they. Coasters weren't traversing opposite sides of the same structure. The new tech can.

- I am not sure what is meant by "information". The rotation is based on a simple mechanical linkage. The top of each crosstie is a semicircle. As the control rail's position deviates progressing along the circuit, it interacts with rollers on either side of the control rail. These rollers are part of a bevel gear structure that rotates the seats. Take a closer look at the pictures in the video.

- The previous tech had 8 wheels linked to its control rails and they were weight bearing. The new tech has 2 wheels contacting the control rail and they bear minimal load except while in the act of rotating the seats.

for some reason the forum will not accept the fix for the link. ?

Very nice. Glad to see the project moving along.

If I'm not mistaken, you attended IAAPA, correct? Have you gained the interest of any manufacturers who may be considering licensing your design?

Interest? Yes, much. I was visited by everyone from Al Schilke to Walter Bolliger. Unfortunately I was NOT visited by vice president types from Cedar Fair or Six Flags.

I am raising awareness now and will approach those types shortly.

OK, I'll bite: How do you use brakes with a center control rail in the way?

[url][url]Easy.

Jeff, why does it add those extra url tags every time I post from Safari?

No idea. Next version will fix the problem When It's Done®.

"control rail in the center"

Who said the control rail is in the center? I deviates between the riding rails from one side of the semicircle to the other. Just make sure the track is designed such that that rail is away from the center in braking/propelling portions of the track, just like I demonstrated in the model.

That's something that will make anyone infinitely uncomfortable about the system. If something breaks for any reason, and that rotation control bogie is in the place where brakes will be, bad things will happen. Perhaps you should put them on the outside, a la Intamin hypers or Anton rides.

They can go on the outside, but honestly, if the coaster is being built in a way that things are going to be breaking off, I would be infinitely uncomfortable about every single aspect and part of the whole thing. Obviously, there is a correct and incorrect way to design and fabricate any coaster. Used correctly, there is absolutely nothing unsafe about the tech.

There are plenty of coasters out there that am far more concerned about than this. However, the consideration you brought up is significant and clearly needs to be taken into account when designing.

I really like the Type 2 idea, Jordon. I really hope something comes of this, because I really want to ride it! It would make a fascinating dark ride system too.

Your fabrication comfort isn't enough. If one option has a .0000001% chance of failure and disaster, and the other has zero, you go with the zero. That's not even a question. The steering bogey is a moving part that could conceivably get in the way of the thing that's supposed to stop the train. That's not an option.

So you've barely been introduced to the new technology and you are already so knowledgeable about it that you have been able to matter-of-factly determine that, when there may be a potential problem, there is nothing that can be done about it? That's impressive.

If the whole industry thought that way, roller coasters would still be mine carts pulled by donkeys. Engineering is about finding potential problems and then adressing them. I have discussed other engineers' 4D concepts with them and wouldn't you know there is another design that has a roller assembly that moves back and forth (but in a linear motion) over the track, and parts breaking and interfering with the braking were not their main concern. There are ways to make things do what they are supposed to.

To write it off with little thought is shortsighted. Of all of the 4D concepts that I know of, including some that have been operation for years, this one promises to have the least issues.

I'd like to ride in a 4D mine cart pulled by a donkey.