New Roller Coaster Technologies

Friday, December 3, 2010 11:19 PM

I think you can do that in Tijuana.

+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 11:23 PM

Actually that's a myth apparently (not that I've ever tried or did serious Internet research into such things or anything like that).

+0
Saturday, December 4, 2010 2:03 AM

New4D said:
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.

Welcome to the site! It's good that you catch on quickly.

+0
Saturday, December 4, 2010 2:44 AM

Welcome to the Internets! Opinions are like, well, you know.

I'm not an engineer, but I play one on CoasterBuzz. Well, technically, my work title has engineer in it, but when I make stuff that breaks, no one dies from it. But I know a few actual roller coaster engineers (including the one that designed the basis of your toy demo), and you learn a lot from hanging out with those cats. Their discipline is not entirely unlike my own from the standpoint that if you can build it in a simple way that's safer and cheaper, that's what you do. It's like the B&M vs. Intamin situation. One coats their rides in prox switches and electronics all over the trains, the other does not. One has a history of deaths and serious failures, the other does not. (Hint: the former is the same one that can't keep flumes from sinking, despite the tech being around for a hundred years.) So it would be rational then that mounting brake fins in a place where they can't ever get in the way is a better idea than putting them where a failure could have dire consequences. That's not rocket science, it's common sense.

Internets. Opinions. 'Holes. Welcome!

+0
Saturday, December 4, 2010 3:07 AM

New4D said:
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.

Uh...isn't this the complete opposite of what Jeff actually did? Didn't he identify a potential problem and then give you a suggestion as to how you might go about fixing it...?

Anyway, I think your concept is great. Some of your proposed elements are brilliant and I would love to experience them some day. Best of luck!

+0
Saturday, December 4, 2010 9:41 AM

CoasterBuzz IS a pretty critical and opinionated community. Don't take it personally, Jordan. The good thing is that most of those who criticize you will also support you.

I'm really impressed. I do feel that maybe Jeff gave you a heads-up with an issue that might need some work though, which is something that you shouldn't be threatened by, rather you should appreciate the honest feedback.

I hope to ride a "Type 2" someday.

+0
Saturday, December 4, 2010 12:27 PM

Well thank you all, Jeff included. If there are ways to improve the technology, I am all ears. Basically anything can be improved, after all my work IS an improvement.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2019, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...