Ron Toomer
NewYorkSuperman said:My point is that it doesn't seem like Arrow worked very hard to make good rides. If they did then their rides would be comfortable, their transitions would be tolerable, and Magnum wouldn't have opened with upstop PADS. I can't even believe they thought it would be okay to open Magnum with upstop PADS. That just tells me that they didn't even know what they were building
---Like people have said before, if it's not broke, why fix it? Arrow used upstop pads on their coasters before Magnum, and they worked fine. Inncidents such as this are known as "trial and error." The upstops on Magnum didn't work, so they fixed it. What's the big deal? Probably every other coaster company has done this in some way, shape or form.---
I just don't see hard work coming out of Arrow. Their rides are continually bad and they never changed. They just got larger, rougher, and more pointless. They served as an example of how NOT to build a wooden coaster, and that was their greatest contribution to the industry.
---Hmm...Never changing, just getting larger, rougher and more pointless...Doesn't that sound like some other roller coaster company we know? B&M is by far one of the best coaster companies out there, and their coasters are much smoother than most Arrows, but this same argument could be used against them. Not nearly to the same extent, but some "Arrow-ness" is starting to pop up in a few of their older coasters.
Also, as far as I know, Arrow has never built or even offered wooden roller coasters. ( Until the recent merger with Denise Dinn and S&S, but that has yet to matter ) I could be wrong, but I'd like to know where you found this idea. And just incase, if you think Gemini is a wooden coaster, you might as well throw that part of your argument out the window, because Gemini is steel.---
------------------
Intelligence is a God given gift: Know how to use it.
------------------
What do Catholic priests and K*Mart have in common? Little boys pants half off!
http://www.ibiblio.org/darlene/coaster/toomer.html
http://search.eb.com/coasters/i_toomer.html
http://www.cedarpoint.com/public/inside_park/rides/thrill/magnum10/toomer.cfm
This is from one search on Google using "Ron Toomer" as the searh subject. Other sites found mention Toomer, but not much information.
------------------
Intelligence is a God given gift: Know how to use it.
Seems to me like Ron Toomer was quite a smart man. He acomplished alot more than most of us will and for that he should be celebrated. As far as his coasters are concerned, he was quite innovative.
When Shockwave was built at my homepark Six Flags Great America, it was so awe inspiring that it stuck fear into the hearts of me and my friends (granted we were bearly tall enough to ride) but the fact of the matter was it was the newest, greatest thing. The lines were enormouse and for many it was considered the best ride in the park. It attracted the people, so it was a good investment for Six Flags.
These great creations were AWESOME and I think thats what some of you are forgetting or possibly never knew. Every park wanted a Shockwave, Drachen Fire or Viper. I still remember my first ride, and how much I talked about it when I returned home to my friends.
Now no one will know what Arrow could have done if they had continued to invest and research new idea's. They simply didn't. Bottom line is you cannot call them lazy for building the same rides. Every park wanted one, so why not continue to build them?
I still love Arrows coasters and can't imaging my love for coasters without those first tender years when I sat looking up at shockwave. I'm done :)
------------------
The Emergency Stop
NewYorkSuperman said:No, there's no comparison at all. B&M coasters have always been and still are perfectly-engineered.
Perfectly engineered?! LOL! That's a large statement... and no where near the truth. We have never, nor will we ever, see any coaster or company with perfect engineering. And that doesn't just apply to coasters...
------------------
Am I really that shy?
CoasterKrazy said:
"It seems to me that they should have realized that putting upstop pads on a 205', 72mph coaster is a bad idea. This reinforces my point that Arrow just didn't seem to know how to progress."
What evidence to you have to support this obvious conclusion that isn't somehow based on hindsight? Please share, because I'd like to hear it. Just because something is big and goes fast doesn't make anything entirely obvious. If upstop pads work on other coasters and they have data collected about their operation, there is no good reason at all to think that using them again in this case was unjustified. Please.
"No, there's no comparison at all. B&M coasters have always been and still are perfectly-engineered."
Nothing is perfectly engineering. Ever. And, maybe you didn't get the memo about Air's problems? It broke, physically, after all. Maybe you were unaware of the changes made to Superman: Ultimate Flight's pretzel loop? If it were perfectly engineered the first time around, they wouldn't be making changes now.
"If an older B&M coaster is getting rough it's because the park isn't taking care of it."
I wasn't aware B&M operated and maintained any coasters that others could be compared against.
The problem on Air was *miniscule*. I can't believe people keep exaggerating the problem. Rides "physically break" all the time. The reality of the situation was that a mechanical problem occurred in one of Air's stations. The second station continued the operate. The station with the problem was back in operation the next day. Seriously, let it go. If that's the only problem you can drag up with B&M, then that clearly shows how problem free their rides really are.
You have no proof of the reasons the new S:UF rides were changed from the original design. For all anyone knows, Six Flags felt the forces were too much and asked B&M to tame it down; that is, those forces were intended all the time. It's very well known within the industry that there is not a more precise company than B&M. I have an extremely hard time believing S:UF ended up being any more forceful than planned, especially with computer simulations available currently. Perhaps it was thought that the forces *felt* more than was intended, but I'm sure the numbers matched what was calculated beforehand.
Did you even bother to read NewYorkSuperman's post? He specifically cited SFGAm's B:TR - a ride that has been operating for ten years - as still wonderfully smooth. That's why he can claim that if an older B&M is not running smoothly it's due to maintenance - because one of the oldest still runs just fine.
-Nate
As for these upstop pads, and forgive my ignorance, but what was the big deal with them anyway? Why exactly was is a big enough issue to force their removal? It sounds like they were a problem due to the neg gs, but there was at least one mine ride that pulled negative gs before magnum. That's Gemini. If the pads worked in that case, why wouldn't it stand to reason that they could work on other air filled rides. It's the simple problems that cause the most trouble because they slip through the cracks. I would bet that the pads weren't even thought of during the design and construction of what was the largest project ever, at least in the States (and to the best of my knowledge). A company can't redign and reinspect every little detail about their product every project, it would take to long to build.
Got news for you friend, Gemini, with upstop pads, does pop hard enough for the pads to make contact with the rails. That's why they grease them.
Magnum was the same deal. In fact, they could very well have done the same thing there, but due to the duration and frequency with which the pads would make contact, it caused a lot of wear on the pads and the track, so they had to be replaced. Again, take Chernabog's challenge... what do you really base your theory on other than hindsight?
Then your debate about Air is pretty silly too. It's OK for B&M to have a few setbacks, but not for Arrow in the dark ages of math-by-pencil.
If Walter and Claude were perfect, there wouldn't be trims on Mantis, Bull and Apollo.
But none of that is really relevant to your original post anyway. You're still not qualified to call Ron Toomer a moron.
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM
*** This post was edited by Jeff 4/7/2003 10:55:24 AM ***
------------------
Scott W. Short
scott@midwestcoastercentral.com
http://www.midwestcoastercentral.com
If people are going to sit there and say I can't criticize a ride or design because I'm not an engineer, then you really have no place to praise the ride or design either. Honestly, what a double standard.
And as for the B&M mishap, as I explained, the problem was *miniscule.* Arrow's problems (how many rides reprofiled?) were not. And the trims on the B&M hypers do not exist for "faulty engineering" purposes, but for control reasons. The parks just choose to use them.
Maybe if I'm feeling argumentative enough later I'll reply to everything more specifically. But this is an argument that's been done, that there IS NO winner to (despite what Jeff may think and say). It's basically a matter of opinion, and I think Toomer was a crappy engineer.
-Nate
Also, I think something that has been mentioned, but not clearly....is the opinion of the GP and its acceptance of Toomer's rides at the time. Like an earlier post, I too remember my 1st ride on a megalooper and how despite how "beat up" I got, I didn't care. I believe the vast majority of riders didn't either. It was ok for the ride to feel like that....woodies were bumpy...why couldn't a steel be bumpy too? Didn't keep me from wanting to ride it again, nor brag about riding it when I got home....
Toomer I believe built within all the constaints and acceptances of his time....he built what his market, his know how, and his budgets and constaints let him. Point is, his rides sold, they ran for years, and at their debut they were almost always the "big" rides at whatever park they were at. Whether you want to admit or not, Toomer played a major and positive role in coaster history.
*** This post was edited by Dale Picolet 4/7/2003 4:30:09 PM ***
------------------
Jeff - Webmaster/Admin - CoasterBuzz.com - Sillynonsense.com
"The world rotates to The Ultra-Heavy Beat!" - KMFDM
NewYorkSuperman said:
How are you (Jeff) any more qualified than Nate to make YOUR opinion?
He hasn't called someone he knows nothing about a moron based on flimsy biased supports like you and Nate are doing.
------------------
Formally Suspended Andrew, proud member since May 2001.
NewYorkSuperman said:
What setback are you talking about? As Nate stated, the Air incident didn't even result in much downtime, if any at all! Parts break on rides every day. The second station was still operational and the ride was back up and running the next day. I have no problem if something breaks on an Arrow ride. I do have a problem with Arrow rides derailing, crashing, and injuring people. Honestly, is that the best you can come up with?
I'm unclear about how when a B&M designed ride doesn't perform up to par or is otherwise less than perfect, you're justified in blaming maintenance of the ride by the owner, but when another company's product has a problem of any sort, it's immediately the fault of the engineer? How can you prove that B&M's issues are largely the result of poor maintenance, but Arrow's problems are because of poor engineering?
And Intamin's ride systems? They've experienced their fair share of crashes and injuries, and as best as I can recall, they've never employed Ron Toomer.
*** This post was edited by Chernabog 4/7/2003 5:25:24 PM ***
Closed topic.
