Standing Inverted Coaster

King Cobra, PKI........ Best Coaster Ever.

'nuff said.

Seems like a good concept, but in no way could they pull an anatomically correct stand up inverted train. I guess I shouldn't say "no way," but what the heck? It just sounds like it'd hurt.

I remember seeing a concept picture of a standing inverter a few years ago. There has been so many rumors and discussions about this a few years ago.

You know, you people are wimps!!! ;)

Learn how to ride a stand-up. I have 2 bad knees and a trashed left ankle, and I LOVE standups. Do NOT put your weight on the seats!!! Leave a SMALL amount of slack by slightly bending your knees until they lock, then stand up. No crotch buster, and much more comfortable.

Btw, this subject is brought up about every 6 months or so, and you always have nay sayers who say "Can't be done" "too intense" or "boring".

The only possibly legit argument is the boring, but that is an opinion based argument. The can't be done and too intense arguments don't hold water. The can't be done is just assinine, sure it can. The too intense is because most people are stuck inside a box and can't think outside of it. Their only perspective is the known. They just cant envision a larger, more gradual loop or more spread-out elements to temper the g-forces.

I think it would be a great gimmick. But unfortunately great gimmicks don't useually translate to great rides!

Why not give parks a 2fer. Use intamin box track and put a sit down on top and an invert on the bottom and have stacked stations! Think of the capacity. It COULD be done. Imagine stacking finally being a good thing! :)

Unless you went with tracks that had no crossties at all, the wheel assemblies on such a train would be hideously complex (not impossible, but complex as hell). Don't forget, you'd need to put supports to the sides, since you coudln't put them above OR below the track. So, no outside guide wheels. But you need crossties, so no INSIDE guidewheels either.

Through use of diagonals and careful clearances, you could do it, but yikes...

I can't stand when people put stand-ups and flyers in the same catagory. I have ridden both the vekoma (x-flight) and the B&M (SUE SFGaM) and I LOVE flyers. They were my favorite ride at both parks. I don't see how anyone could say flying coasters are just a novelty as they are flat out fun.

Edit: In response to the above post, I don't see why the wheel assembly would need to be ANY different than a regular inverted coaster. I still think the idea is rediculous, but the wheel assembly is not a valid reason for why it couldn't happen. *** Edited 12/5/2004 7:48:28 AM UTC by Word***

---

angnjc said:
You know, you people are wimps!!! ;)

Learn how to ride a stand-up. I have 2 bad knees and a trashed left ankle, and I LOVE standups. Do NOT put your weight on the seats!!! Leave a SMALL amount of slack by slightly bending your knees until they lock, then stand up. No crotch buster, and much more comfortable.

---

I love stand-ups too, and you can make it a comfortable and enjoyable ride, except my second ride on Mantis wasn't too good, the ride op slammed my harness down on me and didn't let me adjust my own height for the seat, so that kinda killed the experience for me that time. Other than that, Ive enjoyed my stand-ups :)

First, I think a well done stand-up coaster is a very cool thing - RR for example is my favourite ride around, and I do think that the standup aspect really adds to the flying feeling of the soft inversions this coaster has.

I think the problem with inverted standups is also a technical one:
Since the standup-cars need to be rather "thick", or have a lot of vertical size, the possible negative ("downward") curvature would be very limited, forcing the track to create mostly positive Gs.
This is also a reason why inverted sit-downs rarely have any airtime.

Positive Gs on a standup need to be very controlled though, as the entire weight for your body rests on your legs and knees, and of course on that uncomfortable bicycle-type seat.

That's why I think inverted standups are not a good idea anyway- either they would have a rather limited capacity because of the required spacing between the cars or, most likely, would be boring or painful.

Why hasn't anything like RR been built ever since?
People may say about SFMM what they want, but they still have some unique rides.

dont know if its just me, but i would NOT want to pull any g's with a giant bike seat jammed between my crotch...

Yeah, my point exactly. This would either have to have a floor, or you would be hanging by your crotch. If it has a floor, there is absolutely no reason for the track being over head. The ladder option is just rediculous.

I am perfectly content with regular inverted and stand-up coasters being seperate. I think stand up coasters are fine as they are, take Riddler's Revenge for example.(disregarding capacity, etc. of course)

Has no one ridden Acrophobia? There are plent of G's there when it comes to a stop, why would an invert be any different? Now granted, you couldn't build a Batman with 4.5 G's, but a more mild one.

I'm a bit confused as to what y'all are talking about, would it be like a stand-up except with the track above the head's of the riders, or like an upside-down stand-up, with the track still at the feet, yet resembling Flyer or Inverted track?

I think a loop while standing on my head would be better than anything cuz then it would look like my head was gonna smack the ground.

I'm gonna build one in my backyard out of bent shower curtain rods.

-CO

Aw, Playa you should have spoken sooner, I just threw away a bent curtain rod. ;)

---

rentzy17 said:
how could being below the track and standing be more intense than above the track and standing?

---

It's just that the track layout has to be different to accomodate the physical size of the train, which makes certain maneuvers more difficult:
Take an airtime hill for example:
On a non-inverted coaster, the portion of the car that is most far away from the track (the heads of the riders) are moving apart, spreading out over the hill.
On an inverted coaster, the feet of the riders are moving together, meaning that the hill can't be curved very strongly because contact of the riders with the row in front of them needs to be avoided if no injuries should occur.
Thus you won't find a truly pronounced airtime hill on an interted ride. What an inverted ride can do much better though, is tight turns and loops, as the train will be spread accordingly.
That's one of the reasons for the success of the wild ride the Batman clones deliver.
This means that inverted rides are going to deliver more positive Gs and less airtime as a general tendency.
This effect is already quite effective with sitdowns, but with standups it is going to be much worse.

Sorry to sound geeky

I've been on Mantis at CP many times and I think I was crazy for doing so. I my mind they're a waste of two Tylenols. The constant pulling on your feet kill but I can handle that, it's the turning every which way with tight banking and sudden changes in direction, its a head banging nightmare.

---

Word said:
Yeah, my point exactly. This would either have to have a floor, or you would be hanging by your crotch. If it has a floor, there is absolutely no reason for the track being over head. The ladder option is just rediculous.

---

So in a sense, Acrophobia. *ouch*

Am I the only one who thinks that the addition of the seat belts on standups made it even more uncomfortable to ride them? Because of the belts, you now have to have the seat all the "up"...which is painful on your parts

That can easily be solved by not wearing any pants. It is most comfortable, when riding a stand up, to only where socks and a bow tie.