I was wondering what you do with that section of track? Just have a flat section.
That's what they did with Excalibur at Valleyfair. I only heard this from someone else, so correct me if I'm wrong. But, after the first drop I belive Excalibur used to have a bunny hill that they took out. You can see the flat section in this picture from rcdb.
The theme of these changes is safety. I would imagine they would try to make things as simple as possible in order to insure that. As a result, I would bet money it will be a simple rework.
What is it about the loop on Son of Beast that requires heavy trains? Kings Island has said that the removal of the loop is necessary in order to accommodate new, lighter train. Is this because they [understandably] don't want to pay for a light, inversion-capable design, or because it simply isn't possible?
its not that the loop required heavy trains, its that the trains that were designed to track the loop happen to be heavy. The lighter ones are physically incapable of tracking it - they dont bend enough to make it through the top of the loop.
After Son of Beast opened in 2000, the ride was an immediate flop. For whatever reason, the trains received modifications in 2001 which made them even worse, including a new steel floor pan in each car. The purpose of this was to force your knees up into your chest in order to insure that you would most definitely be wrapped around the lap bar. The lap bars were also changed out. Furthermore, the trains are steel framed with steel car bodies.
Those cars are really heavy, and were made heavier through modifications. The modifications were made in order to insure that riders couldn't come out if the train jammed in the loop. With the loop removed, the modifications might not be necessary, and that would be a method for lightening the train.
Do we know for certain that the ride is getting new trains? I wouldn't put it past them to keep those same POS trains but revert back to the 2000 configuration... :(
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
Does the current staff even know about those modifications 5 years ago? People who worked on the project may may not even be there anymore.
The loop has never been a problem, to the best of my knowledge. I think it scares some people in management, but it hasn't been a problem. The big helix, on the other hand, has demonstrably been an enormous problem, having been implicated in rider injuries (including two broken necks a few years ago and the two trainloads of injured riders back in July) since the day the ride opened.
If that were my ride, and I were charged with fixing it, I'd start by having a completely new set of completely redesigned trains built. While that was being done, I'd remove the big helix completely and with extreme prejudice, replacing it with a long straight series of straight hills and/or shorter curves starting at the top of the second hill. stretching out some arbitrary distance through the woods towards the Eastern edge of the property down by the river and returning to rejoin the top of the hill preceeding the midcourse brake. Leave the loop alone, and fix the part of the ride that simply does not work.
--Dave Althoff, Jr.
RideMan - you've hit the nail right on the head. This move makes NO sense whatsoever. You don't fix a structurally deficient ride by taking out the only structurally sound portion and assuming you can use lighter trains.
There is no question of momentum here. I still want to see specs on these trans comparing their weight to a standard PTC train, but I'm sure those modifications can be done in other ways than steel slabs. Take a car off the train if those trains need to stay, but for God's sake, leave the loop alone!
The ONLY place I can see added weight on the trains that CANNOT be removed is in the wheel mechanisms, particularly the upstop wheels, which almost certainly become road wheels at the top of the loop. Is it more than a typical ejector air experience for those wheels? Hard to say...but I'm sure they have to be a bit beefier than normal regardless. Either way, slap those puppies on a lighter frame and your problems are solved.
The one thing I hope this is not indicative of is PKI thinking that they can remove the loop and get lighter trains, which applies less force to the structure, thus eliminating the need to reinforce and correct the problem areas mentioned in the report. I'd have a hard time believing that is cheaper than adding and replacing bents anyways, and I hope that Ohio wouldn't allow them to get away with inspection for that either.
RideMan said:If that were my ride, and I were charged with fixing it, I'd start by having a completely new set of completely redesigned trains built. While that was being done, I'd remove the big helix completely and with extreme prejudice, replacing it with a long straight series of straight hills and/or shorter curves starting at the top of the second hill. stretching out some arbitrary distance through the woods towards the Eastern edge of the property down by the river and returning to rejoin the top of the hill preceeding the midcourse brake. Leave the loop alone, and fix the part of the ride that simply does not work.
I thought we had *agreed* on that solution back in '01 or '02, Dave....if the search function were working, I'd be willing to bet that THAT answer was proposed more than five years' ago...
I can't help but think that, *if* GCII were involved in rebuilding the ride, AND supplying the trains, that GCII might be "the decider" re: the fate of the loop.
*** Edited 12/18/2006 2:59:49 PM UTC by rollergator***
You must be logged in to post