Saturday, October 20, 2001 8:42 PM
I was looking over a lot of stuff a few days ago, and got an idea.. I posted it in the Cedar Point forums, but they are crowded and this is really a new topic..
Why do we not see any air launched rides where it's just one big hill.. It launches you up one side, and because the hill is in the shape of the trajectory of the ride, you are weightless for the entire duration of the ride.. then it turns arround and goes back..
If you build it right you can easily get more airtime than with a drop coaster, and people would love it!!
Why don't we see this type of setup in the middle of full circuit roller coasters? True hang time!
Just an idea..
Sunday, October 21, 2001 5:22 AM
Hmmm.... i don't know....
One speed Doesn't Fit All!
Sunday, October 21, 2001 7:50 AM
Yes! I have thought of that idea too. I always think of it when I look at bridges like how it is one elongated hill! The airtime would be awsome!
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 4:08 AM
If I'm following you correctly, you're talking about having a launch through some type of parabolic arch, but more elongated? Could work, I guess. I still don't know if I'm seeing it right, though.
I rode "X" and never went upside down.
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:05 PM
That's a good idea. But instead of simply turning around and coming back, have some bunny hops that get wilder and wilder. or better yet, have it shoot you back over the parabola so you get two doses. You could call it "Moon Shot".
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:08 PM
This is an easy one.
They don't build em this way cause it would be a waste of perfectly good velocity. Look at the second hill of most hypers. That's a parabola. More specifically it is almost guranteed to be a zero-g parabola, just like you're postulating. The amoutn of time you can have a 0g experience is simply a function of the HEIGHT of the parabolic path, not the length. Making it less steep simply means you're now at .5g or .7g or something instead of 0g.
Second hills launch at 45 degrees or so because the designer wants to make ABSOLUTELY sure that there is enough horizintal velocity to carry the train over the hills in wind or with sticking bearings or whatever the case may be.
Even with your design you come upon the problem that, at the bottom of the proposed arch, the train has a good amount of kinetic energy left. Either you can go up again (see hypercoaster) or bleed it off with brakes. Your call.
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:15 PM
Even if it were greater than 0 G, but for an extended time, it would be loads of fun. Perhaps you could design it like the game where you try to get the bowling ball to "valley"...Straight shot, up and over the hill, up a steep ramp, then back through.. Kinda like a Shuttle Loop without the loop.
The problem with TA2K is seems is that you go up and over the hill in a split second. If you could go arching all the way over the park...now THAT would be something!
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:04 PM
But... anything more than about half of a G really would jsut feel boring.
To be shot OVER the park you're probably talking 1000 feet high, minimum.
The ride would be kinda a one trick horse, too. I just don't see it being viable.
Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:52 PM
If was really fast and went over a low arc, I hardly think it would be boring...just think of a superfast camelback...and you could bunny hop back to the station.
Look at Superman at SFMM....that thing goes about halfway across the park. If instead of simply going up and then back the way it does, have it shoot over a huge camelback. You could even put stations at both ends and use it to transport guests from one side of the park to the other.
One-trick horse? I'd say quite a large proportion of thrill rides these days are one-tricksters. Do we ride them? Yes. Why? They're plenty of fun.
*** This post was edited by janfrederick on 10/23/2001. ***