3 hours ago, Dean Barnett said:

The only better alternative would be an compressed air launch.. but I'm not sure it would be physically possible (and unlikely because they'd still need the brake fins on the launch.. which they removed)

They're going to need brake fins on the launch regardless of what technology they choose. Risk of roll back = brake fins needed.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that removing the existing fins is just part of the deconstruction process - they can be re purposed/sold to other parks (like SFGA/KBF etc) to recoup costs. New track pieces would be needed to accommodate for the LSM's and brake fins occupying the same space in the launch track section.

3 hours ago, Dean Barnett said:

GP don't care about how much power a coaster consumes.

3 hours ago, Dean Barnett said:

I'd rather a more powerful launch. Other parks can already offer less powerful launches.

Just on those two points, what would GP care about more though? That is a less powerful launch when it's only open 40% of the time, or that it's a crap shoot as to whether the ride is open when they visit.

Sure, if they've ridden before they'll notice the difference, but the ride being open more and less of a maintenance headache will surely win out over a more forceful launch.

23 minutes ago, franky said:

They're going to need brake fins on the launch regardless of what technology they choose. Risk of roll back = brake fins needed.

I'm going to go ahead and guess that removing the existing fins is just part of the deconstruction process - they can be re purposed/sold to other parks (like SFGA/KBF etc) to recoup costs. New track pieces would be needed to accommodate for the LSM's and brake fins occupying the same space in the launch track section.

Wouldn't the LSMs operate as brakes also since they are...magnets..

 

But yeah replacing the track to fit the fins makes sense.

3 minutes ago, Naazon said:

Wouldn't the LSMs operate as brakes also since they are...magnets..

Now you've had me questioning my entire being!

Older rides such as Cheeta Hunt have brake fins (https://twitter.com/bioreconstruct/status/1031294166205169664, even the newer ones (eg Velocicoaster) have them (eg https://youtu.be/hoh3kR-5BsA?t=808). Had to search for some photos/video.

It doesn't look like there are as many as is on a hydraulic launch, so I guess that the LSM's do indeed provide some breaking force, even in the event of a power outage.

They do look like completely different fins to me (VC ones look brass/copper) when comparing to my memory of Supermans' fins for example.

 

correct me if i’m wrong but,

i'm 90% sure the break fins are needed due to the LSM’s alone not being able to slow the train down fast enough, so the break fins are used to mostly slow the train down while also putting less pressure onto the LSM’s in the chance of a roll back. 

47 minutes ago, franky said:

Now you've had me questioning my entire being!

Older rides such as Cheeta Hunt have brake fins (https://twitter.com/bioreconstruct/status/1031294166205169664, even the newer ones (eg Velocicoaster) have them (eg https://youtu.be/hoh3kR-5BsA?t=808). Had to search for some photos/video.

It doesn't look like there are as many as is on a hydraulic launch, so I guess that the LSM's do indeed provide some breaking force, even in the event of a power outage.

They do look like completely different fins to me (VC ones look brass/copper) when comparing to my memory of Supermans' fins for example.

 

Makes sense then. Thanks for researching more than I could be bothered.

6 hours ago, Slick said:

Don't shift the goal posts.

At the end of the day - roller coasters are all about how guests interprate the experience. Gawking over energy effiency isn't really a thing

 

5 hours ago, franky said:

They're going to need brake fins on the launch regardless of what technology they choose. Risk of roll back = brake fins needed.

Here's a roller coaster that launches out of the station, and could roll back into the station ... no brakes.

 

5 hours ago, franky said:

Just on those two points, what would GP care about more though?

I was asked what I'd personally prefer - but you're right.. 

12 minutes ago, Dean Barnett said:

Here's a roller coaster that launches out of the station, and could roll back into the station ... no brakes.

Interesting. I think our collective points need to be how the block zones are configured. Full thottle has a bunch of trims on the final hill leading into a tire drive section (https://youtu.be/XnFS_-nmI4Y?t=56) then there's about 5 tires to move the train back to the station, realistically these would be capable of stopping a roll back when combined with the LSM stopping force I would imagine.

I think you could be onto something though, it would be roughly the same length between station and launch on TTD, so it might end up being tire drive and LSM only as the roll back prevention... time will ultimately tell!

Premier and Intamin are two different manufactures.

Premiers coasters (such as SRII’s) are capable of stopping from LSM’s alone, whereas Intamin’s don’t seem like they are able to do that as all of their LSM coasters have a serious of break fins following the launch.

There are two important stats when it comes to TTD, height and speed. Don't see the tech and how long it takes to reach the speed being a major factor. Does it hit 420 feet and go 120 mph and more reliable? If the answer is yes to all three that is all the GP will care about.

If all they change is the launch system I think I have less of an issue with that being the case and more of an issue in how they have created this level of speculation. Does it really need a ‘retiring as you know it’ status? Why not say something like TTD is being retired, however it will be back under a brand new theme and a new launch system which will improve operations? Why is all this RIP TTD even necessary? Its essentially going to be the same ride, and honestly the GP dont care what type of launch it is, they will look at the ride and go ‘ok so its TTD but they changed the name.’ 🤷‍♂️ 

Well people were already speculating as to whether it was getting demolished or not. Just in the last month or two there were comments along the line of (and I paraphrase) "Launch cables are being removed, TTD demolition confirmed!" before CP even made their announcement

We still don't know just how changed the new ride is going to be

1 hour ago, Coasterjoe said:

Why is all this RIP TTD even necessary? I

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3546998/Sydney-Luna-Park-ride-Tango-Train-closing-21-years.html

Incorrect post.

Edited September 14, 20224 yr by Coasterjoe
Incorrect post

To be fair it wasn't announced or known to anyone that an identical model would be built in its exact spot. Though it made sense - very popular ride that was difficult to maintain. Just like Dragster.

Fwiw, I never rode Dragster, but the LSM conversion as rumoured is a perfect metaphor for Mack Tango Train vs SBF Visa Tango Train. 

Why make a big deal about it by the park?

Us talking about it is exactly the reason. When was the last post about TTD on Parkz? By making a thing about it the park is generating talk and buzz. 
I could argue Jurassic World at Islands of Adventure is the exact same ride system as Jurassic Park, but by making a big song and dance that JP was closing forever the park fueled talk about the ride. 
 

Its pure marketing. 

Pretty much all of the ground track has been removed. Even in the station. 
 

Let’s just hope we don’t end up with something like this 

37 minutes ago, Dean Barnett said:

Let’s just hope we don’t end up with something like this 

Top Thrill Dragster had roll backs, too. 🤷🏼‍♂️

There’s rollbacks then there’s complete failures. Every TTD rollback I’ve seen video of at least made it to the crest 

32 minutes ago, Dean Barnett said:

There’s rollbacks then there’s complete failures. Every TTD rollback I’ve seen video of at least made it to the crest 

So because one ride technology fails more safely it’s a complete failure? 

The goal of the launch system is to launch the train over the crest. The train didn't make it halfway up. It completely failed to do its job. 

I never said its dangerous. 

1 hour ago, Dean Barnett said:

The goal of the launch system is to launch the train over the crest. The train didn't make it halfway up. It completely failed to do its job. 

I never said its dangerous. 

Both technologies do that - you’re showing a video of a rollback which is an anomaly in regular operations. Arguably, if one emergency system can remove energy sooner than another, then by definition it is a safer system. 

Even Superman Escape at MW has had many rollbacks during its life 

2 hours ago, Dean Barnett said:

The goal of the launch system is to launch the train over the crest. The train didn't make it halfway up. It completely failed to do its job. 

I never said its dangerous. 

There would’ve been a problem during the launch therefor making the LSM’s slow the train down instead of launching it over the top hat, that’s a lot safer of a system then potentially making it stall at the top or continue the rest of the ride if something is wrong… 

“Complete failure” 

ok calm down captain 

A sensor alerted - and aborted the launch. The launch failed. 

 

Honestly guys. I never said it was dangerous. Red Force is nothing compared to the former TTD - this just backs up this claim even more.