World's Fastest Coaster:Again

[scott]

You may have already heard about it,but I sure haven't.There's speculation that Six Flags Great Adventure is building another coaster similar to Top Thrill Dragster and Xelerator,and that It will be the world's tallest and fastest coaster.I read this off Arthur Levine,a theme park guide.All I did was type in Calafornia theme parks on Google,and one of the links(second,I think,)lead me to his site.His site will in turn lead you to East Coast Coasters,which has some pictures of steel construction pieces. What I want to know is how much bigger can they build them?Not only do they cost huge amounts of money(which theese parks have),but humans can only endure so much.When the first looping coaster was designed,the effects were so strong that riders suffered whiplash and black outs.Min you they probably weren't so well designed back then My family and I are doing our usual trip to France at Christmas,but were going to stop for a week somewhere on the way over,as where bored with the usual flight route.My Mom wants to stop in Thailand,but obviously chose the states because if the parks.Can't wait to get Calafornia

[Gazza]

There is no real limit if the resources are there, you would just make transitions more gradual etc so you could put up with it. If this happens to be true, I hope it isnt just going to be launch, top hat and brakes like TTD because that is a waste, They get the train going at 195kph, only to put it through one manouver before dissipating all the momentum in the brakes, I mean, the train has just come off the worlds tallest drop and the best they can come up with is a brake run, why not chuck in some major airtime hills, helixes, inversions, maybe a second top hat, now that would be the best coaster ever.

[Richard]

The problem as you get faster is things need to get bigger. You're looking at a pretty big (300ft+) airtime hills, some pretty large helixes etc., which all adds up to millions and millions. To double the ride time, you've probably easily doubled the cost. For instance, a helix at 195km/hr (i.e. at the bottom of the drop), exerting a constant force (at every point in the helix) of 4Gs positive and no lateral forces, banked to 60º throughout will have a 170m diameter and add only 10s to the ride time. And in reality, it'd be larger than this, mostly for transitioning reasons to keep forces reasonable throughout. Find me any park that has this sort land sitting around that couldn't do with it for future expansions.

[Gazza]

Well, maybe they could have a trim brake and get it to the speed of say a normal hyper, and then build the coaster.

[Richard]

US$25 million is already a huge investment for Top Thrill Dragster. With the amount of track you'd need to add to such a ride, even with trim brakes, to make it of reasonable length, you'd be looking at millions and millions more. Let's face it, people are flocking to these sorts of rides because they're the tallest and fastest and they really don't care that there's not other elements. Anything else is really a letdown after an incredible launch like that. Xcelerator's biggest downfall really is the two overbanked turns. They're nice, but it's such a huge letdown after that incredible launch and tophat.

[Gazza]

I dont think its a letdown at all, I'd rather the adrenaline keep pumping for a longer period of time, and the ride not just being a one trick pony. I like what has been done with storm runner how it has interesting elements after the top hat , and more coaster should take a leaf out its book. So with Xcelerator, you would rather just the top hat to be there and nothing else? Unfortunatley due to the nature of ride physics the elements after the launch will not be as big, but it has been well and truly proven a ride can still be fun until the end even if the drops etc arent as big.

[Nebuchanezzar]

Hmm, I reckon a real big-assed 300 ft vertical loop, this may seem far-fetched, well, it probably is, but iuno, it'd be relatively interesting to see if it could be done, and at what height, cost etc... Howd that go to get your adrenaline pumping (hey, that sounded like a non coaster enthusist comment, a 300ft loop, oh well)

[Richard]

I wouldn't rather nothing at all, I never said that. I'm completely indifferent about them. Xcelerator would be just as good with or without the overbanked turns. There's not too many people who have ridden it that wouldn't agree to some extent with this. Storm Runner's only 150ft tall. That's a fair cry from 400ft+ we're talking about here. The point is, rides built for height and speed are done for those reasons alone. It's been this way for the last ten years, and as these stats become bigger and bigger, it increases the costs more and more, to the point where there really is no room for anything but the bare essentials.

[Gazza]

I suppose. I think its bad to compromise ride for the sake of a statistic that will only stand for a couple of years or three, espeically if this statisic is one only enthusiasts will really remember and the GP will probably get wrong. Xcellerator is a far cry from the 400 ft were talking about here too.

[Nebuchanezzar]

Well, not too much of the general public care about the actual height, only for the fact that it is fastest and tallest.

[Nightshifter]

i mean if ur in a rocket travelling thousands of kilmotres an hour i dont see why not u can travel more than 200k/hr on a roller coaster. Maybe it might not be as safe but you can still make a ride that fast. Discussing the height of a coaster, it really doesnt matter becasue height doesnt affect a human, but the speed and g force does. If a proper train is designed and maybe the train is like almost enclosed like a car, it'll be more safe.

[Nebuchanezzar]

All you need to lessen those G-Forces is a shallower gradient, so the shape of the train(enclosed or not) isn't really gonna make too much of a difference.And height does affect humans in their breathing. That's why they take Oxygen (and helium?) tanks when they hike very large mountains.

[steve$]

i mean if ur in a rocket travelling thousands of kilmotres an hour i dont see why not u can travel more than 200k/hr on a roller coaster. Maybe it might not be as safe but you can still make a ride that fast. Discussing the height of a coaster, it really doesnt matter becasue height doesnt affect a human, but the speed and g force does. If a proper train is designed and maybe the train is like almost enclosed like a car, it'll be more safe.

Rockets arent designed to stay on a track like roller coasters are. So where the rocket might swerve up wards it dosent have too keep to a path

[Bussy]

Shifty do you have any idea about the differences between coasters and rockets and the potential effects they have on a human? First of all the people who go up in a rocket are probably among the fittest people on the planet. They have trained for years to get to where they are. If a normal person went up in a rocket without any training they would probably have a cardiac arrest from the extreme g-forces. Coasters on the other hand are designed with everyday people in mind. The g-forces can be high but will never be anywhere near that endured in a rocket. The corners, drops, loops, etc can only be of a certain angle anymore and the public will not be able to handle it. "The Bus is now leaving for Rocket Spit, Queensland"

[rappa]

Well as someone who's favourite coaster is Xcel, which I don't see changing for a very long time I must say I am a fan of the overbanks. From my point of view I see the coaster as perfect. I could ride it all day no worries without any sort of sickness or headache coming on. It's the only coaster I've found this on. I've racked up 50 rides on one visit and 30 on the next and still don't get tired of it. The launch is amazing and the top hat is great but having the 2 overbanks just gives it something else to do and keeps the ride going for a bit. It also alows for the ride to run with 2 train op without stacking so that's another point to consider...

[joz]

Thing is people love the big rockets. TTD is getting really good feedback, and SFGAdv's new rocket is getting people excited about going back to the park. Even though the ride is really short, people are lapping it up, much more then with S:TE. Really, if they can get it too to work properly, then they've got a real winner on their hands.

[Ian]

Actually you will find from people who have ridden rockets, that TTD has a great rush to it but after a week you are bored of just going up and over with no elements. Where there are more fans of Storm Runner at Hersey even though it doesnt have the height TTD has its got crazy elements after so its like if Intaimin Rocket had a baby with B&M layouts.

[steve$]

There could be a coaster with 9 inversions in a straight line after the top hat. That would be so exciting!

[Nightshifter]

but then again, i understand about the extreme g, force on a coaster, but we are comparing the speed difference here, come on a rocket goes thousands of kilometres an hour and the worlds fasteset coaster barely reaches 200 km/hr like come on a roller coaster can go as fast as it wants and IMO i think they can make a coaster go up to like 300-400km/hr reaching heights more than 200 metres high easy. But then again coasters that go this fast shouldnt be launch coasters becasue people can suffer neck injuries but if the coaster gradually picks up speed, there less of a chance of a person getting injured. The easiest way to do this is a lift hill continous circuit coaster like millenium force. Reaches a great height and gradually picks up speed when it drops.

[Richard]

Anything can be done - at a cost. You must realise how ridiculously much it would cost to launch a train at such speeds. Then there's space. Do you know how much land it would be needed for a ride like this? The launch track would be a kilometre or longer. Throw in a brake run and you'd be looking at a ride that's 2km or longer with just a tophat as the only element on the ride. Launches would be the only way to get to these speeds. Apart from the size of the structure needed at these heights being out of the question, there's a little thing called terminal velocity that would make it impossible to attain to such speeds with gravity alone.

[Gazza]

The only way we are going to see coasters get much bigger nowdays is if we start using cliffs and buildings. Eventually its going to get to a point where it would be cheaper to just buy a fleet of stunt planes and take people up in them.

[steve$]

yeah,Have millenium force drop right down a 400m cliff

[Bussy]

There is a big difference between a rocket going vertically at 1000km/h and a coaster on a track doing 300km/h. If a coaster went that fast the curves on the track would have to be very gradual to reduce the high g-forces. The public cannot endure high g-forces without any consequents. Joz, Rabid I was not taking about rocket coasters but rockets to go into space. "The Bus is now leaving for The Force, NSW"

[steve$]

How high and how fast will be the limit though. I suppose we are approaching it very quickly as Kingda Ka became the 1st coaster to break the 200km mark and im not too sure but it was probably only 10 years ago that we got our 1st 100km p/h coaster. But drop rides can go very high without the g-forces getting too strong

[joz]

Joz, Rabid I was not taking about rocket coasters but rockets to go into space.

That makes sense, because I was making the point that the big coasters don't really need all the extra elements after the tophat. :confused: