DeLorean Rider

I still say tower gardens.

Both Delorean Rider and I have a lot of experience working that ride and riding it during early morning ERT's and all throughout the season. The employees do not tell guests that the trims are adjusted throughout the day, and if they do, they are wrong. Well said. There are obviously many factors that influence the speed of the train. Among the obvious are temperature, weather, ridership, etc; but it is extremely rare that the trim brakes are adjusted during the day. Granted it has happened, but the train has to be moving consistently either exceptionally fast or exceptionally slow at certain parts of the track to justify it. In order to adjust the brakes during the day, the ride must be shut down, locked out, and then the block safety test must be re-run after the change has been made. Like I said it's very rare that this is done. PS. In addition to last year (2007) I worked The Beast a LOT in my time at Tomb Raider, and have been trained on The Beast since 2003.

Good answer I guess that answered several questions.

I'd like to see just how much you know about the block set up on The Beast. In fact I'd like to know if you even know how many blocks The Beast actually has, and where they begin and end. When it comes to amusement park accidents, the news is often wrong. Gordon Bombay and I both know several people who worked at the park at the time and were working at the time of the incident. The accident did NOT happen in the station. It happened on the bridge when a train did not come to a complete stop in the safety brake and hit a train in the ready brakes. Apparently you already know what blocks those are, but in case you do not they are the block directly behind and the station, and the block behind it, both on the bridge. It was rainy, the trains hit at about 5mph. Also from personal experience working The Beast, the operator has the ability to check the speed of the train in several locations throughout the track, and throughout the year, I have seen speeds above 70mph. That’s not to say that they keep it there but it reaches it; the last bare bones night last year was a perfect example of The Beast going exceptionally fast. Maintenance determines the amount of trim needed in the morning every day depending on weather and temperature conditions. They know what they're doing when they're trimming the ride. Several of the maintenance members helped build The Beast and they know where the speeds need to be to reduce stress and wear on the coaster, and its not anyone else’s place to question their decisions. 29 years of experience for them speaks for itself.

True, however the magnetic brakes on The Beast do not adjust like this. I've had conversations with maintenance regarding this topic and on The Beast, there is no adjustment in the distance from the magnet to the fin; the way that the braking is adjusted is adding or removing brakes. Its difficult to make a precise adjustment because there aren't that many and the difference between adding and removing a break is pretty big.

I'm sorry, what I meant was: I've learned that Those That Have Ridden The Bat are Always Experts about How the Ride Works..... or Else They Think They Are.

I've learned that First Year Undergrads are Always Experts in Their Fields..... or Else They Think They Are. <G> Just as much as the guy who sold food at the park at the time The Bat was around. <G> Difference... I rode The Bat well over 100 times. I had the opportunity to ride The Bat the last few rides before it was dismantled. (But opted not to as I would have missed school.) I think that you'll agree that I do not make statements that I am reasonably or absolutely certain about. Oh, I have no doubt that you do, but DiscoDude wasn't claiming to be an expert, and made a general observation that he would probably know about. Lots of people ride coasters, doesn't mean they know how to maintain or fix them. And this has taught you how to calculate the necessary banking angle how??? Having ridden the ride doesn't make you an expert about it. I'd trust the first year engineering student who hasn't ridden it before the e-surance worker who rode it 25 years ago.

Whether or not you were trying to "egg me on" you gave information and you said many things that were not true. I proved that they were not true and you refused to admit that you were wrong. For example, the word centrifical. First, I challenge you to type the word "centrifical" into Webster or wikipedia, the result is: did you mean centrifugal? If you type the word into Word it tries to change it to centrifugal. See this is exactly what I'm talking about. Rather than admitting that you were saying centrifical when you should have been saying centrifugal, you change the argument. Yea, of course physics majors dont use centrifical to describe inertia, because it's not a word. You make no sense; inertia is what carries you through a loop, if you meant centrifugal force, even though it's not a calculated force, it is used in describing an objects inertia. Either way, centrifical, even if it is a type of pump, it has no significance what so ever. Then you said that I should have been using centripetal; you obviously weren't reading thoroughly because I was using it since the beginning. This is what you do, all the time you were just trying to change the subject and not admit that you were using the word centrifical, which is not a word. This statement does not make sense. You did not use inertia, you used the word centrifical. Any other mature member here would have just said "oh yea, I guess it is centrifugal not centrifical." Not "yea well centrifical is a type of pump," which has no relation to our argument on roller coaster physics. Also the phrase "I subscribe to the theories of Newtonian Mechanics," simply means, "I believe in the Basic Laws of Physics." All Newtonian Mechanics are are Physics according to Newton's laws, which any basic physics student would understand. This ENTIRE thing started when you talked about all the reasons restraints were necessary, one of which saying they keep riders in during inversions. You showed rides like Firehawk (no **** do you really need restraints on Firehawk) and other coasters. Huge argument entailed, then you said: "well I never actually said that everyone would fall out." Maybe not in so few words, but if you're going to argue about it, then you obviously thought it. Going back and changing the argument when you're proven wrong is immature, but it's what you do. By the way, you threw the first insult when you said I needed to get my money back for my classes; well, at least I've taken classes... HOWS THIS? Thats pretty solid. "Restraints are there to HOLD YOU IN; Doesn't that mean that if they're not there YOU'LL FALL OUT?" If you want to try to snake your way out of this saying this isn't what I meant, or you're misinterpreting that, or you want to change your story, then fine, thats the typical Monroe. Heck, you still wont admit that several times you said explicitly that the g's are constant through a circular loop which is wrong. I proved you wrong, then you said it again, I proved you wrong AGAIN, and you wont admit that you were wrong, you just avoid the subject. Don't try to act like you weren't trying to prove anything; that you were just, "egging me on" seeing where it would go. You dug yourself into a big hole by saying a bunch of things that were not true and then when the evidence that you were wrong was presented you refused to admit that you were wrong or just ignored the evidence. Simple as that. I dont know where you think I put my foot in my mouth but I'd really like to know. You can tell me after you take all the feet out of your mouth. But you know what, **** it, I've had it with this argument, I've proved what needs to be proved. You can be the one to not accept roller coaster physics, but I hope everyone else does. If you need to convince yourself that you did not say this, or didn't use this word, or I didn't mean this, or but you said that, or your info is just ok, or avoid the subject when you're proven wrong, then fine; whatever helps you sleep at night. I sleep great knowing that when I discuss roller coaster physics, I know what I'm talking about. You, maybe you should just admit you were wrong and consider a sleep aid. See ya next time I have to prove you wrong! So I guess as they say at Disney World, See ya real soon! P.S. Way to go going back and changing all of your "centrifical's" with "centripetal's". By the way: Not sure if you're confused by all the quoting, but I was the one who posted the information with illustration and all that "made perfect sense." Thank you, I do try to back up my information. And yes school is still out.

Hey that really happened, I was the one who took him into 2010. This is confirmed information...

Kings Island: Take physics and you'll know how our rides work.

Well this makes a good point dealing with circular loops. With an enterprise wheel, the speed of the car is kept constant, the radius or curvature is kept constant, meaning the g-forces are kept constant. With a roller coaster, the train slows down at the top meaning the g's are not kept constant in a circular loop. However when the radius at the top is reduced proportionately to the decrease in speed, the g-forces are kept constant, ie elliptical loop. (To say this for the 4th time) And like he said, this ride has no restraints.

Great! I'll take that as a concession. It's about time. Every time I prove something to you, you change the argument or say "that's not what I meant." All you're doing is nit picking. It does not change the fact that you said that you fall out of loops without restraints, that circular loops have constant forces, the Schwarzkopf's coasters had circular loops, and everything else you said that was not true. You were looking for a fight when you said: Then I spoke up and you said I needed to get my money back for my classes. I gave you a fight and I proved you wrong and you can't get over it. All you're doing is changing your story and going after stupid little parts of the argument. You're like a child who doesn't know how to loose. You were wrong, accept it and get over it. Almost weightless is a whole hell of a lot different than weightless, weightless, you float; almost weightless, you are still stuck to the seat. The bottom line is, a coaster could easily be designed such that restraints would not be necessary, and there are many many coasters today that according to the laws of physics, do NOT need restraints to keep riders in their seats. The restraints are there for psychological reassurance, for liability, and because above all else, average park guests are stupid; maybe that's why YOU always need a restraint on a roller coaster. P.S. That statement about not being able to achieve 0 g's in a circular loop is wrong. I'll say this as simple as possible, if you can design a roller coaster so that it hangs at the top of the loop, then you can design a coaster to make you experience 0'g's in the top of the loop, all that has to be is that the CENTRIPITAL force at the top, is equal to the force of gravity; forces cancel out, G's = 0. Given that the only area of interest is the top of the loop, its shape DOES NOT MATTER. Oh and by the way, centrifical is NOT a word. Perhaps you were planning on using the term Centrifugal force, which is still only a virtual force that is not able to be calculated (which you would know if you had taken physics). The force felt throughout the loop that can be accounted for is the centripetal force. And you're telling other people to take physics classes. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You still do not understand that the centripetal force in a circular loop is NOT constant. The forces in an elliptical loop are way more constant than a circular loop because the loss of speed towards the top is accounted for by the decrease in radius, therefore keeping the centripetal force and g's the same. In a circular loop, the decrease in speed yet constant radius causes a sharp decrease in centripetal force and g's, meaning MUCH GREATER fluctuation in g's. Circular loops require greater speed to maintain safe g's at the top of the loop, but cause unsafe g's in the sides of the loop. How many times do I have to ****ing say this??? Have you never seen an article about elliptical loops vs. circular loops??? They all say the same thing! TAKE A darn PHYSICS CLASS ALREADY!!! Also cannot is ONE word. See I can nit pick over stupid stuff in the argument just like you, but I don't need to because I'm not the one constantly trying to change the subject. (this is definitely a trend in your argument) And you really need to use spell check, you're spelling and grammar are way off. Notice all the bold italicized words in your quote, they're all misspelled. Maybe you should take an English class while you're at it as well. School is out for SUMMER!

I don’t know when the last time you were on a coaster was, but to make a ride more comfortable, a ride designer would not have a passenger pushed into their restraint, they would have them pushed into their seat. Whether a loop is elliptical or circular does not matter as long as the forces throughout are greater than gravity. You are WRONG! 100% WRONG! The g's are not constant, they do decrease towards the top of the loop with the decrease in speed. In case you don’t know how an elliptical loop works, making the radius at the top of the loop smaller (ie elliptical loop), INCREASES the outward forces on the rider PUSHING the rider into their SEAT even more at the top of the loop than with a circular loop. Physics man, BASIC physics. The problem with the circular loop was that at the sides of the loop the g's were high on the rider, yet at the top the g's were barely enough to keep the rider in. Designers found it difficult to find a balance as more speed kept people in at the top but blacked them out on the sides of the loop, the answer, the elliptical loop. Lower forces on the sides, higher forces at the top. What this means is that an elliptical loop holds people in their seats BETTER than a circular loop. Like I said PHYSICS BASIC PHYSICS. The G-forces are more constant in an elliptical loop because as the speed decreases toward the top of the loop, the radius decreases, keeping the g-forces the same, as the ride speeds on the way back down the radius increases keeping the forces constant. This is NOT what would happen with a circular loop, the forces increase towards the bottom and decrease towards the top with the decrease in speed. If anything circular loops made it harder for Schwarzkopf to keep riders in their seats. Once again BASIC PHYSICS. Try riding a B&M stand up coaster, do you think that the designers design it so you float around, NO, your knees nearly collapse through the loop which is why you have the bicycle seat; same on any B&M sit down coaster. Ok information?? Sorry, I tried to make it as simple as possible so that you could understand it. If you'd like I could write out a proof for you; but it's not worth the effort. The information is the same whether you're teaching it in high school, college, the industry, or someone who obviously does not understand it on a forum. Like I said SCHOOL'S OUT!

Didn't the ride break both height and speed when it opened? I think the theme of TTD is more consistant with the launch rather than the height.

Note: inline with the new TOS ^Remember this is NOT Confirmed. Yea Ki has the trains but they will not be used, they're just in storage. The trains are not the same as the SOB ones from the hurricane. No need to worry.

For some reason the words "Flight Commander" and "Drop Zone" come to mind... PS Monroe, I'm sure nobody is going to argue that the restraints on a flying coaster are there to keep you in however you cannot make the statement that EVERY coaster that goes upside down requires restraints to keep riders in their seats. Given competent riders, there are many coasters that would be just fine without restraints holding riders in. I have a very old video of King Kobra at KD when it was new without restraints and people riding it. Before it launched the operator would explain that the centripetal force would keep the riders in. Many of Anton Schwarzkopf's coasters (that went upside down) never had restraints and operated just fine. I don't know when the last time you took a physics class was, but I've taken three in the last 2 years, not to mention statics, dynamics, strengths of materials, thermodynamics, and mechanics of materials, and had countless discussions with many people about roller coaster physics. http://rcdb.com/ig637.htm?picture=5 ^The people in this picture are not wearing restraints^ http://rcdb.com/ig637.htm?picture=2 ^Nobody is falling out in this picture^ http://rcdb.com/ig1152.htm?picture=4 It is very obvious that you have not been on that coaster, and yes I have. This is the very same coaster with the original restraints. As you can see, there is a lap bar that comes down around your waist. I am not going to explain what happens regarding gravity forces in a loop again, so go back and read my posts. Also, if you have taken that many classes and you still think you are perfectly safe without restraints. Then I would take the classes again or get my money back. This is basic physics, and with that comes many variables. For example, you mentioned Schwarzkopf, I am assuming that you are referring to his single loop coasters. Take a look at the loop, it is not as tear drop looking as most loops. This gives you a more constant g-force all the way through the loop. Any coaster that you might have a video of where the coaster does not have restraints, that video was taken shortly before they added restraints. That the ride currently has restraints after 4 relocations is of little consequence. The ride ran for many years without restraints whether you like it or not, and the video was taken several years after the ride was installed at KD CLEARLY you need to take some very basic physics to understand the idea of centripetal force. How else do you explain when a hotwheel's car makes it through a loop on a plastic track. Its the same as how a passenger stays in a Schwarzkopf coaster through a loop. Here maybe this will help you understand: Notice the beginning in bold and underlined!!! Look simple physics will tell you that if the train is going fast enough that the road wheels are in contact with the track, then the riders who are subjected to the same forces of the train, will remain in contact with their seats. If a coaster like a Schwarzkopf shuttle loop is designed such that the road wheels stay in contact during the loop, which they do, the riders will not fall out. That is not to say that on Vortex during the corkscrews the road wheels are always in contact, that would be a case where restraints are necessary. You obviously do not know, because SIMPLY PUT, if the centripetal force (or acceleration force) throughout the loop is greater than the force of gravity, you will not fall out. END OF STORY, whether the loop is a elliptical or circular. Also do not tell me to take my classes again or get my money back, that’s just plain immature. Thank you class. PS this information is CONFIRMED. My source is the Laws of Physics, Isaac Newton, and How-Stuff-Works.com

Just as safe as the Flight Commander. Just had to put that out. Hey now, you may have been to young to remember flight commander, but Flight Commander had a pretty intricate restraint system, even more so after the accident. Just because there was an accident doesn't mean the ride is not safe. They wouldn't operate it if it wasn't safe. I have been on all of the Coasters at Kings Island and other parks with out a seatbelt and was fine. Also look at the old King Kobra at Kinds Dominion just a buzz bar also. Why don't you take a look, the handle you are refering to is NOT a buzz bar, it is a handel mounted to the car similar to the ones on the wooden coasters at our park. It would be pretty impossible to have a buzz bar and a handle on the same car since on a buzz bar car, the buzz bar is the handle.

I can understand that, all the other characters had names and places where they were more just props that happened to talk (very quietly and hard to understand), no real personality. I think I would recognize if you left out someone else but those two, doesnt really cross my mind. I remember at TRTR when the preshow projector burned out we used the one from the centurian for about a week and a half, it was pretty low quality.

I'm sure the intamin standup's are great rides. I've been on about 7 B&M standups and honestly, I dont care for any of them. I've also been on 2 B&M hypers, 1 sit down,4 floorless, and 8 B&M inverted coasters and I cannot imagine a park now wanting to build a standup B&M when they could have any of the other 4. B&M Standup coasters are very intense. The force distribution in a standup is much different to that of one where you sit down. Personally I could do without all of them, the Vortexes, iron wolf, chang, mantis... I do not believe that the future has B&M stand up coasters in it.

I do recall that. I also recall that the only two sound files lost were those of the centurian and the shakespearian man. Well perhaps not lost but rather unobtainable due to the nature of their audio.

I had a hunch that that movie was a work of yours AlienSeed. I've recognized that quality before. Did you remake the ride? I noticed that there is much less space between scenes than your last creation.

I've got the the music for the queue ie. maestro talking and playing the organ which is about 15 minutes long and he says all of that in the queue. The only difference is that its not 5 years ago it's 75 years ago. (easy fix). Thats definately not someone immitating maestro, it really is maestro. Still a pretty good movie EDIT: Here we go, I searched through the queue music and found the part that they used, listen for yourself! http://media.putfile.com/Maestro-72

Given that each character or scene in phantom theater had its own special effect there was no actual ride through soundtrack other than the music. Those that remember AlienSeed however, may remember his ride through creation, which too this day I still keep on my computer. It is by far the best phantom theater make, flawless in it's transitions, perfect order or scenes. Every now and then I'll just sit back close my eyes, listen to it and relive the ride. I've got a copy of it but I know how particular AlienSeed was about distributing it as he only had it posted for one day, (I think Halloween 2006) then took it down. Maybe if we're lucky someone can get ahold of him and he'll grace us with it again.

For some reason the words "Flight Commander" and "Drop Zone" come to mind... PS Monroe, I'm sure nobody is going to argue that the restraints on a flying coaster are there to keep you in however you cannot make the statement that EVERY coaster that goes upside down requires restraints to keep riders in their seats. Given competent riders, there are many coasters that would be just fine without restraints holding riders in. I have a very old video of King Kobra at KD when it was new without restraints and people riding it. Before it launched the operator would explain that the centripetal force would keep the riders in. Many of Anton Schwarzkopf's coasters (that went upside down) never had restraints and operated just fine. I don’t know when the last time you took a physics class was, but I've taken three in the last 2 years, not to mention statics, dynamics, strengths of materials, thermodynamics, and mechanics of materials, and had countless discussions with many people about roller coaster physics. http://rcdb.com/ig637.htm?picture=5 ^The people in this picture are not wearing restraints^ http://rcdb.com/ig637.htm?picture=2 ^Nobody is falling out in this picture^

I'm With Monroe. Kings Island would Not take the time, effort, and money to install the restraints if they were, Reduntant! They are to keep you in. Have you ever seen Final Destination 3? Well, that's one of the many reasons that they have the seatbelts. Over all, BUCKLE UP! It's the law. Redundant is a trade term. Additional redundant connections and redundant restraints is what they're called. Are you saying that the redundant connections on skyflyer are not necessary? It's a good thing that the skyflyer test explicitly outlines redunant connections otherwise we'd have people like you thinking the extra hooks aren't necessary flying people. It's all there for safety. Additional restraints as a last resort incase the primary restraint fails. Even then accidents happen (raven, flight commander, superman ride of steel, drop zone GA, etc. etc. etc.) but I'm sure the list is smaller in part because of the "redundant" restraints.