Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345
Results 61 to 75 of 75
  1. #61

    • Resident Neuroscientist
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    on a college campus for the rest of my life
    Posts
    1,143
    Quote Originally Posted by Skipper S
    Ian P is right, sorry I was not more specific about the entire system but yes the idea is to not have to use the brakes at all. When this happens you have to push the rockets to get the ride up agian. Not all break spots have e-vac platforms. There is a stress scale and it it works well. If the rocket is too heavy they take it off and reseat the guests in diffrent rockets. this happened more than you think.
    of course, I'm sure issues like these will be solved with the new track and new cars.

  2. #62

    • That's Hawt
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Tahoe
    Posts
    6,989
    Its actually a pretty smart system if you think about it ... it allows that ride to operate many many rockets which keeps the line moving the weighing also makes a lot of sense, on a ride where, like everybody says, the weight can make a difference of up to thirty seconds you don't want a fast train behind a slower train.
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkmom
    this is my first buzzed post in the DMCA -- I'm really in this club because I'm a bitch more than anything. I've only had to hit the backspace 4 (oops, make that 5) times in (now 7) in this (now 9) (now 15) in this post! Damn, now I'm up to 18! Our neighbors were (19) (20) making tequilla sunrises. I thought I couldn't do tequilla (22) anymore but (24) this stuff (26) was good! It started (27) with an s



  3. #63

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    21
    Aboutt the speed thing... I was curious myself, so I took the time to calculate the maximum possible velocity allowed during free-fall.

    Okay, so knowing that there is 92 feet of clearance from the roof to the floor inside the building (I looked it up) I calculated that a 92-foot free-fall would result in a speed of 52.5 miles per hour at the bottom.

    However, it would never get anywhere near this speed. For starters, the rollercoaster car never gets this close to the roof, nor to the floor, resulting in less height drop. Also, this does not consider the momentum being converted into the rotational momentum of the wheels (which, as was mentioned, can be used to lower the peak velocity of the ride without sacrificing the momentum of the vehicle, making the speeds at slow parts change very little.) Finally, and most importantly, the friction the vehicle experiences would suck a lot of energy from the vehicle. Adjusting the dimensions and weight of the wheels would only allow minute adjustments to the speeds - say, perhaps, 1 or 2 miles per hour - since they are much much less massive than the vehicle filled with people. So the speeds before opening were probably something more like 35 mph. Besides, if the engineers designed it for 32 mph and they are hitting 55 mph then they would have done something incredibly wrong with their math.

    Hey, I didn't know that the trains were weighed at the beginning, that's really cool. I always wondered how they managed to keep the trains moving through the ride so close together without any break station intervetion despite changing conditions. That makes a lot of sense. By the way, for those who haven't considered it, the lack of brake station intervention is particularly important to Space Mountain because you are supposed to be a vessel travelling through space. Brake stations would break that illusion (no pun intended.) WDI went to great efforts and expense to design the track to allow the cars to fall into the banked corners rather than be forced into them like Matterhorn, so that it would feel like space travel. To ruin that with brake stations would have been a big mistake.

  4. #64

    • ...or just Tonny
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    337
    I still don't really get it though...it's exceptional for a coaster to gain more than a few seconds on ride time. So I don't really see the advantage of the weighing system. Just as a small safety margin (sp?). Say if theoratically, a train can leave every 20 seconds. Adding in factors like different weighed and wheel conditions etc., add an extra 3 seconds and you'll be pretty safe that there won't be any safety braking. And, wait for it, no need for an expensive weighing mechanism!

    Space Mtn in Paris did have the problem of braking on some days, where almost every train would be braked halfway through the ride. Of course, they never intended the "fake launch" in the canon, but the French government screwed with the plans, so they've had more capacity issues...

  5. #65

    • Resident Neuroscientist
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    on a college campus for the rest of my life
    Posts
    1,143
    Quote Originally Posted by Thriller
    I still don't really get it though...it's exceptional for a coaster to gain more than a few seconds on ride time. So I don't really see the advantage of the weighing system. Just as a small safety margin (sp?). Say if theoratically, a train can leave every 20 seconds. Adding in factors like different weighed and wheel conditions etc., add an extra 3 seconds and you'll be pretty safe that there won't be any safety braking. And, wait for it, no need for an expensive weighing mechanism!

    Space Mtn in Paris did have the problem of braking on some days, where almost every train would be braked halfway through the ride. Of course, they never intended the "fake launch" in the canon, but the French government screwed with the plans, so they've had more capacity issues...
    But that system would decrease hourly capacity. If they picked 20 seconds as the space between sending out trains, they would be assuming, of course, that everyone in the car is probably 400 lbs, because they would want the gap between the cars to be enough for any situation. However, with the weighing system, when you have cars that weigh much less, you can lower that gap to 16 or 17 seconds. Assuming each train is full w/ 12 people, 20 second ride cycles would allow 180 ride cycles per hour, or 2160 guests/hour. With the weighing mechanism, it may average out to have 18-second cycles, or 200 cycles per hour, 2400 guests/hour. Even the few seconds change can increase capacity pretty substantially, making the greater cost of the scales worthwhile. In reality, I'm sure the difference is even more than what I listed (there is probably a more than 2 second change in ride time between the heaviest train load of guests Space Mountain handles and the average weight train load it handles).

  6. #66

    • The Magics in the details
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by SirLamer
    Aboutt the speed thing... I was curious myself, so I took the time to calculate the maximum possible velocity allowed during free-fall.

    Okay, so knowing that there is 92 feet of clearance from the roof to the floor inside the building (I looked it up) I calculated that a 92-foot free-fall would result in a speed of 52.5 miles per hour at the bottom.

    However, it would never get anywhere near this speed. For starters, the rollercoaster car never gets this close to the roof, nor to the floor, resulting in less height drop. Also, this does not consider the momentum being converted into the rotational momentum of the wheels (which, as was mentioned, can be used to lower the peak velocity of the ride without sacrificing the momentum of the vehicle, making the speeds at slow parts change very little.) Finally, and most importantly, the friction the vehicle experiences would suck a lot of energy from the vehicle. Adjusting the dimensions and weight of the wheels would only allow minute adjustments to the speeds - say, perhaps, 1 or 2 miles per hour - since they are much much less massive than the vehicle filled with people. So the speeds before opening were probably something more like 35 mph. Besides, if the engineers designed it for 32 mph and they are hitting 55 mph then they would have done something incredibly wrong with their math.

    Hey, I didn't know that the trains were weighed at the beginning, that's really cool. I always wondered how they managed to keep the trains moving through the ride so close together without any break station intervetion despite changing conditions. That makes a lot of sense. By the way, for those who haven't considered it, the lack of brake station intervention is particularly important to Space Mountain because you are supposed to be a vessel travelling through space. Brake stations would break that illusion (no pun intended.) WDI went to great efforts and expense to design the track to allow the cars to fall into the banked corners rather than be forced into them like Matterhorn, so that it would feel like space travel. To ruin that with brake stations would have been a big mistake.
    There's always the possability that they might use Electromagnetic LIMs to accelerate and decelerate the trains as they make their way through the attraction. It might not be all gravity (as it once was) after all!
    "To All Who Come To This Happy Place, Welcome!
    Disneyland is Your Land. Here age relives fond memories of the past, and youth can saver the challenge and promise of the future. Disneyland is dedicated to the ideals, the dreams and the hard facts that have created America, with the hope that it will be a source of joy an inspiration to all the world.
    "
    -- Walter Elias Disney, July 17, 1955 approx 4:35PM

  7. #67

    • Banned User
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,769
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCM
    There's always the possability that they might use Electromagnetic LIMs to accelerate and decelerate the trains as they make their way through the attraction. It might not be all gravity (as it once was) after all!
    That is very true. The computer could sense how fast the particular rocket is going and either slow it down or speed it up.

  8. #68

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Fullerton, CA.
    Posts
    795

    Thumbs up Kudos To Matt...

    Hey, wouldn't it be GREAT if Matt took over the roll from M.E. as CEO? Talk about many (MORE) wonderful things that could happen to Disneyland and DCA!!

    Out with the old & pathetic (M.E.) and in with the new & exciting...GO MATT!

  9. #69

    • ...or just Tonny
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by Disneyfreak
    That is very true. The computer could sense how fast the particular rocket is going and either slow it down or speed it up.
    Actually, no computer is needed. The new type of induction braking that is used more and more often, slows down faster trains a lot more than slower trains. Really great stuff for speed control. Although personally, Í am still of the opinion that rollercoasters should not be braked untill the end...everything in the middle is design flaw IMHO.

  10. #70

    • New Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCM
    There's always the possability that they might use Electromagnetic LIMs to accelerate and decelerate the trains as they make their way through the attraction. It might not be all gravity (as it once was) after all!
    Yeah, except we know that Space Mountain doesn't use LIMs. It was built in 1977, LIMs weren't around until the mid-90's.

    I'm pretty sure that the new track is exactly the same as the old one (except stronger) and thus doesn't need LIMs, since the old one didn't.

  11. #71

    • Closed Account
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Indian Village
    Posts
    35
    I heard there was gonna be a loop.

  12. #72

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    67
    I can't wait until it opens! How many lift hills will it have?

  13. #73

    • Junior Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    20
    So, who knows when soft openings might start.....
    :o

  14. #74

  15. #75

    • Member
    • Offline

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, California, United States, United States
    Posts
    986
    Quote Originally Posted by SirLamer
    Yeah, except we know that Space Mountain doesn't use LIMs. It was built in 1977, LIMs weren't around until the mid-90's.
    Except for those ones Force Engineering UK provided for Disneyland's Big Thunder Mountain Railroad in 1979.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-14-2008, 03:55 PM
  2. Rayland Grand Opening July 11-15th
    By Rayangelo in forum Disney Interactive and Game Industry Discussion
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-02-2007, 04:47 PM
  3. Space mountian July 15th?
    By Disney Analyst in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-16-2005, 09:50 PM
  4. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-10-2005, 01:32 PM
  5. Space Mountain to Open JULY 15th
    By innonut99 in forum Disneyland Resort
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-04-2005, 07:37 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •