Hulk Trains Scrapped

[Bairstow]

That initial acceleration is what would cause the train to be moving through the track faster than originally anticipated.

How could the train be moving faster than originally anticipated?
It's not like they built it with a lift hill and suddenly woke up one morning and found that a launch had been installed.

 

[lazyboy97o]

How could the train be moving faster than originally anticipated?
It's not like they built it with a lift hill and suddenly woke up one morning and found that a launch had been installed.

B&M did not like the launch concept and was not involved in its development. This is why Thunderbird at HolidayWorld is described as their first launched coaster. So in a way, yes, it was sort of like a launch just appearing.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Hmm. You wouldn't just buy a coaster from someone and not give them an idea of a launch system. These are pretty much one offs so there is a bunch of engineering involved, it would be strange not to take into account starting velocity going over the first drop because that would tell you the expected velocity through every turn, drop or incline from the beginning. I just don't see a company building a coaster and saying there you go launch it how ever you want? It could end up very dangerous to that so non integrated.

Could have been a failure to do a good job on the over all design but I doubt it. It worked well for many years I'm thinking a load calculation was off for other reasons or it was just bad construction. Concrete out of spec can cause a bunch of problems. It does happen.

The launch is pretty much an aftermarket addition. Coaster manufacturers sell their rides with control software but that doesn't stop Disney from wiping it and installing their own software. Or from other parks installing new trains and equipment made by others. They're still machines that in many cases have several different parties involved. Even Disney loaded up Space Mountain with too much equipment and destroyed its track.

 

[Andy_0410]

Maybe the new trains are so much heavier than the original this meant the old track wouldn't of been able to withstand the weight then and had to be replaced. Though if this is the case surely it would lead to a slower ride than we used to have?

 

[Tom Morrow]

Maybe the new trains are so much heavier than the original this meant the old track wouldn't of been able to withstand the weight then and had to be replaced. Though if this is the case surely it would lead to a slower ride than we used to have?

This. I don't know if the trains will be heavier or lighter, but they are different enough that new track was needed. It wasn't about the launch as it will still need to launch at least as fast as it did to complete the circuit.

The spine on the new track looks smaller - I'm willing to bet the ride will be quieter now.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Like Dragon Challenge, the track of The Incredible Hulk will be filled with sand to dampen its noise so that the new on-board audio can be heard. On-board audio would also contribute to a new track, being what destroyed Space Mountain.

 

[BubbaQuest]

There must have been something wonky going on, because there are plenty of older B&Ms out there- Kumba, Montu, and just think of all the Batmen out there.

Steel track will warp over time. From weather/heat related expansion and contraction plus normal operating conditions. Kumba was buttery smooth when it first opened and is now a head-banging mess.

I'm sure once there was talk of changing the train weight with onboard audio, it made sense to start talking about track replacement. I wonder if the new trains will also have more than 2 big-boy rows.

 

[maxairmike]

I think you're all overestimating the difference onboard audio would make. This isn't the first B&M to have onboard audio added. Bizarro/Medusa at SFGAdv had audio added and nothing changed besides the trains. Led Zeppelin at Hard Rock Park had audio and I don't believe the track and supporting was any different than other B&M sit downs at the time. There were issues, but I highly doubt adding audio was even close to a reason it had to be done.

 

[JT3000]

B&M did not like the launch concept and was not involved in its development. This is why Thunderbird at HolidayWorld is described as their first launched coaster. So in a way, yes, it was sort of like a launch just appearing.

Not really. Regardless of who designed the launch system, they would need to take all the same things into consideration. It's not like B&M are the only ones with any expertise in the field of coaster design. If something as vital as the launch system were actually problematic, the ride would have never opened, much less operate for 16 years.

As for the ride's momentum, the launch is there to get you through the first couple inversions, and it was designed by professionals specifically for this purpose, which means it's more than likely going the "correct" speed. The fact that you were launched starts to become irrelevant after that, as the other ride elements (including brake runs!) serve their secondary purpose of regulating momentum. If a coaster were entirely reliant on its lift hill/launch for momentum, it would never make it through the entire track cycle. So for the entire ride, it's going as fast as it's supposed to be going.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not really. Regardless of who designed the launch system, they would need to take all the same things into consideration. It's not like B&M are the only ones with any expertise in the field of coaster design. If something as vital as the launch system were actually problematic, the ride would have never opened, much less operate for 16 years.

As for the ride's momentum, the launch is there to get you through the first couple inversions, and it was designed by professionals specifically for this purpose, which means it's more than likely going the "correct" speed. The fact that you were launched starts to become irrelevant after that, as the other ride elements (including brake runs!) serve their secondary purpose of regulating momentum. If a coaster were entirely reliant on its lift hill/launch for momentum, it would never make it through the entire track cycle. So for the entire ride, it's going as fast as it's supposed to be going.

A roller coaster is absolutely reliant on the lift hill for all of its potential energy. A train suddenly getting more would defy the known laws of physics. There are also plenty of examples of rides not performing as intended but still operating for years.

 

[JT3000]

A roller coaster is absolutely reliant on the lift hill for all of its potential energy. A train suddenly getting more would defy the known laws of physics. There are also plenty of examples of rides not performing as intended but still operating for years.

Other ride elements, such as drops and brake runs, absolutely have an effect on momentum. By the end of the ride, you're not still coasting off of the energy derived by the launch alone.

Picture a ride the length of the Hulk, with a traditional lift and nothing but straight track after the first drop. I guarantee it would not make it to the end.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Other ride elements, such as drops and brake runs, absolutely have an effect on momentum. By the end of the ride, you're not still coasting off of the energy derived by the launch alone.

Picture a ride the length of the Hulk, with a traditional lift and nothing but straight track after the first drop. I guarantee it would not make it to the end.

You're arguing against some rather basic physics. Brake runs and the elements of the coaster remove energy, they do not add energy. The Incredible Hulk is able to do more than it could with just a lift hill because it has a launch.

 

[JT3000]

You're arguing against some rather basic physics. Brake runs and the elements of the coaster remove energy, they do not add energy. The Incredible Hulk is able to do more than it could with just a lift hill because it has a launch.

Not all ride elements remove energy. Any time you drop something where gravity exists, it will gain energy.

But yes, brake runs remove energy. And once the train hits a brake and loses energy derived from earlier sections of the ride, why does it keep going? Why is there a drop right after most brake runs? Why not an immediate incline into the next inversion? If the coaster is receiving all the energy it requires from the launch alone, this should be a possibility.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Not all ride elements remove energy. Any time you drop something where gravity exists, it will gain energy.

But yes, brake runs remove energy. And once the train hits a brake and loses energy derived from earlier sections of the ride, why does it keep going? Why is there a drop right after most brake runs? Why not an immediate incline into the next inversion? If the coaster is receiving all the energy it requires from the launch alone, this should be a possibility.

There is never a net gain over the potential energy from the top of the lift hill. It requires more energy to get to the top of a hill than is generated by going down. You're trying to argue that a roller coaster is a perpetual motion device.

 

[JT3000]

There is never a net gain over the potential energy from the top of the lift hill. It requires more energy to get to the top of a hill than is generated by going down. You're trying to argue that a roller coaster is a perpetual motion device.

I'm not arguing that there's a net gain of energy. I'm arguing that the train loses and regains momentum throughout the course of the ride. It doesn't have to gain more energy than it had after the launch, but it also doesn't rely solely on that energy to reach its conclusion.

I'm not sure what you mean by "perpetual motion device", but if you keep dropping the train from a high enough elevation before it's allowed to lose all its momentum, then yes, it will keep going in perpetuity, and not because of the initial launch (there's no prohibitive ground level in this theoretical.)

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'm not arguing that there's a net gain of energy. I'm arguing that the train loses and regains momentum throughout the course of the ride. It doesn't have to gain more energy than it had after the launch, but it also doesn't rely solely on that energy to reach its conclusion.

I'm not sure what you mean by "perpetual motion device", but if you keep dropping the train from a high enough elevation before it's allowed to lose all its momentum, then yes, it will keep going in perpetuity, and not because of the initial launch.

Losing and regaining momentum is all based on the launch/lift hill because that is the point of greatest potential energy. Energy shifting from potential to kinetic to potential (going faster at the bottom of a hill to slower at the top of a hill) doesn't change that energy is always being lost and never gained. The top of a subsequent hill is an increase in potential energy but it comes at the expense of kinetic energy. You're only focusing on kinetic energy and that is not the whole picture.

No, a train will not keep going forever if there are enough hills. That means defying the laws of physics.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Steel track will warp over time. From weather/heat related expansion and contraction plus normal operating conditions. Kumba was buttery smooth when it first opened and is now a head-banging mess.

I'm sure once there was talk of changing the train weight with onboard audio, it made sense to start talking about track replacement. I wonder if the new trains will also have more than 2 big-boy rows.

It has nothing to do with "track warping" and everything to do with upkeep on the trains themselves.

 

[danlb_2000]

Has any park ever rebuilt the exact same coaster turn for turn due to replacement (not fire, accident, etc)?

I'm glad they did- why mess with a great thing. It's going to be so interesting to feel the difference between the old track/cars and the new.

Found another example of an upcoming re-tracking project...

http://coasterchitchat.com/index.ph...er-to-retrack-90-of-great-noreaster-for-2017/

 

[JoeCamel]

Found another example of an upcoming re-tracking project...

http://coasterchitchat.com/index.ph...er-to-retrack-90-of-great-noreaster-for-2017/

"Bendable Technology"? I hope it is not too bendable.

 

[danlb_2000]

"Bendable Technology"? I hope it is not too bendable.

According to this, http://coasterhub.com/archives/3216, Vekoma is using a new track bending technology that allows for a much smoother ride. I am not a coaster fan so I have never ridden this one, but I do like to lay on the beach and watch it.

I saw a documentary recently about how they build the track sections and I was amazed at home much manual work is involved. The rough bends are done by a computer controlled bending machine, but all the find tuning is done by hand. Maybe Vekoma has come up with a new technique that allows a lot more of the work to be automated.