Spider-Man Ride Patent for DLR

[Curious Constance]

Spider-Space-Pirate-Man!
Spider-Space-Pirate-Man!
Does whatever a spider space pirate does?

That may be the first cheeky post I've seen from you.

 

[Disney Irish]

Not that I even believe that post, but in the Ultimate Spider-Man Animated Series On Disney XD there was an episode last year with a pirate version of Spider-Man called Web Beard:

http://thedailybugle.wikia.com/wiki/Web_Beard

 

[Disney Irish]

Now as for the patent of the ride system, it looks interesting and fun. I'm betting if someone actually read through the actual patent it'll say something about the ride vehicle itself actually having movement separate from the arm movement. So either part of the arm will turn as it swings or the vehicle will turn on an axis at the bottom of the arm. This is likely so the rider is not always facing forward but is turned with the action.

 

[Practical Pig]

That may be the first cheeky post I've seen from you.

I know, huh! I like this development.

 

[Practical Pig]

Now as for the patent of the ride system, it looks interesting and fun. I'm betting if someone actually read through the actual patent it'll say something about the ride vehicle itself actually having movement separate from the arm movement. So either part of the arm will turn as it swings or the vehicle will turn on an axis at the bottom of the arm. This is likely so the rider is not always facing forward but is turned with the action.

That is certainly a glaringly missing element. But a simple rotational arrow in the diagrams could have indicated that. Why would that have been omitted unless it's not in this patent?

Answering myself; maybe the patentable part of this system didn't need to include it because of earlier patents. (?)

 

[Disney Irish]

That is certainly a glaringly missing element. But a simple rotational arrow in the diagrams could have indicated that. Why would that have been omitted unless it's not in this patent?

Answering myself; maybe the patentable part of this system didn't need to include it because of earlier patents. (?)

Or because there could be other images included in the patent that wasn't included in the story.

 

[Disney Irish]

That is certainly a glaringly missing element. But a simple rotational arrow in the diagrams could have indicated that. Why would that have been omitted unless it's not in this patent?

Answering myself; maybe the patentable part of this system didn't need to include it because of earlier patents. (?)

Or actually because no one has noticed it and actually read the patent.

If you look at the image right before the track layout image it shows a cross section view. On the arm looks to be a motor labeled 149 which appears to give the vehicle some motion.

Now here is what the patent says about that:

"The rotatable coupling allows a drive mechanism (e.g., a motor) 149 may be included in the system 110 for selective operation to move the vehicle 140 as shown with arrow 147 about the yaw axis, Axisyaw, of the vehicle 140. For example, it may be desirable to yaw or twist 147 the vehicle inward as the pendulum arm 130 is rotated through or into its larger roll angle ranges or toward the top of a swing or swing arc to achieve a desired swing sensation for the passengers 102 in the seats 142 of the passenger vehicle 140 as though they are rotating to face the ground before the next swing. The amount of yawing 147 may be relatively small such as 3 to 15 degrees or the like in many applications. Although not shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the vehicle 140 may further be coupled with the pendulum arm 130 to be moved with addition DOFs such as with yaw to achieve a desired ride experience while providing roll with rotation 131 of the pendulum arm 130 with the roll driver 128."

"Also, in this operating example, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be operated to slow the bogie 110 (and interconnected vehicle 140) into a relatively slow velocity range as it is sometimes useful to have the vehicle's translational motion synchronized with the rotational movement through roll so as to move more quickly with smaller roll angles and less quickly at the larger roll angles of each swing or each swing arc (e.g., the top roll angle may be 15 degrees in one swing arc and 45 degrees in another and 90 degrees or more in another and, in each case, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be controlled to slow down at or near the top of each swing arc). When larger amounts of roll (larger roll angles, .theta.) are provided, the yaw driver 149 may concurrently be operated to rotate the vehicle 140 about the yaw axis, Axis.sub.Yaw, such as to provide some amount (e.g., 1 to 15 degrees) of inward yaw to the vehicle 140 to provide a more natural swing feel."

So it appears there will be some motion, either forward and back or turning, of the vehicle itself to give a more swinging sensation.

Here is the actual patent if anyone wants to read it:

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...85".PGNR.&OS=DN/20170282085&RS=DN/20170282085

 

[mickEblu]

Or actually because no one has noticed it and actually read the patent.

If you look at the image right before the track layout image it shows a cross section view. On the arm looks to be a motor labeled 149 which appears to give the vehicle some motion.

Now here is what the patent says about that:

"The rotatable coupling allows a drive mechanism (e.g., a motor) 149 may be included in the system 110 for selective operation to move the vehicle 140 as shown with arrow 147 about the yaw axis, Axisyaw, of the vehicle 140. For example, it may be desirable to yaw or twist 147 the vehicle inward as the pendulum arm 130 is rotated through or into its larger roll angle ranges or toward the top of a swing or swing arc to achieve a desired swing sensation for the passengers 102 in the seats 142 of the passenger vehicle 140 as though they are rotating to face the ground before the next swing. The amount of yawing 147 may be relatively small such as 3 to 15 degrees or the like in many applications. Although not shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the vehicle 140 may further be coupled with the pendulum arm 130 to be moved with addition DOFs such as with yaw to achieve a desired ride experience while providing roll with rotation 131 of the pendulum arm 130 with the roll driver 128."

"Also, in this operating example, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be operated to slow the bogie 110 (and interconnected vehicle 140) into a relatively slow velocity range as it is sometimes useful to have the vehicle's translational motion synchronized with the rotational movement through roll so as to move more quickly with smaller roll angles and less quickly at the larger roll angles of each swing or each swing arc (e.g., the top roll angle may be 15 degrees in one swing arc and 45 degrees in another and 90 degrees or more in another and, in each case, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be controlled to slow down at or near the top of each swing arc). When larger amounts of roll (larger roll angles, .theta.) are provided, the yaw driver 149 may concurrently be operated to rotate the vehicle 140 about the yaw axis, Axis.sub.Yaw, such as to provide some amount (e.g., 1 to 15 degrees) of inward yaw to the vehicle 140 to provide a more natural swing feel."

So it appears there will be some motion, either forward and back or turning, of the vehicle itself to give a more swinging sensation.

Here is the actual patent if anyone wants to read it:

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1="20170282085".PGNR.&OS=DN/20170282085&RS=DN/20170282085

No I'll take your word for it. But good to know!

 

[Practical Pig]

Or actually because no one has noticed it and actually read the patent.

If you look at the image right before the track layout image it shows a cross section view. On the arm looks to be a motor labeled 149 which appears to give the vehicle some motion.

Now here is what the patent says about that:

"The rotatable coupling allows a drive mechanism (e.g., a motor) 149 may be included in the system 110 for selective operation to move the vehicle 140 as shown with arrow 147 about the yaw axis, Axisyaw, of the vehicle 140. For example, it may be desirable to yaw or twist 147 the vehicle inward as the pendulum arm 130 is rotated through or into its larger roll angle ranges or toward the top of a swing or swing arc to achieve a desired swing sensation for the passengers 102 in the seats 142 of the passenger vehicle 140 as though they are rotating to face the ground before the next swing. The amount of yawing 147 may be relatively small such as 3 to 15 degrees or the like in many applications. Although not shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the vehicle 140 may further be coupled with the pendulum arm 130 to be moved with addition DOFs such as with yaw to achieve a desired ride experience while providing roll with rotation 131 of the pendulum arm 130 with the roll driver 128."

"Also, in this operating example, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be operated to slow the bogie 110 (and interconnected vehicle 140) into a relatively slow velocity range as it is sometimes useful to have the vehicle's translational motion synchronized with the rotational movement through roll so as to move more quickly with smaller roll angles and less quickly at the larger roll angles of each swing or each swing arc (e.g., the top roll angle may be 15 degrees in one swing arc and 45 degrees in another and 90 degrees or more in another and, in each case, the bogie drive mechanisms 118 may be controlled to slow down at or near the top of each swing arc). When larger amounts of roll (larger roll angles, .theta.) are provided, the yaw driver 149 may concurrently be operated to rotate the vehicle 140 about the yaw axis, Axis.sub.Yaw, such as to provide some amount (e.g., 1 to 15 degrees) of inward yaw to the vehicle 140 to provide a more natural swing feel."

So it appears there will be some motion, either forward and back or turning, of the vehicle itself to give a more swinging sensation.

Here is the actual patent if anyone wants to read it:

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1="20170282085".PGNR.&OS=DN/20170282085&RS=DN/20170282085

I was just digging into the patent when you posted this, but you do seem to be more invested here then I am, so cheers and have at it.

I want to thank @lazyboy97o for the links originally providing this information three days ago in the WDW forum side of this discussion.

 

[Disney Irish]

I was just digging into the patent when you posted this, but you do seem to be more invested here then I am, so cheers and have at it.

I want to thank @lazyboy97o for the links originally providing this information three days ago in the WDW forum side of this discussion.

I'm not more invested in it, I was just answering the question that everyone seemed to have about the motion of the vehicle.

 

[mickEblu]

So can we assume no new nifty ride system with the Avengers/ Captain America Coaster since no patent has surfaced?

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

So can we assume no new nifty ride system with the Avengers/ Captain America Coaster since no patent has surfaced?

I personally wouldn't make that assumption. No presence of a new patent doesn't mean they aren't working on one/one has been developed and is more top secret.

 

[mickEblu]

I personally wouldn't make that assumption. No presence of a new patent doesn't mean they aren't working on one/one has been developed and is more top secret.

Definitely possible. I would bet against a new ride system for this one though. I think I've heard this one compared to Gringotts.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

Definitely possible. I would bet against a new ride system for this one though. I think I've heard this one compared to Gringotts.

I'm honestly not that sure what that system is. Would that be a desirable basis for an attraction?

 

[mickEblu]

I'm honestly not that sure what that system is. Would that be a desirable basis for an attraction?

I haven't been but I have seen it described as a say a Spider-Man or Transformers ride vehicle on top of a Coaster. The vehicles move forward on the track and can spin as well. Something like that would definitely be new to DLR but I wonder how much Disney can borrow if that system is patented.

From the sound of Gringotts, I think I would enjoy it much more than Forbidden Journey. So I think it would make a good basis for attraction, especially at DLR that doesn't have anything like that. Unfortunately, I'm not interested in the Avengers characters and I probably won't be interested in the world/ sets that imagineers create for the attraction.

So basically the fact that I'm excited for Marvel land has nothing to do with Marvel at all. I'm excited for newer high tech attractions and ride systems that can't really be found in So Cal yet. I pretty much would prefer any other IP to super hero stuff most likely set in a city scape. I guess I like the thought of being transported to different worlds or mysterious places. More often than not, Marvel movies are set in some big city. That's why the Disney Marvel attractions are self referential and are happening at Disneyland or Epcot.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So can we assume no new nifty ride system with the Avengers/ Captain America Coaster since no patent has surfaced?

Based on patents? Absolutely not. @danlb_2000 mentioned in the other thread that looking over past threads on patents, none have been built. Disney still builds proprietary, patented systems (ie. Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, Tow Mater’s Junkyard Jamboree) but they don’t get leaked in this manner.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

I haven't been but I have seen it described as a say a Spider-Man or Transformers ride vehicle on top of a Coaster. The vehicles move forward on the track and can spin as well. Something like that would definitely be new to DLR but I wonder how much Disney can borrow if that system is patented.

From the sound of Gringotts, I think I would enjoy it much more than Forbidden Journey. So I think it would make a good basis for attraction, especially at DLR that doesn't have anything like that. Unfortunately, I'm not interested in the Avengers characters and I probably won't be interested in the world/ sets that imagineers create for the attraction.

So basically the fact that I'm excited for Marvel land has nothing to do with Marvel at all. I'm excited for newer high tech attractions and ride systems that can't really be found in So Cal yet. I pretty much would prefer any other IP to super hero stuff most likely set in a city scape. I guess I like the thought of being transported to different worlds or mysterious places. More often than not, Marvel movies are set in some big city. That's why the Disney Marvel attractions are self referential and are happening at Disneyland or Epcot.

Gringott's is a terrible attraction. The ride system is fun, but it's a glorified coaster that parks you in front of giant SCREENZ where actors just yell at you incomprehensibly until it's time to move to the next SCREENZ. The only fun parts are when the ride is in motion careening through what little sets were constructed. I find FJ to be a far superior attraction in every way FWIW.

If Disney goes with a Gringott's-esque system for any new attractions, I hope they'd build more sets and scenes and figures instead of just the park-and-bark routine Universal has settled into.

 

[mickEblu]

Gringott's is a terrible attraction. The ride system is fun, but it's a glorified coaster that parks you in front of giant SCREENZ where actors just yell at you incomprehensibly until it's time to move to the next SCREENZ. The only fun parts are when the ride is in motion careening through what little sets were constructed. I find FJ to be a far superior attraction in every way FWIW.

If Disney goes with a Gringott's-esque system for any new attractions, I hope they'd build more sets and scenes and figures instead of just the park-and-bark routine Universal has settled into.

Oh God. That's sounds like a non Kuka arm version of FJ. I haven't looked at a ride thru because i don't want to spoil it before I go in person. But it does sound like the attraction had a lot of potential. How are the sets and effects? Do you feel like you are deep down in the caves of Gringotts bank?

Lol @ park n bark.

 

[D.Silentu]

Strange that more and more attractions seem to be mobile theaters, taking riders to events that you witness, rather than participate in.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Oh God. That's sounds like a non Kuka arm version of FJ. I haven't looked at a ride thru because i don't want to spoil it before I go in person. But it does sound like the attraction had a lot of potential. How are the sets and effects? Do you feel like you are deep down in the caves of Gringotts bank?

Lol @ park n bark.

FJ has actual scenes and the projection domes actually "take" you somewhere and serve a purpose; Gringott's doesn't even do that. The loading area for Gringott's is really gorgeous and fantastic, but the ride itself doesn't feel immersive to me.