new ride segment ideas

[RCT2head]

i might be thought of as stupid for asking this, but is it possible to make a very (on purpose) shaky woody with a steel segment that has a wall of fire type of tunnel with safety features worked into it. i know alot of you are engineers and designers, so you all probably could answer this better than if i tried to find out. another thing, a friend of mine wants to know what is the steepest angle of descent you can use, and how high is the coaster that uses it? thank you to those who answers these questions.

[raptorrvnge4928]

You know, I am sure that the woody idea could be accomplished, as there are many chemicals that exist that are flame retardants, but not sure if you would ever see a tunnel of fire on a wooden coaster. As for the steepest coaster descent, you are opening a can of worms here. But I think the steepest degree would be 90 degrees, and the tallest is TTD. Granted, I believe that somewhere (sorry dont exactly remember the name or manufacturer of this coaster, though I think it might be Gerstauler) there exists a drop of 95 degrees, but as we know, the complimentary angle to this is 85 degrees. Technically, that is the greatest angle of descent, but the steepest drop one could achieve towards freefall is 90 degrees, this is why TTD is IMO the steepest.

[RCT2head]

thanks, dude, because it's my dream to open my own park, with a drop of about 500 feet straight down, with some real intense parts to it, like a a 400 ft straight up wall to climb after the first drop, of course stuff needs to work out, but hte woody would be put in Va., and named Va. Earthquake after what it's supposed to be modeled after, an extreme earthquake in va...

[RCT2head]

sorry for double post, but i thought it would be ok to post something, seeing as noone esle has in a day. would it be possible to create a very versatile coaster for an actual park, that has parts that are pre-made that can be replaced by others very easily to create a coaster that's always changing? imagine this, one day, an awesome coaster is there, but guests don't like the look of it, so the next week, it's remade into a better ride by an onsite factory that manufactures pieces to fix it to be a better ride. or imagine a ride that has parts of its track flip or move, like the loaders do, so that a train can actually go on a totally different set of track. that could lead to having 20 seperate parts of track on a relatively long coaster, making block sections obsolete almost, and saving time and money for the park on building another ride repetitively every season. and if both ideas are implemented on a coaster, that could mean this coaster could never be the same twice, granted that there would be extremely high maintainence factors that prevent a massacre from happening. i would love to see this idea implemented, but i'm not an engineer/architect, so i would have no idea if it would work or not.;)

[pnkfloyd12]

I think, at least theoretically, it would be possible. If trains can switch between two different tracks, so should a roller coaster. From a safety standpoint, I don't know if it would be feasible.

The design of a switch like that would be a lot more complicated than a train since a train only has wheels on top of the track whereas a coaster has wheels on top, bottom and inside of the rail.

If it could be done, it would have to be done where the train is moving relatively slow. You would still need block brakes or something similar to stop the coaster if the switch fails.

It definitely would be interesting to see, if they can figure out how to do it.

[RCT2head]

I sure thought so... i mean, if it were possible, it'd be cool. the inspiration actually came from the loader for The Big Bad Wolf @ BGW, it's loaders flip to put different trains in different sheds, even though i don't know how fast they work, i'm presuming they could go pretty fast if designed to do that. that, and the loaders are a prime example, because all they do is flip a curved section of track to put the train somewhere else.

[raptorrvnge4928]

I would think this would be possible if the switch were at a station, midcourse block breaks, or a place where the train is moving slow. It is feasible, as X-Flight uses this technology to allow the trains from both parallel stations to access the track. So it would work. Now as for the cookie cutter rollercoaster replacement parts idea, that may be a bit more difficult. Judging by the weight of the track, the amount of time it would take to install, the amount of time to test, etc, it may not be very cost efficient to do so, unless perhaps you were talking of a timeframe like between seasons.

[RCT2head]

I was thinking of a week designing/engineering/construction in an onsite lab/factory while it's still running, and then tested for the next week. if the part doesn't work, then it's rejected, and the original was put back in. it's kind of like a carnival setup with better pieces, and ability to change it drastically. the switch could take place while a train's still on the lift, sensors or a ride op could have the piece switch in a second, so it will be ready when the trains come, and then it would be stopped if there's a problem, or an entire lift hill could be engineered to shift on a track under it so it could connect with another track all together. it would take place as soon as sensors detect that the last car has rolled onto the lift, and then it starts shifting while the trains is running. of course, either the lift would have to be very slow, or very tall. i know i have crazy ideas, but it could happen if someone who can engineer these type of things looks at rough drawings i have made depicting the track pieces...too bad i don't have a scanner, and am bad at using paint.

[RCT2head]

i would like to know who exactly is a coaster designer/engineer on this forum, and i'd also like to know what academic and other requirements are needed to be one for places like B&M, Vekoma, Arrow, Mack, and others places. I've wanted to be one for my whole life, and would try really hard to become one. i would also consider to start my own company, except for the huge amounts of cash/insurance/permits required that i know about. but i'd be willing to do it, because i am young enough to gain all the requirements needed. i know from what i've heard that being a rc designer/engineer is a goal that is super-hard to reach, but i'm willing to reach it. if i can't do that, which would be like hell to me, i'd try to work somewhere where i could be doing something with a roller coaster (scenery/sound/lighting/special effects/working for a park somewhere that will hire me [that last 1's a last resort]) i know alot about the design process from what i've seen on tv, talked to the dude that does the 'X-treme Physics' @ BGW, and the many simulators i've worked with. it seems like i'm writing this for nothing, but it's my life's dream, and i'm bored right now because nobody is really active on these forums for me to discuss stuff with. i probably have one of the highest daily post ratings right now, but i don't know for sure, but that's was not the point. anyway, sorry for rambling on, i know anyone who's reading this is probably tired of having to answer similar questions, and i thank anyone who responds to this for their time! ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)

[Harpo]

I'm an electrical engineer who has worked in the auto and semiconductor industries. I've been trying for about 12 years now to get into the amusement industry. I've interviewed with Intamin USA and with Disney Imagineering, and have had phone conversations with several other companies. Overall, I've contacted more than 400 companies involved in entertainment/amusement park design. I'd say it's a reasonable estimate to indicate that the industry is not an easy one to get into!

There were a couple of things I kept hearing when talking to these companies. One: you've got to be a bit lucky with getting your resume to the right place at the right time. The positions are rare, but, if your resume happens to come across the desk just as an opening occurs, then you've got a chance. Two: At least 10 years of engineering experience is required. The companies generally don't seem all that interested in talking to anyone with less than 10 years of engineering work experience.

As for the track switching idea: For a static coaster, it would certainly be possible, although I question if it would be cost effective or sufficiently reliable. At a higher cost, higher reliability can be built in, but the cost would probably be prohibitive for most parks. I suspect that only the really big parks would be able to afford it, and I'm not sure if they'd see the value to it. It would probably be a better fit for a Disney-style park, where the different track sections could have a variance on a single theme.

As for physically replacing track pieces, I don't believe that would work too well. In addition to making the changes, the appropriate local authorities would have to come in and provide inspections. The regulations vary by state. As an example, however, Ohio requires at least 100 hours of operating time before the ride can be licensed.

From a marketing side, new rides tend to be a bigger draw than reworked rides, so it could be a tough sell to get the general public to buy into the idea. That's not to say it would be impossible, but it would be tough. If the reworking costs were low enough, with enough projected benefit, then a park might consider it, but I think you might find it a bit tricky to convince a park that there would be enough projected benefit.

[RCT2head]

thank you, i see what you mean, but couldn't a week of consant running have 100 hrs in it? as for marketing, call the ride someting totally different, and since it would be modified, it could be considered something totallly different. then the locals would be the only ones to know it's the same ride...as for 10 years engineering requirements, is that just for electrical, or is it for structural as well? i guess it'll be about time in several years to try to get a job in the industry....thanks, harpo!!!:)

[Harpo]

Walt Disney, Arrow, and Intamin all told me that they want all of their designers to have 10+ years of experience. I also received that information from a few other companies, but, off-hand, I don't recall who they were.

However, don't let that discourage you from trying. It's possible that some of the smaller companies may be willing to allow fewer years of experience. Also, circumstances are constantly changing. While these companies may be intent upon 10 years right now, they may be willing to take interns or new recruits at some point in the future. Because they don't deal with a high volume business, I wouldn't bank on it, but it's always possible. Remember, sometimes long shots pay off!

Most important, however: Make certain you choose a career that you find interesting and enjoyable so you'll have job satisfaction even if you can't get into the amusement design industry. My motto has always been: "Think optimisically, plan pessimistically, act realistically." In other words, hope for the best, be prepared for the worst, and follow the course (probably somewhere in between the best and worst) that currently makes the most sense.

Good luck!

Oh, by the way... yes, a week could have 100+ hours of constant running, if everything goes well, and if local regulations allow. In some areas, the parks cannot run their rides for more than about 12 hours per day, hence more than 8 days would be needed to hit 100+ hours. Also, during testing, measurements need to be taken, which will slow down the operations, and issues may come up that need to be addressed. And, of course, you need to have adequate staff there to keep running the ride. To be prepared for issues, a plan would probably anticipate around 8 to 10 hours of testing per day for park locations with nighttime ride restrictions.

[RCT2head]

thank you, harpo,
as i have said before, i plan on doing somrthing involving roller coasters, even if it only is designing scenery.
so iguess i can make it work, what r some good engineering schools to get into, and what requirements do they have?

[Squid2]

Regarding switching tracks.... there's a rumor circulating around that Revenge of the Mummy in Universal Studios Florida has multiple tracks that switch during ride operation. This isn't for a loading/unloading station, but so that people do NOT see the same scenes each ride. In other words, each ride should be unique. So, yes, a switching track idea could be used, but probably not in the way you imagine.

Squid2

[RCT2head]

well, i'm not an engineer, so i don't know exactly what would have to be done to create those tracks....r u an engineer/designer, Squid 2?

[Harpo]

Good engineering schools? There are a lot of them. I strongly recommend talking to faculty and students at some schools to help you decide what's most important for you.

When I was deciding, I applied to and was accepted at three schools: Michigan State University, University of Michigan, and Purdue. I really liked the looks of Purdue's program, but they only accepted 50 out-of-state students in that program, so they accepted me in the Science department. I didn't want to start out in science and risk whether or not I could change to engineering at a later date, so that scrubbed Purdue.

When talking to Michigan versus Michigan State, U of M had the better equipment at the time, but I felt MSU's professors were more interested in the students and teaching while U of M's were more interested in research. The teachers were more important to me than the equipment, so I chose MSU.

If you're looking into scenery development, MSU might be a good one to investigate. It's got one of the best agricultural engineering schools in the nation -- even adding it as a minor, it could be beneficial in scenery design. You might also want to look into schools with good drama programs, as they may have classes focusing on scenery design. (I can't really advise what schools those would be, although I would guess that southern California might have some good choices.)

I don't know the current requirements for any of these schools, but I know that Purdue, MSU, and U of M's engineering programs are all rather hard to get in. I would estimate that you should have at least a 3.2 GPA, and do well on the SAT, especially in the mathematics section. Depending on the number of applicants at that time, a 3.2 GPA could be rather light. When I was looking, I know U of M preferred at least a 3.5.

In other words -- study hard! :)

[raptorrvnge4928]

I just wanted to chime in on this topic a little bit about the topic of schools... Now note, I am a major in civil engineering, and I am pretty sure this isnt quite as popular as mechanical or electrical engineering, but I easily transferred into MSU with a 3.2 in my junior year. But this is likely due to the program of study. Wow, I never considered a 3.2 to be that horrible in the GPA land though....

But I am sure it also depends in your program of study, and your school of choice. I wqas told MSU college of engineering wouldnt even consider you if your GPA was under 3.0 though. So as Mr. Harpo said, study hard... and yes, math is extremely important.

[RCT2head]

thank you both, i already know my school of choice, except for my GPA is starting to go down. does anyone know what Virginia Tech requires as far as GPA? also, i really want to do ride design, but the scenery stuff is if i really can't. but thank you guys for helping me figure some stuff out.

[leonardofury]

I heard CalTech has a very good reputation? Being British I don't know that many american unis, I can advise you on British ones though if you can afford the £10,000 tutition fees! Well that's what UMIST charges foreign students anyway.

[Harpo]

I recommend you look at the FAQ page for Virginia Tech:

http://www.admiss.vt.edu/miscpages/faq.html#a4

It's a competitive admission policy, so, while the minimum is specified as 2.0, that's probably not good enough to get in. It looks like a B+ average (i.e. about a 3.2) or better is the range that is most likely to get accepted.