Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

CWOA | Mandrill Mayhem (World of Jumanji) | B&M Wing Coaster | 2023

Ah, my mistake for not spotting the drive wheels on the second piece of track at the back.

@Gazza and @Jared are correct. :)
 
CrashCoaster said:
Well I guess that guarantees a backwards launch out of the station unless the trains actually go backwards through the circuit first.
Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance, but why does this guarantee a backwards launch out the station? I don't really pay attention to these finer details so am confused what gives it away.
 
JoshC. said:
Forgive my ignorance, but why does this guarantee a backwards launch out the station? I don't really pay attention to these finer details so am confused what gives it away.
Click to expand...
Because there is literally no launch track in front of the station, just that turn.
 
45mph is a good speed for a coaster of this size. With what looks like some extreme banking and tight turns, it could pull some nice forces for a family/thrill coaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JMW
I think they could seriously increase the throughput on shuttle coasters if they just connected the track at either ends. that way the train could continue forward to the station and you could have multiple on the circuit at once
 
cocoa said:
I think they could seriously increase the throughput on shuttle coasters if they just connected the track at either ends. that way the train could continue forward to the station and you could have multiple on the circuit at once
Click to expand...
Then wouldn't that just a normal full circuit roller coaster??

I don't know if I'm misunderstanding your point but this post has baffled me cause it completely defeats the purpose of a shuttle coaster.
 
Last edited:
cocoa said:
I think they could seriously increase the throughput on shuttle coasters if they just connected the track at either ends. that way the train could continue forward to the station and you could have multiple on the circuit at once
Click to expand...
That's genius... If they extended the layout a little, added a few block brakes in, they could have even more trains.

Why has nobody ever thought of this before?
 
Switchback at ZTD is a full circuit, even has a one way lift hill. Uses a little switch track to great affect. I think gerst have done a steel coaster shuttle full circuit with lift hill somewhere.
 
emoo said:
Switchback at ZTD is a full circuit, even has a one way lift hill. Uses a little switch track to great affect. I think gerst have done a steel coaster shuttle full circuit with lift hill somewhere.
Click to expand...
Mystique at Walibi Rhône-Alpes and next year Palindrome at Cotaland.

I am still intrigued by John Wardley's words: he said that he was impressed by how they could maximize capacity on this coaster with a shuttle layout. Maybe we read too much into his words but I can't think of a way to fit a second train.
 
oriolat2 said:
Mystique at Walibi Rhône-Alpes and next year Palindrome at Cotaland.

I am still intrigued by John Wardley's words: he said that he was impressed by how they could maximize capacity on this coaster with a shuttle layout. Maybe we read too much into his words but I can't think of a way to fit a second train.
Click to expand...
The quoted throughput, 720 rph, adds up perfectly to one train, with 6 rows, every 2 minutes. 1 minute ride time, 1 minute load time.

Sadly, I don’t ‘think’ there is any hidden secret here. :(

Edit: The really sad thing is that if they had gone for 7 rows, as with most B&M coasters, that would have been a much more respectable 840 rph… 8 rows 960 rph… :(
 
Last edited:
Nicky Borrill said:
The quoted throughput, 720 rph, adds up perfectly to one train, with 6 rows, every 2 minutes. 1 minute ride time, 1 minute load time.

Sadly, I don’t ‘think’ there is any hidden secret here. :(

Edit: The really sad thing is that if they had gone for 7 rows, as with most B&M coasters, that would have been a much more respectable 840 rph… 8 rows 960 rph… :(
Click to expand...
It’s seemingly touch and go as to whether the ride has 6 or 7 rows, so we could yet be in luck. The planning application says 6, but both the renderings and people in the know suggest it will be 7…
 
Matt N said:
It’s seemingly touch and go as to whether the ride has 6 or 7 rows, so we could yet be in luck. The planning application says 6, but both the renderings and people in the know suggest it will be 7…
Click to expand...
But the stated throughput, and associated calculations, also support 6 rows. :)

If you look at the left arrow on those plans, it’s a different length.
 
The throughput hasn’t been stated in the plans… That’s all enthusiast speculation at this point. From what I’m hearing it’s closer to 1200pph. How true that is it to be confirmed of course.
 
Jared said:
The throughput hasn’t been stated in the plans… That’s all enthusiast speculation at this point. From what I’m hearing it’s closer to 1200pph. How true that is it to be confirmed of course.
Click to expand...
Interesting… I must have been mistaken then. Thought I’d read that it was stated in one of the consultations / press conferences / interviews. :/

Where on earth did I get the 720 figure from then? Because it’s only here that I’ve seen any information on this addition. 🙈😂🤷🏻‍♂️
 
If I’m remembering correctly, the 720pph figure was extrapolated from the Environmental Impact Assessment (which talked about noise), which described 6 row trains (with each row seating 4 people… I definitely seem to remember 24 being mentioned in there somewhere), a ride time of 1 minute and a load/unload time of 1 minute.

Unless there’s a second train lurking somewhere or the trains seat more than 24 riders, it appears as though we’re looking at a 24 rider train every 2 minutes, which would equate to 30 trains per hour or 720 riders per hour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top