Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Ferrari Park in Abu Dhabi

After seeing the POV, and taking note that no passengers were on board, I come to the conclusion that it should actually cruise along at a faster pace with a full load of riders. You can see that it stopped basically halfway down the initial brake run, when it will probably make it nearly to the end.

I know the current accelerators all do the same thing without riders. Xcelerator just barely makes it over the top without riders, but it cruises over nicely with passengers. With passengers, it cruises through the brakes, but without it stops short.
 
There's loads of rides that a POV video does absolutely no justice to, and it's impossible to make any sort of meaningful comparison unless you actually ride the thing.
 
^Completely true. POV's only show one thing: what the camera sees. The camera can't display how the ride feels, or how forceful an element is in real life, it only shows what it saw.

UC said:
You can see that it stopped basically halfway down the initial brake run, when it will probably make it nearly to the end.

I know the current accelerators all do the same thing without riders. Xcelerator just barely makes it over the top without riders, but it cruises over nicely with passengers. With passengers, it cruises through the brakes, but without it stops short.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make sense.

Magnetic brakes operate on a very simple principle - the braking power increases as the force of the train hitting them increases.

A heavier train means there will simply be more braking power to counteract it.

The only real difference riders are going to make is post-hill - where the ride runs purely on gravity.
Click to expand...

It makes perfect sense. More weight on the train = more momentum and inertia. More momentum means the train is going to hit the brakes harder, and take longer to stop. Do you really think they would build a brake run twice as long as the train, just to have it stop halfway down the brake run? No, they would not, as that would not only be a waste of space, but also a waste of money.

You yourself said that the reason they use OTSR's now is not because the public will freak out if they didn't have OTSR's (and other various and valid reasons that you have chosen to put off as myth), but because of the braking force- they can use a stronger force to slow a train down because of OTSR's. Logic would say that less weight means that there's less inertia built up, and overall, it's easier to stop.

Take a cars chassis, with nothing on it but the wheels and axles so it can roll. Roll it down a slight decline, and try to stop it. It's not going to be much of a task to stop it. Now, put the rest of the car onto that chassis and then repeat the same test. Now how hard do you think it is going to be to stop?
 
Did you actually read what UC wrote? He said that the force applied by the brakes is proportional to the speed at which the train enters the brake run, so it should stop in about the same place. Most accelerators have brake runs that are much longer than they need to be. I'm assuming it's for safety incase one fails, and to provide more control options over the rides speed.
 
jokerman said:
Did you actually read what UC wrote? He said that the force applied by the brakes is proportional to the speed at which the train enters the brake run, so it should stop in about the same place. Most accelerators have brake runs that are much longer than they need to be. I'm assuming it's for safety incase one fails, and to provide more control options over the rides speed.
Click to expand...

Yes, I read what he wrote, but what he writes sometimes doesn't make sense.

In theory, as train weight increases, so will the force applied by the brakes. Not always the case. Just because theory says it, does NOT mean reality will agree with theory.

After viewing rides like Xcelerator and Pony Express during testing, I noticed how the trains stop short of the end of the brake run. Under a normal full rider capacity, the train cruises right on through the brakes.

In this POV you can see that the train flows right on through the brakes, and keeps its momentum up travelling through the section of track that levels off:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCvth7VZ ... re=related

Without riders, it stops short of the section of track that levels off, and slowly rolls down. Also, during testing, when the train rolled back, it stopped about 60ft. short of the station. With a full train during rollback, the train stopped with the back car in the station.

MY POINT IS that the train will carry more momentum with a full train of riders than it will without riders. Simple as that. So, while the POV looks slow, it should be a lot faster than it appears. There's POV's out there of empty accelerators just barely making it over the top, and ones full of riders going over the top with ease.
 
Nevermind, I'm arguing with an arrogant brick wall who can't see my point, so I'll just re-quote myself:

myself said:
MY POINT IS that the train will carry more momentum with a full train of riders than it will without riders. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

I never meant that the train will enter the brakes with a much higher speed. Granted with riders, the speed may vary by 1-2mph, depending on rider weight, weather conditions, and such and such.

What I am implying is that with a full load of riders the train will carry more momentum.
 
Yes, but you're assuming that it's one long brake, when in reality, it is a series of brakes. If one brake fails to slow the ride down sufficiently, then the next brake will apply a larger force than it would if the train was empty.
 
After reading through the posts on the previous page, and I discovered things for both sides that are valid, and other that is not...

Xpress is right, a fully loaded train will take longer to stop compared to an empty train.

Since more weight means more momentum that will have the train to hit the brakes at a faster speed. The increase in speed gives the train a lot more kinetic energy compared to the increase in braking force, the kinetic energy is proportional to the speed squared, while the braking force of a magnetic brake is directly proportional to the speed.
So even if the brake force double as the speed doubles, the energy of the train quadruples which in the end gives a longer braking distance which was exactly what Xpress was saying...

This however is wrong:
UC said:
A heavier train means there will simply be more braking power to counteract it.
Click to expand...
The braking force is only dependent of the speed the fin hit's the brakes (and of course magnetic field, air-gap etc. but they are normally constant).
 
UC said:
So, no, the added momentum really isn't going to make a difference. The brakes are designed to counteract that.
Click to expand...

Whatever is there isn't going to make a BIG difference, and would take scientific instruments (I.E. speedometer) to notice, so true statement.

Stupid trims. :evil:
 
If anyone wants to dwell deeper into the physics of PM brakes for coasters then take a look at this document I found while looking for information about the braking force: Click

Oh and about this coaster I have a feeling that the ride will be very different with some passengers in the cars, a lot faster over all...
But trims are still a bad :(
 
But passengers will cause the train to have more weight => kinetic energy => less reduction in speed on the trims, since the breaking force will be about the same it would mean that more speed is preserved.

Not to forget that it will keep it's speed a lot better through the ride.
 
The ride is still in its testing phase. For all we know, they could remove trims after initial passenger testing. Sometimes, the ONLY way to absolutely know for sure is to let the general public ride, and get an average out of them- computers can only do so much, and eventually, real life has to take over for us to know for sure. In I305's case, a giant section of trims were added to the lift, because the public was complaining of blacking out.

Also, I do believe there will be a higher speed with riders after the train has passed the trims, because of the greater amount of kinetic energy generated with more weight to the train.

I'm siding with loefet on this.
 
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MqLVNmpFCw[/youtube]

This ride looks like it does what its ment to keeping in mind its ment to act like an F1 car.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top