Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

PortAventura | Ferrari Land | New Area

Martyn B said:
^ Remember how this has a LIM launch.... ;)

Although LSM would have probably been better.
Click to expand...

I'll just leave this quote of an older post here:
oriolat2 said:
thumb_8f0e93a8-70af-42ce-aea1-655fdef4dfe1.jpg

TA-DAH! Not that we weren't expecting it though lol
Click to expand...
 
I don't really know what the difference is I'm afraid.... I know the Rock 'n' Rollercoaster's use LSM, but they also have a catch car that attaches itself to the train, similar to accelerators. Yet the Intamin half Pipes use LIM, and they feel very weak in comparison to the LSM on RnRC. But RCDB lists LIM and LSM as practically the same tech just with a different name.

Oh, and there's some more photos over at Towers Street that shows the track all wobbly again from different angles....
 
Martyn B said:
I don't really know what the difference is I'm afraid.... I know the Rock 'n' Rollercoaster's use LSM, but they also have a catch car that attaches itself to the train, similar to accelerators. Yet the Intamin half Pipes use LIM, and they feel very weak in comparison to the LSM on RnRC. But RCDB lists LIM and LSM as practically the same tech just with a different name.
Click to expand...
To quote what I wrote when this was asked a while back: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36578
Hixee said:
OK, I'm going to elaborate slightly as I think the real difference has been missed.

LIM stands for Linear Induction Motor. The name is already giving an indication as to the way these work. Basically you have a series of electromagnet plates placed along the track, attached to an AC current source. As the magnetic field is induced in these plates they generate an opposing magnetic field in the fins attached to the train (via eddy currents - basically the alternating magnetic field causes a current to be generated in the plate on the train, which then itself creates a magnetic field) and Lenz's Law states that opposing magnetic forces will repel each other - thus pushing the train along. Basically you control the speed of the train down the track by alternating how fast you change the frequency of the AC current.

LSM stands for Linear Synchronous Motor. This means that the fin attached to the train is a permanent magnet, and so is affected by the generated magnet field directly. All you have to do it charge one of the electromagnet plates behind the train to be the same as the back end of the fin (the front end is charged the opposite - like all dipole magnets). This then pushes the train along. In reality, they also charge the electromagnet plates in front of the train to simultaneously pull and push the train along. All you have to do is keep the pulse just ahead/behind the train all the way down the track.

So, what's the practical difference?

LIMs are simpler (that meaning the hardware to increase the frequency of an AC current isn't that complicated).
LSMs are more complicated (you have to have a clever control system to monitor the exact position of the train to ensure that the magnetic field is in the right place).

BUT

LIMs are generating currents inside the fins on the train, which causes heat to build up.
LSMs are capable of braking the train on the way back without any power. As the permanent magnet fins pass the plates in the launch track, they induce currents in the plates and (with eddy currents again) this generates an opposing magnetic force which slows the train down. You can't do this with LIMs because without any current flowing in the plates, it would just be two sets of metal plates passing each other. LSMs work in braking just like normal magnetic brakes on a coaster do. It's worth nothing that this effect is a fuction of several things; magnetic flux, distance between plates, etc, but crucially - speed. This is why you can't ever stop a train directly using static magnets. The train can slow down greatly, but you'll always notice some sort of friction device to actually bring the train to a stop*.

FINALLY on the topic of power consumption, I don't know this for sure but this is my educated guess. LIMs are activating the magnets down the whole launch track at the same time, which takes a lot of power. LSMs are only generating magnetic fields in the vicinity of the trains, and so don't require as much power (I don't imagine the more complicated control system uses up more than the difference), so that might be another factor which means LIMs are becoming less popular these days when compared to LSMs.

I think that just about covers it, I might have missed something, or messed up a detail or two, but that's about right.

*The topic talking about the Inverted Impulse coasters seems to suggest that they just run the LIMs in reverse for a very short amount of time to bring the train to a halt - but I've no confirmation of that just yet.
Click to expand...
I would definitely be inclined to say that LIMs are the cheaper and less refined solution, compared to LSMs. Especially as complex control technology is becoming more affordable.

I would wager that as the technology moves on we'll see stronger and stronger LSM launches, but I'm not really an expert in that sort of technology, so would need to do a bit more digging to understand how things might go in the future.

Martyn B said:
Oh, and there's some more photos over at Towers Street that shows the track all wobbly again from different angles....
Click to expand...
Yeah, that wasn't an effect of **** JPEG compression, it was an effect of **** manufacturing/installation. :lol:
 
Could they use more than one set of magnets on the train, and more than one in the stators(?) to try and increase the power they get from them?
 
Dar said:
Could they use more than one set of magnets on the train, and more than one in the stators(?) to try and increase the power they get from them?
Click to expand...
They could, but I don't think they'd really do anything.

If you had them in series or parallel and in phase with the first set then you'd need two high-amp circuits connected together and both running at the same time. To my mind, your total amperage is going to be the same, at which point you might as well just run one circuit at double the amperage and save yourself more complex switching gear.

If they were in series or parallel and out of phase, then you'd just end up with them fighting each other. The fins/magnets aren't able to pick which magnetic field they respond to.

I would be inclined to say that with technological increases in electronic components (capacitors - meaning they don't need to pull full load from the grid on launch, transformers - meaning they can play around with the amps/volts, switchgear and controls - meaning they can safety distribute the power, etc) would just allow them to increase the power of the launches by just increasing the power supply.
 
PA has unofficially released possible gate pricing options for the new park through a recent online survey:

- 1-day ticket FerrariLand: 35-40 €
- 1-day ticket PortAventura: 45 €
- 1-day park-hopper PA/FL: 60 €
- 2-day park-hopper PA/FL (consecutive days): 65 €

On-site hotels won't have unlimited entry to FerrariLand, but guests staying in them will have the option to get in for 35 €.

As I see it, PA is going to experiment having both parks as different gates and if that concept fails, they will just join FL as a an extension of Mediterranea... I can't see FerrariLand having a big success on its own, just like Walt Disney Studios didn't, and when WDS opened back in 2002 it was a park with a richer, much more rounded line-up of attractions than FerrariLand as of now...

I feel like this rushed gate is a blatant attempt from PA to bump their 1-day gate price, stepping their game to the Disney league (although PA is years away in terms of service and operations).

In fact, the last option of the survey suggests the option of FL joining the park as the 7th themed area:

- 1-day PA (FL as an integrated area): 60 €
- 2-day PA (FL as in integrated area): 74 €
- 3-day hopper PA and water park: 94 €

f1e2336f0b8fbc9eab3fc0d2d5c94b52o.png


bb19ea958397c950afcd5a6f070f8ed0o.png


b7eaad88362aa919a8cd96381cac182co.png


CAPTE.org
 
40€ for that pile of crap? I can see this having ZERO success. Apart from some curious regular visitors and cred whores, I highly doubt there is anyone who'd opt to pay 20€ more (or even less 40€ just for a visit to FL) to go and visit it, while there's a park with more than enough to do just next door.


PS: Does anybody know how the PA crowds are in late April?
 
If its true that Ferrari Land won't be included with the hotels I'm washing my hands with PA, beautiful park but terriblely ran!

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
oriolat2 said:
As I see it, PA is going to experiment having both parks as different gates and if that concept fails, they will just join FL as a an extension of Mediterranea... I can't see FerrariLand having a big success on its own, just like Walt Disney Studios didn't, and when WDS opened back in 2002 it was a park with a richer, much more rounded line-up of attractions than FerrariLand as of now...

I feel like this rushed gate is a blatant attempt from PA to bump their 1-day gate price, stepping their game to the Disney league (although PA is years away in terms of service and operations).

In fact, the last option of the survey suggests the option of FL joining the park as the 7th themed area:
Click to expand...

Remember that we don't know who is building this park. While it could be PortAventura it could also be an outside investor who is building it with just a deal to operate it in cooperation with the PortAventura and that could be the reason for the separate tickets.

TilenB said:
40€ for that pile of crap? I can see this having ZERO success. Apart from some curious regular visitors and cred whores, I highly doubt there is anyone who'd opt to pay 20€ more (or even less 40€ just for a visit to FL) to go and visit it, while there's a park with more than enough to do just next door.
Click to expand...

Yes, because the tallest coaster on the continent surely won't have any effect whatsoever on the WTP of the general public...
 
^_koppen, I know who is bulding the park. It is InvestIndustrial, an Italian venture capital company with some (bad) experience running parks, which is currently owning and operating PortAventuraWorld (the resort; hotels and parks). They invested 100 million Euros and partnershipped with Ferrari (Italian, any surprise here?) to use their brand for the new park.

Even with the big marquee attraction, it's such a niche park that only Ferrari fans would pay 40 € to get into it exclusively. As for the rest, the 60-euro deal is a no brainer. That's why I think that FerrariLand won't last as a separate gate for too long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top