Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Thirteen, Intamin ''psychoaster'' - Alton Towers 2010

Status
Not open for further replies.
UC said:
Blaze said:
There are two pieces of track perfectly aligned with each other. as the train reaches the end of the first piece, a catch car attaches to the train and drags it across the gap to join the end piece.
Click to expand...

I haven't been following, and I don't especially care about this project, but - are you f*cking kidding me?

Do you think before you post? Or do you just have no concept of safety in design at all?

There is so much wrong with that statement that I wouldn't even know where to begin. I don't care to waste everyone else's (and my own) time on the subject, but if you really want to know what the hell is so wrong with your statement, please, email me.
Click to expand...

It has been patented. What I said is exactly what the patent is. Something connected to the track connects to the train and brings it across the gap. Retractable bumpers and brakes make sure it will not over-shoot, then wheels move it forwards, all at the same speed so it appears the train has floated across. Simple.

Anyway, In John Wardley's podcast, he confirms what Alton said in their brochure, that it will open on March 20th and says Merlin want it ready in January.
 
Any proof for this Blaze, because i highly doubt that this isn't absolute bull ****.

And don't argue with UC, you will not win.
 
OMG DAS IZ SICK INIT. WE'Z GONNA AVE OURSELVZ A FLOATIN' COASTARR. ACTUAL AWESOME!!! IT'S GONNA BE LIKE DA MAGNIT TRAINZ IN JAPAN INIT?!
 
Can UC remain here please? I was rather happy to see him quoted and want more!

You are so annoying Blaze, everything you post is repetition of what others have said or stupidity... Why is there going to be a catch car? Why can it not be tyre driven track? Which is what's used on most rides with slow ride portions (RotM)... How do you know it will be this patent as the inside bit has no details at this time outside of the park? Can you prove that the second switchback will be hidden?

You seem to claim a lot of things without actually backing them up properly... So gives us actual evidence on these things or just go away...
 
Nemesis Inferno said:
Can UC remain here please? I was rather happy to see him quoted and want more!

You are so annoying Blaze, everything you post is repetition of what others have said or stupidity... Why is there going to be a catch car? Why can it not be tyre driven track? Which is what's used on most rides with slow ride portions (RotM)... How do you know it will be this patent as the inside bit has no details at this time outside of the park? Can you prove that the second switchback will be hidden?

You seem to claim a lot of things without actually backing them up properly... So gives us actual evidence on these things or just go away...
Click to expand...

Can we have a 'Like' button?
 
I'm usually first to have a go at Blaze, but this time he has at least given evidence. It may be a strange idea, but he does at least have something to back it up. Still wasn't worth posting though.
 
What evidence is there that Alton have this so called patent though?

That link has nothing to do with Intamin or Alton, so how does it add on to the whole current topic?
 
Nemesis Inferno said:
What evidence is there that Alton have this so called patent though?

That link has nothing to do with Intamin or Alton, so how does it add on to the whole current topic?
Click to expand...

Just like the past 20 odd pages :)
 
Most of this topic is speculation though. How much evidence has there been of most of the things we've talking about in this topic? Not much really.
 
Few things. First, I did not suggest it will hapen. I said at the time it almost certainly will not. Second, if it did happen, how the hell would wheels take it across an empty space? Third, the helix is in a deep trench and the queue goes along such path as to hide the switch. I have posted images of the queue enough times so don't say I have no evidence.

Half the suggestions have even less to do with anything, mine had atleast proof it existed and was posible. Unlike most people, I have not spouted daft suggestions, I have always used plans to make my ideas, and I have rarely speculated, just stated what the plans seem to say. Yet this is worse than some of the daft suggestions that have been tossed around. My one bit of speculation is hammered into the ground even though I have now prooven twice that it is possible. I didn't even say it's what will happen, just an idea, I even said it was unlikely. What is the point, honestly? This is a topic about a ride being built but every time I say what will clearly or probably happen, or even just throw an idea into the mix, it s treated like a crime. Is there a need for cockendery like that?
 
^When did I say about an empty space? Say for example the track was elevator controlled so began in the top position, in order to control the train's approach and stopping procedure onto it, tyres would be located onto the drop track, not only would this help get the train into the right position, but after the drop or whatever, the tyres could then push the train into the rest of the section, done...

As I said, on your link with this switchtrack catchcar thingy I didn't see ANY INTAMIN PRODUCTS!!!

I saw Mauer, and some random Japanese people, but nothing Intamin related, surely if it WAS an Intamin ride as everyone says, then this 'patent' would be on there under Intamin? Not another company? Hence your link makes no sense...

How do the plans seem to say anything about the inside bit? You cannot do any but speculate about the internal aspects of this attraction, so take that sentence out...

It may be true that your suggestions are not as daft as say people who suggested B&Ms for Chessie, but why use a catchcar? Hell your idea involves a gap between tracks? How big is this gap, let's say that to a degree all coasters involve a form of switchtrack (i.e. transfers), and because these tracks need to be moved, they have a tiny tiny miniscule gap between itself and the other tracks it will connect to...

I'm just confused as to how you've come up with an idea involving a gap between tracks and catchcars... If they are perfectly aligned, then they have either a negligeable gap or are welded together, as I am assuming you mean for special track, I would guess that the gap would not be massive as your comment suggested...

Seriously, if you didn't post so much crap in this topic maybe people would be more likely to agree and believe you, instead most of your posts are repetitions of previously said things by other people, and then you also bring in some crap about patents now... You just get on everyone's nerves and you fail to see this...

And what the hell does cockendery mean? How about using proper words and terms so your arguements can become more credible... :roll:
 
NI, I was talking about how a train could get across the gap if there was one. It was never a full idea but a suggestion, and as I said first time, the gap would have to be small. I saw it after TT had the idea, thought maybe it could happen and posted it here after looking at the page.
Cockendery is the act of being a cock end. Thought that was clear enough, or do you want pages of evidence you will just complain about anyway?

UC, I read the patent, but not all of it. There are not many things worse in my mind as reading through tons of badly translated/poorly worded text to get every last detail. I saw the idea, looked through to get the rough idea and shared it. Clearly I did not read it thoroughly enough, but was it really neccessary for a two hour long lecture about every way I was wrong. Hell I didn't even seriously suggest that there would be an effect like this.
 
Blaze said:
NI, I was talking about how a train could get across the gap if there was one. It was never a full idea but a suggestion, and as I said first time, the gap would have to be small. I saw it after TT had the idea, thought maybe it could happen and posted it here after looking at the page.
Cockendery is the act of being a cock end. Thought that was clear enough, or do you want pages of evidence you will just complain about anyway?
Click to expand...

So I'm a cock end was disagreeing with your ideas? Wow, please post more just so I can now target you... Please do... Because if you're resorting to insults then I know that you are failing at your arguements... Plus you started the whole thing...

Probably a lot of people see my posts as complaints, but the thing is a lot of people don't think very LOGICALLY about things, and refuse to imagine other factors apart from 'what they want'... Reading UC's post and focusing on the computers and stuff, this is where your idea fails...

Looking at the patent UC linked to, it's only a year old, and look how long it takes certain world first's to come to fruition, indeed Air, the original idea, before Oblivion, so how could something like that come in so quickly?

You're the one performing your term of 'cockendery', of trying to back up silly ideas with things that just confuse us further and hence laugh at your failures... When did you link to the original idea from TT? What page? What time?

Seriously, just go away like many other's say... Especially as UC's now found it here, which leads to this...

Blaze said:
UC, I read the patent, but not all of it. There are not many things worse in my mind as reading through tons of badly translated/poorly worded text to get every last detail. I saw the idea, looked through to get the rough idea and shared it. Clearly I did not read it thoroughly enough, but was it really neccessary for a two hour long lecture about every way I was wrong. Hell I didn't even seriously suggest that there would be an effect like this.
Click to expand...

Did it really take you 2 hours to read his post? You're from Liverpool right?

Also, you just shot yourself in the foot... Why did you stop reading it all? Seriously, research before arguements is important and generally researching behind new ideas (i.e. general finance, planning permissions, etc) are important when we discuss such things...



Critical Thinking is about the only subject I seem to have taken stuff from AS Level :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top