Lightning Rod: Launched RMC Coming to Dollywood!

[slosprint]

idk, to me it just seems like making a 4d coaster where the cars don't rotate.

slosprint wrote:

idk, to me it just seems like making a 4d coaster where the cars don't rotate.

I promise that you will find your desired laterals on Outlaw Run. I have been on 6 RMC's (not Wicked Cylclone), and I can tell you that a couple of them have features with laterals, but not all. I can also tell you that Outlaw Run feels a hell of a lot different than the steel RMCs (Insane pacing, laterals, very quick transitions). Don't judge them on their wooden coasters until you've ridden one - Trust me!

slosprint wrote:

idk, to me it just seems like making a 4d coaster where the cars don't rotate.

I found this non-rotating 4D coaster to be miles better than X2.

[slosprint]

This isnt going anywhere, but at no point did B&M claim wing coasters were meant to emulate the experience of a 4D coaster, whereas RMC claimed WC and others were supposed to provide the experience of a great wood coaster in nearly every interview. If they want to just make awesome rides, which I think they do, then they should stop pushing them as a kind of successor or replacement to a different kind of ride entirely and have thier designs stand on thier own merits, which I think they would be quite successful at. I'd like to also point out that it's not just in the area of wooden coasters where they are attempting to use gimmicks where they really aren't needed to push really cool designs which could stand out on thier own. I don't know how many of you saw them at last year's IAAPA, where they had a concept for a single-rail steel coaster. It essentially was just one big square beam with square rails sticking out the side, and was functionality indistinguishable from a normal steel track if you just replaced all the crossties with solid metal. If any engineer would like to illuminate me on the benefits of doing this rather than just saving several tons of metal and using crossties please do.

Because cross ties require significantly more effort to create, while one continuous square is very easy. Plus it doesn't really use much more steel than B&M track would. Then you end up with a track that needs less supports like the B&M thicker spines. Overall it'll save costs on materials and manufacturing, not any kind of gimmick just a different approach to designing.

slosprint wrote:

This isnt going anywhere, but at no point did B&M claim wing coasters were meant to emulate the experience of a 4D coaster, whereas RMC claimed WC and others were supposed to provide the experience of a great wood coaster in nearly every interview. If they want to just make awesome rides, which I think they do, then they should stop pushing them as a kind of successor or replacement to a different kind of ride entirely and have thier designs stand on thier own merits, which I think they would be quite successful at. I'd like to also point out that it's not just in the area of wooden coasters where they are attempting to use gimmicks where they really aren't needed to push really cool designs which could stand out on thier own. I don't know how many of you saw them at last year's IAAPA, where they had a concept for a single-rail steel coaster. It essentially was just one big square beam with square rails sticking out the side, and was functionality indistinguishable from a normal steel track if you just replaced all the crossties with solid metal. If any engineer would like to illuminate me on the benefits of doing this rather than just saving several tons of metal and using crossties please do.

This isn't going anywhere, because you haven't ridden enough of them to have a more well rounded opinion. Sorry, somebody had to say it. RMC I Box transformations aren't meant to emulate wooden coasters, they're meant to enhance them, bending steel in ways a standard wooden coaster hasn't done. While also offering a new tech that lowers costs and saves on long term maintenance. If your not a fan, your not a fan, but at least give credit where credit is due.

They are not meant to have the feel or presence of a wood coaster, but only in inspiration. Any "gimmicks" found on these rides are no different then the "gimmicks" found on other steel coasters. Somebody please show me an example of an RMC element that you couldn't also find on the typical B&M or Intamin. Their designs are not really innovative in terms of elements, they're the same ones that have been included on steel coasters forever, just bent a little more to the left or right to put a new spin on the forces you feel while going through them.

RMC is just a solid company making solid, fun rides. it's the enthusiast community that once again, over inflates everything and takes the fun out of it.

[mkingy]

MagnumFreak25 wrote:

Because cross ties require significantly more effort to create, while one continuous square is very easy. Plus it doesn't really use much more steel than B&M track would. Then you end up with a track that needs less supports like the B&M thicker spines. Overall it'll save costs on materials and manufacturing, not any kind of gimmick just a different approach to designing.

It's not one continuous fabricated square section though from the looks of things. It's several flat sections which are welded together.

[Paradox]

Nice to know I'm not the only one who thinks Trex track is useless and unnecessary, but for some reason when one criticizes RMC enthusiasts feel as if he's just committed blasphemy.

Well, I guess I probably won't be riding Lightning Rod next week . I'm sure the rest of the park will still be fun, but walking right past LR will be disappointing.

I wish Dollywood would at least make some sort of statement. The fact that they haven't given the slightest update about Lightning Rod for almost two months is pretty ridiculous.

[Innovtech]

We're on our way to Dollywood from the UK in June & I really hope it's open by then. It'll be my first RMC.

We're gonna be there on the 4th & we've only got that one day on park.

I'll be gutted if all I can do is look at it!

I think it's definitely time for an official update.

[Paradox]

Why do they need 2 months to test this?

They had a pretty serious setback when the primary element wasn't doing the trick for them. I mean we all have to walk by a closed RMC that was delayed for opening at some point in our lives. It's a rite of passage. I didn't enjoy mine, but I did get over it.

Let's just be thankful we don't maintain Indian testing standards here, ouchie.

[mkingy]

VF15 wrote:

I wish Dollywood would at least make some sort of statement. The fact that they haven't given the slightest update about Lightning Rod for almost two months is pretty ridiculous.

I think this is the greatest failure - even if its to fob people off with "undergoing extended testing - we still have no idea when it will be sorted" I personally think is better than nothing at all. PR might disagree with me though.

[Coasterkidmwm]

Paradox wrote:

Why do they need 2 months to test this?

"we determined that the third-party launch system would not be able to perform at the level required for proper operation"

Anyone seen them replacing fins or anything?

slosprint wrote:

whereas RMC claimed WC and others were supposed to provide the experience of a great wood coaster in nearly every interview.

Yes and parks are calling Larson Loops roller coasters now. Advertising will take absolutely anything it can get. You have to move on.

[Paradox]

Coasterkidmwm wrote:

Paradox wrote:

Why do they need 2 months to test this?

"we determined that the third-party launch system would not be able to perform at the level required for proper operation"

Anyone seen them replacing fins or anything?

It's not like the launch is new technology, I don't understand how they can have so much problems with LSM's which have been around for some time. I don't see how it could be different on a wooden coaster, especially when the track has a lot of steel on it anyways.

It kinda is. The only other ride I can think of with a TILTED launch is Hulk, and that uses tires.

My main question on the company doing the LSMs is "why?" Why would you choose a company that's never touched a launch system, and gamble that on a ride like this?? Unless Velocity Magnetics does the brakes for RMCs, that's the only reason I can think why they chose them.

[Paradox]

TylerE wrote:

It kinda is. The only other ride I can think of with a TILTED launch is Hulk, and that uses tires.

Maverick

[mkingy]

Wicked at lagoon too

California Screamin' also has a LIM lift hill. The issue isn't due to the inclined launch, it is a result of the motors being created by a company with no prior experience with LSMs and installing a product that can't meet required specifications. RMC went with Velocity Magnetics because of their relationship and because they claimed they could do it cheaper, but it obviously hasn't paid off. At this point, the best option for Dollywood is probably to just say something along the lines of "Due to extended delays in the testing and commissioning process, we currently have no idea when Lightning Rod will open and will make an announcement when we have more information," then just refrain from mentioning anything about the project that gives the impression of an opening date. Honestly, it could be weeks before ride is ready or it could be months, so although this seems to be the biggest must-ride of 2016 for enthusiasts at this point it may be wiser to refrain from planning a trip just in case it becomes a 2017 project.

Yeah. Sounds like this launch isn't delivering the desired forces (probably too much) that RMC and Dollywood are comfortable with.

[Coasterkidmwm]

I don't believe the stupid "the dippin dots guy said it's going 90mph instead of 78 and that's bad because wheels" rumor for a second. I bet it's something stupid like the software not cooperating with the launch system.

Even if it's going 79 mph instead of 78 that would be a problem. These rides are designed and built to run at exact specifications , not just in terms of forces on the riders, but also structural integrity. Which is why RMC tests with different wheel combos to get the exact ride they are contractually suppose to deliver. This is why parks love B&M so much. They nail this 99 percent of the time and they will not agree to build a ride unless they can nail it. I'd say RMC are learning a valuable lesson from this. Rookies...

I can't say for sure this is the issue, but it seems that way to me.

Coasterkidmwm wrote:

I don't believe the stupid "the dippin dots guy said it's going 90mph instead of 78 and that's bad because wheels" rumor for a second. I bet it's something stupid like the software not cooperating with the launch system.

I don't believe that rumor not just because it is incredibly ridiculous but also because it is physically impossible. Without going into heavy details, for the ride to max out at 90 MPH instead of the design speed of 73 MPH it would need to be going 55+ MPH at the top of the hill rather than ~20 MPH it's supposed to go. If the launch system sent the train that fast even once you can be sure the ride would be completely shut down and everything closely examined before any testing resumed. Besides, LSM systems require extremely precise control, and while there is a small tolerance range it is typically ~1 MPH on a modern system.

My guess is that there is a problem either in the ride programming or (more likely) with the motors themselves that is causing major reliability issues. Photos and videos show that the ride is able to successfully complete the circuit, but working once is not good enough. Even if the ride works properly 99 out of 100 tests it is still not ready for opening. Rides need hundreds of successful cycles before they can be certified, and one bad cycle can start that count over.