Retard Coaster Designers

Ok, ive seen some bad coasters, but just take a look at these pics.

http://www.rcdb.com/254.htm?p=2327
^What the hell is going on with the track after the loop?

http://www.rcdb.com/254.htm?p=1466
http://www.rcdb.com/254.htm?p=7794
^And how retarded are those loop supports?

Who was so stupid to design something that bad?

Dude, that first loop looks EPIC!

[Brtnboarder495]

"Retard" is the wrong word.

They aren't exactly ideal, but they obviously get the job done. They aren't exactly a reputable designer.

Im guessing the loops were origionally bigger and were scaled down to intensify the ride.

To be honest, the track after the loop isn't what I'm worried about in that first pic. It's the track before the loop. It looks like something a beginner in NL would design. Second, I think the loops are supports are the way they are because in early testing, the train made it through a loop that went all the way to the top of that structure, but eventually something happened to cause that to change, so they had to lower the loop height.

OD Hopkins actually makes some of the best flumes and rapids rides, coasters just aren't really their thing.

Remember that when it comes down to it, a roller coaster is really just supposed to move people along a train track in a way that will be exciting for them. Shaping and supporting doesn't have to be as exact as we like to think it does when we're talking about NL. As long as it's structurally stable and economically makes sense, parks and designers will build what they can within the limits they're given.

http://www.rcdb.com/3231.htm?p=15714
http://www.rcdb.com/468.htm?p=4846
http://www.rcdb.com/3609.htm?p=18430

Would these designers be considered retarded too?

[AyTrane]

The ride was designed to fit over and around existing rides. The long straight track before the loop gets the train to a point to where the track can turn and go over the water ride. The odd section after the loop allows the train to hop up and over the station for the water ride, and then drop below it's lift (The bump midway through the climb creates some major air). The awkward looking loop is due to the loop being scaled down after initial testing (unlike Togo who allows the train to barely travel through the course).

I'm not a big Hopkins fan, but like someone said, they get the job done.

http://www.rcdb.com/2906.htm?p=17944

^ That's idiotic design. I think the Hopkins ride looks rather funky rather than stupid.

^ I saw that picture yesterday, I was like, Lats'R'Us?

[hyyyper]

^lol,

btw, the chinese copy really everything:
http://www.rcdb.com/m/2906.htm?p=17939
http://www.rcdb.com/m/1565.htm?p=4519

^[lol] that's so identical that it seems illegal.

[AyTrane]

I bet the stress on the chassis of that hang-and-bang is pretty bad.

Lets just say.... points for originality

Originally posted by hyyyper

^lol,

btw, the chinese copy really everything:
http://www.rcdb.com/m/2906.htm?p=17939
http://www.rcdb.com/m/1565.htm?p=4519

They actually look very different from each other. I don't know abotu you but there is only like a few things those two buildings have in common.

[Coasterkidmwm]

In half of cases the worse a ride is designed the more fun it is.

Magnum XL200. The triangle hills are terribly shaped, but they're GREAT for that style of airtime.

[AyTrane]

Arrow used to design coasters to save their customers as much money as possible. It takes time, money, and steel to make a curved section. Hence why Magnum has a lot of straight sections of track, to reduce costs. This benefited the ride for airtime sake. Same reason all of Arrow's transitions are abrupt, less bent steel...cheaper the cost.

Now days parks have opted to spend more to get a smoother ride, which in turn has made older rides seem rougher by comparison. Schwarzkopf/Stengel used to do this back in the day as well, take for instance the Speed Racer models, they had very straight hills, and minimal transitions. The turns had no lead ins/outs. The train would enter a straight section of track, and immediately meet up with a 20m radius curve. Had these rides had over the shoulder restraints, you would notice it more (eg: Revolution at SFMM).

Voyage and Hades both have outward banked curves, and in my opinion are a little uncomfortable, but you could also say that it adds an element of excitement to the ride. Great Bear had to have a special support structure built to make sure the water channel was clear of footings (regulations). Mystery Mine...yeah, it's just strange.


I don't know if you could consider any of the situations "Bad Design." More than likely each situation was an oversight, or an unknown variable. A ride has to get from point a to b, and sometimes the path between can't be as fluent as we would like. Every problem has a solution, but not every one is the best fit.

From what I heard one time, mystery mine's rolls were like that to reduce lats.

[AyTrane]

You can't really reduce lateral G's without adding G's somewhere else. If the roll is slower, then you will experience more vertical forces, a quicker roll will produce more lateral forces. The bottom line is, a barrel roll is an abnormal element to begin with, so not much can be done to make it less forceful. That being said, what the designer did with the roll is put it on an incline, which will reduce the vertical G's on a slow roll due to momentum being in the upward direction. This does not explain the shape of it however...

Originally posted by Coasterkidmwm

In half of cases the worse a ride is designed the more fun it is.

Aye.

Originally posted by GerstlCrazy

Originally posted by Coasterkidmwm

In half of cases the worse a ride is designed the more fun it is.

Aye.

Double Aye

It should also be mentioned that Arrow used manually controlled benders and everything was cut/welded by hand, there were no CNC machines back then (or at least not ones for fabricating stuff that big). They were limited by what was available at the time.

[rcmaniac25]

None of the mentioned coasters really look "bad" so to say. Could they be done differently? Yes. On a side note I feel that even if Arrow's coasters were not the smoothest I think they were one of the most innovative.

Am I the only one who thinks those loop supports on Texas Tornado look awesome?

[AyTrane]

Yes, they are very Schwarzkopf, but boxed I-Beam.