Return Project - Omega (Uploaded! Link pg 3)

First of all, this is not the project I've been secretly planning for the last 5 years (haha), but more like a way for me to get back into things. Mostly, that just means getting some experience with Newton 2.

So here it is, a small(ish) fast paced Intamin Mega Coaster. The layout was originally much more... unusual (Think 3 outbanked hills) but that got scrapped in favour of a more realistic design which I felt suited the ride better and gave me a chance to practice some proper shaping more.

So far this is only a first draft of the track, there's still a lot of issues to be worked out. If you see anything you think needs attention please don't hesitate point it out. Layout's not final either, so any suggestions for that are also very welcome.

As usual, I'm looking for a few people who wouldn't mind casting a critical eye over this thing for me. Even better if you've got some experience with Newton. So if you'd like to test, please do let me know.

Anyway here's some pics.

First Section:
Image Insert:

373.32 KB

Stengel Dive:
Image Insert:

356.39 KB

Final Helix:
Image Insert:

401.52 KB

Overall Layout:
Image Insert:

347.22 KB

[Coasterkidmwm]

I really don't like the 100ft in the air flattish track section.

Why are you using Newton? You are a master handbuilder. Use that to your advantage.

^Because he can work wonders with it once he figures it out knowing him!

Yeah im sorry but that raised double up thing has gotta go. And the crest of the first drop has too small a radius. Make it more like...



In fact make the whole ride like that. The best thing to do is take elements from ^THAT and stick it in ^^^THAT in your own cool order, with an original layout, and maybe just a couple cool elements taken from other intamin coasters or that you made up that seem reasonable. Which i think you could totaly do. My coaster sapphire was very successful and thats basically what i did. Its like a mix of multiple intamin coasters in my own layout. You can check it out if you want it might give you some inspiration!

I agree about the flat-ish section. Also the radius and shaping on the lift crest/drop is too tight and needs to be constant. Look at real mega-lites to get how the drop should look. And I think I have a decent knowledge of newton so I'll test.

Originally posted by Coasterkidmwm

I really don't like the 100ft in the air flattish track section.

Ok I probably should have mentioned that there is actually plenty of terrain around it. That first drop will be at ground level, as will the first hill of the double up. I'll post some screenshots of what I mean in a bit, but I didn't post the track with the terrain because I wanted to show the layout and a fair bit of it is underground.

Originally posted by Jcoasters

Why are you using Newton? You are a master handbuilder. Use that to your advantage.

What are you talking about? I've never handbuilt a ride in my life. I've designed with tools since the moment I started uploading NL tracks.

Kyle, your image is broken for me so I can't quite understand what you're referring to, but from what I can gather that's mostly how I came up with the layout.

Edit: Typo.

...*hands the dunce hat off to Jcoasters*...

I actually like the flat section, especially if it fits to the terrain. Fresh things are fun.

I disagree about the drop radius...Intamin has varied that radius in its history. For one of the most drastic examples, compare I305 to MF. Also compare the Megalites to Maverick.

Most all of them have one characteristic in similar, and that's the circular pullover up to the leadout. That section may be controlled by geometry instead of force on the real rides...no reason to fight with forces during that kind of acceleration. I think his radius is fine, honestly.

Only reason it might be too small is the radius the cable can follow on a convex curve, but even if that's the case, I doubt that is difficult to overcome.

Actually millie and timmy have about the same radius on the drop.





The truss plays tricks on ur eyes. It makes it look much smaller. The reason why intimidators IS slightly smaller is because of the angle of the drop. Generally the steeper the drop, the smaller the radius as far as intamins go. Which is why mavericks is so small. Its not an aweful radius but its just a bit too small.

Just did a few tests, and a slightly larger radius crest does look better.

Here's a couple shots of the terrain. This is just to get a general idea of the shape, it will look much better once its done properly with 3ds. I'm planning on having a stream running down from the first overbank to the lake.

Image Insert:

350.26 KB

Image Insert:

361.8 KB

Kyle, I have checked this picture over a hundred times referencing it and taking my own pics to match, this "drawing" Im assuming was taken from a blue print because it is pretty much exact.

I don't want to hijack his thread but MF's isn't as narrow as you're making it out to be. Plus my plethora of rides has shown me from the back seat how circular and wide it is. (thats what she said) At any rate, Dcs is right, Intamin has varied it so much there should be no "rules" for that.

Shenanigans. MF's radius is clearly larger at the apex. Intimidator starts to get steep earlier because of the smaller radius, hence why the rest of the drop looks so drawn out vertically, just like B&M drops with their smaller radii.

No resemblence.

I didn't say they looked the same. I said the steep portion is longer than something like Millennium Force. On MF, the pullover is so large that it doesn't seem to spend as much time at a relatively steep angle...say between 50 and 80. Yes, Intimidator 305's curve has a smaller relative radius as it approaches maximum slope, but in relation to MF the ideas are similar between Intimidator and Behemoth. I think you're just trying to be difficult now.

TL;DR - i305 has a longer leadout than MF but a smaller radius.

Yes i never said it wasnt. But i305s drop is really not that different from MFs. i dont get how it is in any way closer to a b&m than mf.

I feel as though it is all in the radius. I've never ridden I305, but I can assume there are more negative G's on the drop, correct?

Guys, guys, guys! Look, I think wing-over got the thought process going on here. Why the hell are you guys hijacking this thread and arguing with each other...about something like this? Shall we leave it to constructive criticism? XD

Quite personally, for never using newton 2 before in your life...I must say it looks pretty f*cking good! Not many people can get their drops round like that without some maneuvering so, props there. Maybe it COULD use a little more roundness, but you'll update us. And I'm sure you know people's thoughts lol.

i personally think we should all just trust wing over. In one way or another he will still impress us.

Originally posted by HZKoasters

I feel as though it is all in the radius. I've never ridden I305, but I can assume there are more negative G's on the drop, correct?

Yes noticably more. But i think that if mf had intimidators lift speed it would have rediculous airtime too.

I think my problem wasn't that my radius was too small, it was that the leadout wasn't long enough, meaning the small radius was maintained for too long making it look too tight. Here's what it looks like now:

Image Insert:

324.53 KB
I overlaid this screenshot with a photo of I305, and its pretty close, and given the differences in drop angle, lift speed, height etc. I think its acceptable. Its never going to match anything exactly because no real rides have the same height and drop angle, and as dcs and Real have said Intamin vary this element so much, so as long as I have the general shape down (Correct me if I still don't) it shouldn't be an issue.

SupraSix, thanks for volunteering. If you want to pm me your email I'll send it to you later tonight hopefully. Anyone else interested in testing?

I'd like to, but if I just tell you it's great (even if it really is) and don't critique it, it'd just seem like I just want a peek at your new ride. :/

But from everything I can gather from the pictures, it looks like it really takes shape with the terraforming.

Looks great to me. Glad your back and still alive haha

[i]Originally posted by Jcoasters

Why are you using Newton? You are a master handbuilder. Use that to your advantage.

What are you talking about? I've never handbuilt a ride in my life. I've designed with tools since the moment I started uploading NL tracks.

Kyle, your image is broken for me so I can't quite understand what you're referring to, but from what I can gather that's mostly how I came up with the layout.

Edit: Typo.

Lol. I forgot to tell you, Jcoasters is the site idiot. Ignore his comments, I'm surprised he didn't say the shaping was bad (not that it is). But as for the coaster...Please go back to HSAK.

After a bit of testing the trackwork's been redone and the layout of the second half completely changed. Most notably a second overbank after the stengel dive which drops into a 360 degree helix, which is much more fun than the long old boring 540 helix. (At least I think so)

New overbank sequence:
Image Insert:

350.93 KB

New layout:
Image Insert:

328.96 KB

Still would like to get feedback from some more testers, any takers?