• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

2020: General Discussion

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Ethan said:
So they put in trim brakes to slow it down when the ride has people in it, but if it has less than a certain amount the ride risks stalling? Well how stupid is that. The manufacturer designed a ride that is too fast without trim brakes and risks being too slow with them
Click to expand...
Correct, hence the restriction to work around a serious design flaw.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
The 18 person rule wasn’t there from the start. I remember soon after it opened they were only loading half the train, maybe when they found it was running too fast. So they added the trims and added the rule.
 
spinba11 said:
The 18 person rule wasn't there from the start. I remember soon after it opened they were only loading half the train, maybe when they found it was running too fast. So they added the trims and added the rule.
Click to expand...
Oh so it's not an original design cock up?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
I believe the trims were an addition after the original opening or at least testing. Seem to remember that once operating they found it running too fast through one section - so yep there's the original design problem - so added trims to sort it out.

It appears the trims are not dynamic in any way, so are either on or off. On slows the train too much with low numbers of riders. Whilst off brings about the original problem, and presumably is now deemed unsafe for guests so can be used to allow smaller guest numbers - or just isn't an option to prevent a full train being sent with no trims active.
 
How can thirteen possibly go 'too fast'. It'd be nice actually if it hit a decent speed. That's what makes the ride a bit dull. So it runs at 42mph so what if the trims were off it'd hit 48? That'd be a bit better
 
If it's a structural issue, there'll be a bit of track somewhere, even if quite small, that can't take that bit of extra speed and in-turn force. So I'd assume the addition of the trims has then neutered what was the original plan for the speed and feeling of the ride everywhere else.

All in all, a bit of an embarrassment for Intamin. As they should have figured out their structural modelling by 2008-10 when it was in design.
 
The ride was originally pulling negative g's and hitting the brakes too hard, causing the ride to automatically shut down. So the trims were added later on to prevent this. John Wardley and co confirmed this when questioned about the late add-on of trims in 2010.

There was a story going around at the time that a dummy flew out of a train during testing and Intamin offered a different restraint (ratchet lock) however this would have cost in excess of £100,000, so trims were seen as a more viable option. That was never confirmed.
 
I was told at the time (and have no idea if it is true but seems more likely than any potential force issues as it's so tame with or without trims), that the issue was clearing the first block too soon, arriving before the drop track was back in place. As there is no braking prior to the second lift and the tyre drive lifts do not have variable speeds, if the train arrives too soon there's no track in front of it yet so it rightly shuts down on the second tyre lift awaiting the resetting of the drop mechanism. Once that kicks in crappy tyre lift him is not able to reliably accelerate the train from a standing start on the incline at any speed effectively meaning the first block hasn't been cleared so the main lift hill also stops and any reliable running falls apart.

It's a shame trims couldn't have been placed later in the circuit to give the system time to work out the level of trimming required. I guess if they were too far along though it's be too late to save enough time for the block clearance after the track reset.
 
Ethan said:
Wow that's quite high for a smaller park like Chessington. Towers must be around 10k then
Click to expand...
You’d think that but if Chessington was running at 5k a day they are only running at approx 30 percent capacity. So With that in mind towers would be operating at around 8-9k a day Maybe more.
 
With regard to Thirteen’s trims; I thought trims adjusted themselves dependant on the mass and speed of the train, to get the train to a certain desired speed? That’s what the trims on B&M rides like Mako do, anyway...
 
I think thirteens trims are either on or off, there's no subtlety to them.

RE: guest numbers, interesting to see that there's a clear ramping up of capacity planned. Meanwhile, Chessington seems to have already sold out some dates. For some reason they also seem to be allowing twice as many pass holders in on zoo days (1st-3rd) compared with full opening when capacity should be higher. Seems a bit odd.
 
John said:
I think thirteens trims are either on or off, there's no subtlety to them.

RE: guest numbers, interesting to see that there's a clear ramping up of capacity planned. Meanwhile, Chessington seems to have already sold out some dates. For some reason they also seem to be allowing twice as many pass holders in on zoo days (1st-3rd) compared with full opening when capacity should be higher. Seems a bit odd.
Click to expand...
I'm theorising that the reason passholder capacity is higher on zoo days isn't because capacity is higher but because they are prioritizing passholders to get tickets for zoo days

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
imanautie said:
Looking at Chessington passholder numbers seems they are operating with a total capacity of somewhere in the region of 5k guests.
Click to expand...

I don't think my eyesight is that dodgy... from the Accesso screenshot, it looks like capacity at Chessington is 500 per day, not 5k (ever such a slight difference). It's 1000 per day on the 3 zoo only days prior to the 4th July when they expect to reopen the theme park side.
 
Kraken27 said:
I don't think my eyesight is that dodgy... from the Accesso screenshot, it looks like capacity at Chessington is 500 per day, not 5k (ever such a slight difference). It's 1000 per day on the 3 zoo only days prior to the 4th July when they expect to reopen the theme park side.
Click to expand...
The capacity is per package, I guessed 5k per day based on the 500 Chessington passholder capacity and peak Alton capacity of 4500

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
I'd also suggest that there's too much prominence being placed on these figures... just 'cause they're buried within the code of the Accesso page, doesn't mean they are accurate figures reflecting the park's true capacities.
 
Islander said:
I'd also suggest that there's too much prominence being placed on these figures... just 'cause they're buried within the code of the Accesso page, doesn't mean they are accurate figures reflecting the park's true capacities.
Click to expand...
It's been adjusted from 30000

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk
 
Matt N said:
With regard to Thirteen’s trims; I thought trims adjusted themselves dependant on the mass and speed of the train, to get the train to a certain desired speed? That’s what the trims on B&M rides like Mako do, anyway...
Click to expand...

It's pretty much a case of some can, and some can't. For those that can't adapt, they'll just be set with a specific constant braking force. There'll be design and/or cost reasons as to why you would use one over the other.
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top