• 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.

Thorpe Park: General Discussion

Why are people hating on Taziker?

I don’t see how getting a British company who employ local people and thus help our economy in this down turn is a cheap option.

They’ve proven themselves with their work on the Big One and if you watch any of the videos where they show the whole process of them scanning and re manufacturing sections you can see they’re not doing it ‘on the cheap’. They even fix previous errors in the existing track as the track wasn’t designed using the technology we have now.
 
havaska said:
Why are people hating on Taziker?

I don’t see how getting a British company who employ local people and thus help our economy in this down turn is a cheap option.
Click to expand...

I think any “hate” is just for the fact that The Big One doesn’t seem particularly smooth after its shiny new Taziker retrack.
 
Shaggy_Dog_ said:
I think any “hate” is just for the fact that The Big One doesn’t seem particularly smooth after its shiny new Taziker retrack.
Click to expand...
The trains are a real problem that honestly are more rougher that Smiler's trains and a new set would actually go a long way.

If say Taziker did a retrack of Vampire then I have no doubt you'd see a good change there.
 
QTXAdsy said:
The trains are a real problem that honestly are more rougher that Smiler's trains and a new set would actually go a long way.

If say Taziker did a retrack of Vampire then I have no doubt you'd see a good change there.
Click to expand...
I find Vampire's trains rough so I'm not sure if a Taziker retrack would make much of a difference on that either.
 
Tbh, it was an old method of track building when it was new, and very little can change that now, some new trains that would be able to ride lower to the track would enhance and smoothen the whole ride…. The trains are large bulky and clunky and look there age
 
Surely every new piece of track is smooth, no matter who it's made by. It's a straight piece of steel.

I'd have thought track replacement is needed only for obvious dents and general wear and tear over time.

Coasters are rough because of the wheels and trains, no?
 
RicketyCricket said:
Surely every new piece of track is smooth, no matter who it's made by. It's a straight piece of steel.

I'd have thought track replacement is needed only for obvious dents and general wear and tear over time.

Coasters are rough because of the wheels and trains, no?
Click to expand...

Straight piece of steel? Coasters would be pretty boring if they were just straight pieces of steel. Bending of the rails to an exact specification is quite difficult to do even being out slightly can have a profound impact on how smooth a ride is.

Different designs of track have different levels of smoothness. One of the reasons why B&Ms are so smooth is because their box section track is made up of triangles, these triangles make it relatively easy to get extremely precise track geometry. Industry leading precision actually and a B&M patented design. It goes a long way into making a coaster smooth.

You are not going to get dents any dents to track really. Most replacements are deemed necessary due to microscopic fatigue cracks in the track, found during ultra scans and non destructive testing.

Trains do for sure play a big part in smoothness but I would say the track plays a bigger part. Variations from the design due to tolerances and not been able to get the track to the correct precision can have a huge impact in how smooth a coaster is. A tiny variation in the profile that would almost be unnoticeable to the naked eye, can and does feel very different when going over it at 50mph.
 
Last edited:
DistortAMG said:
No. While a single section of track


Straight piece of steel? Coasters would be pretty boring if they were just straight pieces of steel. Bending of the rails to an exact specification is quite difficult to do even being out slightly can have a profound impact on how smooth a ride is.

Different designs of track have different levels of smoothness. One of the reasons why B&Ms are so smooth is because their box section track is made up of triangles, these triangles make it relatively easy to get extremely precise track geometry. Industry leading precision actually and a B&M patented design. It goes a long way into making a coaster smooth.

You are not going to get dents any dents to track really. Most replacements are deemed necessary due to microscopic fatigue cracks in the track, found during ultra scans and non destructive testing.

Trains do for sure play a big part in smoothness but I would say the track plays a bigger part. Variations from the design due to tolerances and not been able to get the track to the correct precision can have a huge impact in how smooth a coaster is. A tiny variation in the profile that would almost be unnoticeable to the naked eye, can and does feel very different when going over it at 50mph.
Click to expand...

I’m less convinced on the track being the major contributor, the profiling of the track can impact smoothness and that’s why B&M did so well in the early years.

The best example of this is the Smiler as it has both track induced roughness and train induced roughness. The profiling of the 11th inversion is the lone cause of the head jolt at that point as are a few other jolts around the layout. However the reason ride roughness is so variable on the Smiler is because the trains run on hard compounds to maintain the speed (due to the stalling issue) and these wear out faster than normal so you get a smoother ride if you are lucky enough to be on a train with recently replaced compounds.

My personal view is profiling is the first factor, followed by train, followed by track aging. With modern design techniques most coasters are profiled well so the major factor is the train.
 
Dave said:
My personal view is profiling is the first factor, followed by train, followed by track aging. With modern design techniques most coasters are profiled well so the major factor is the train.
Click to expand...

I have to agree in parts. But take The Smiler for example. The track profiling is only as good as they can build it. The fact it was shedding bolts in its early days shows parts of the track were facing high levels of compression and or tension, this nocks your profiling out. Quite a bit.

Then you have a fair bit of movement in track peices as trains go over them, perfectly normal and safe, but that flex in the track is momentarily knocking the profiling out, unfortunately for the time it is needed most, when a train is passing over it. All coaster track moves and flexes, but there is a substantial difference between some manufacturers and others.

B&M not only have a box section for extremely precise track profiling but their robustness is usually engineered into the support structure too. Having a very minimal flex in the track, but still allowing train induces stress to dissipate is a very difficult thing to do, some manufacturers have nailed it. Others haven't.

You can physically see the track flexing as trains pass not only on the Smiler, Spinball too. The adjustments to the profiling is so big, you can visibly see them, even if they are only temporary.

I agree fully on the compounds and wheels though.

It's a complex thing for sure. Likely a combination of all the things you and I have mentioned.
 
DistortAMG said:
I have to agree in parts. But take The Smiler for example. The track profiling is only as good as they can build it. The fact it was shedding bolts in its early days shows parts of the track were facing high levels of compression and or tension, this nocks your profiling out. Quite a bit.

Then you have a fair bit of movement in track peices as trains go over them, perfectly normal and safe, but that flex in the track is momentarily knocking the profiling out, unfortunately for the time it is needed most, when a train is passing over it. All coaster track moves and flexes, but there is a substantial difference between some manufacturers and others.

B&M not only have a box section for extremely precise track profiling but their robustness is usually engineered into the support structure too. Having a very minimal flex in the track, but still allowing train induces stress to dissipate is a very difficult thing to do, some manufacturers have nailed it. Others haven't.

You can physically see the track flexing as trains pass not only on the Smiler, Spinball too. The adjustments to the profiling is so big, you can visibly see them, even if they are only temporary.

I agree fully on the compounds and wheels though.

It's a complex thing for sure. Likely a combination of all the things you and I have mentioned.
Click to expand...

Construction can certainly impact the profiling and I agree this happened with The Smiler but I think that’s a rare occurrence in the general world of roller coasters.
 
Dave said:
Construction can certainly impact the profiling and I agree this happened with The Smiler but I think that’s a rare occurrence in the general world of roller coasters.
Click to expand...

I agree, except if you are Gerstlauer. They have an interesting approach to constructing their coasters. I am sure they have their reasons for their specific approach but it comes at a sacrifice of profiling precision.

Gerstlauer don't actually know where their supports and track are going to be exactly before construction. I mean, they have a very good idea, a good enough idea to place footers and what not, but they cannot pricesely say where track connecting end is going to be, and in turn the track. They know it 'should be' within a few centermeters of a general area. This is why you don't see any of their supports permantly fixed to the ground before the ride is complete.

Once the track is complete, the supports will all be sitting / leaning to where they need to be, they then attach the supports at the ground end and grout the shear plates in.

Interesting approach for sure, at the expense of precise profiling - it's impossible to get precise profiling when building that way. I suspect they do it that way because they have to allow for some realtively high tolerences in their manufacturing processes for what could be a huge number of different reasons. This nicely highlights why B&M use Claremont exclusively almost, because they are one of the few companies who have the skillsets, experience and knowledge to manufacture B&M track to the within the extremely tight tolerances that B&M demand to ensure the profiling is almost exactly or as close as it can be, to how it appears in the CAD drawings.
 
DistortAMG said:
I agree, except if you are Gerstlauer. They have an interesting approach to constructing their coasters. I am sure they have their reasons for their specific approach but it comes at a sacrifice of profiling precision.

Gerstlauer don't actually know where their supports and track are going to be exactly before construction. I mean, they have a very good idea, a good enough idea to place footers and what not, but they cannot pricesely say where track connecting end is going to be, and in turn the track. They know it 'should be' within a few centermeters of a general area. This is why you don't see any of their supports permantly fixed to the ground before the ride is complete.

Once the track is complete, the supports will all be sitting / leaning to where they need to be, they then attach the supports at the ground end and grout the shear plates in.

Interesting approach for sure, at the expense of precise profiling - it's impossible to get precise profiling when building that way. I suspect they do it that way because they have to allow for some realtively high tolerences in their manufacturing processes for what could be a huge number of different reasons. This nicely highlights why B&M use Claremont exclusively almost, because they are one of the few companies who have the skillsets, experience and knowledge to manufacture B&M track to the within the extremely tight tolerances that B&M demand to ensure the profiling is almost exactly or as close as it can be, to how it appears in the CAD drawings.
Click to expand...

Actually I have ridden quite a few Gerstlauer coasters outside of Merlin and although they are not by any stretch smooth they don’t all do the jolting. It’s only the Merlin ones that do that and curiously they both had the same groundwork construction company….

Anyway this is a bit off topic
 
with regards to DBGT. We clearly don’t know the depreciation cycle on Merlin’s investments, but I’d be very surprised if they chop a ride which hasn’t been written off in their accounts yet. For an investment of that size you’d imagine at least a 10 year depreciation timeframe.

What I’m trying to say is, they won’t take the P&L hit be scrapping it when they are all about revenue growth and profit numbers.
 
You also have to consider.. it did work. So it can work.

What is the cost of writing off the Capex Vs the ongoing maintenance, parts, staff costs to run it as intended?

If anyone knows the total crew size required to run it properly we could fag packet the opex and work out the answer somewhat objectively.
 
I honestly think they would be better off just closing it and save the money that it is draining by having it open. They know that it’s a failure, to fix all of the problems would need major amounts of money and I don’t think they are willing to take that risk incase it doesn’t payoff. Thank goodness they didn’t open a clone of this at another of the parks!
 
How big is the DBGT show building? From memory it isn't very big in height. What kind of ride/attraction could they fit in there should it be removed?

It was absolute awful when we experienced it for the first time this year, granted the end hook was good but aside from that I refused to ride it when we revisited in September.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top