Wasted Energy.

[Mark-Cal]

No, I'm not talking about the wasted energy of travelling all the way to the Towers to ride Smiler for the first time to find it's broken again, I'm talking about wasted potential energy on a coaster.

Now I know very little about how one goes about designing a roller coaster from scratch but I imagine these days as well as a good understanding of physics there's a lot of computer input as well.
I guess compared to putting up a wooden coaster 80 years ago the modern designer has a good idea just how the trains are going to perform round the track before the first bit of cement is poured.

Having a train arrive back at the station "hot" is obviously better than having one that trickles back in having spent every last joule (or whatever it's measured in) of it's potential energy. Any excess energy can be lost mid ride easily with trim brakes but not enough means a redesign I would think, so a good designer is always going to play safe.

Having potential energy to spare is obviously going to help alleviate problems with stalling or rolling back later on along the circuit which makes good sense from an operating point of view and a fast approach into the final brake run can be fun but I sometimes find myself thinking rather than that energy be wasted perhaps it could have been better used up in a final ride element and whether the designers are sometimes shocked just how much faster a coaster reaches the end of it's run the first time they run it for real ?

Shock Wave at Drayton Manor and Millennium Coaster at Fantasy Island were two rides I noticed last year that seemed to carry a lot of energy right to the end of the ride that was burned off in the brake run but what other European coasters can you think of that are better examples, or perhaps the complete opposite ?

 

[Ian]

Many rides hurtle into their brake runs (Air comes to mind actually!). I think that really, as you say, it's simple a case that it's safer to have too much than not enough.

I often think that with a lot of rides though, the designers choose to cut them off at the right time, rather than trying to use up all their speed. There are many coasters out there which would simply feel too drawn out by the end of it, had they tried to cram more into the layout. Personally, I find this when I look at a lot of mega coasters. Silver Star is about right for me, as it manages to throw in that last slalom section before hitting the brakes, just to catch you off guards and do something different. The same goes for GeForce, which has a couple of nice bouncy hills before to starts to slow down. However, some of these I look and start thinking "Is it done yet?". Eventually you've done more than enough that it starts to feel dull by the end of it

In my mind, a good coaster should be at a point where you think it's about to end, before it chucks in one final surprise element before it comes to a close. Nemesis achieves this perfectly with its final corkscrew before the last turn. You come out of the dive under the exit bridge and think it's all over, but then it throws a curveball with one final inversion. It's something which a lot of newer coasters, namely B&Ms, don't do, which results in what I refer to as B&M syndrome, where the coaster has a fantastic first half, but then finds itself meandering its way back to the station through just a few wingovers and turns to try and wind down to the end. Yawn

 

[Alastair]

Shock Wave at Drayton Manor and Millennium Coaster at Fantasy Island were two rides I noticed last year that seemed to carry a lot of energy right to the end of the ride that was burned off in the brake run but what other European coasters can you think of that are better examples, or perhaps the complete opposite ?

Not European, but Full Throttle wastes a tremendous amount of potential energy (brakes on the bottom of the biggest drop on the ride!), also Top Thrill Dragster with it's lack of airtime hill after the ridiculous huge drop.

 

[Sam]

Maurer Söhne have begun offering regenerative braking on their rides, I think Freischütz has this. The energy captured by the brakes is used for the next launch.

 

[Russ]

Maurer Söhne have begun offering regenerative braking on their rides, I think Freischütz has this. The energy captured by the brakes is used for the next launch.

I seem to remember hearing once that Intamin have a similar concept on their rocket coasters. As where the extra energy from the force of the cable winding back into the drum spins some more flywheels and so on which then helps build up the boost for the next launch.

 

[CGM]

I tend to prefer coasters that hit the final brake run with quite a bit of speed to ones that limp their way back to the station. If the last third of a coaster is slow and boring, what's the point? On the other hand, I dislike coasters such as Stealth using huge amounts of energy to launch you up to 80 mph only to slow you right down again a few seconds later. There's definitely a balance to be had.

I think that the best coaster that I've been on when it comes to energy efficiency is Mountain Flyer at Knight Valley. It's blisteringly fast and relentless throughout the whole course despite it being quite a long coaster. As soon as it shows the first hint of flagging, it hits the brakes. You really get the sense that GCI have squeezed every possible bit of excitement from the potential energy available at the top of the course.

Wooden coasters have somewhat of an advantage over steel when it comes to pacing as they retain their speed much better. When you combine this with clever use of terrain, you end up with these woodies that seem to be powered by witchcraft like Mountain Flyer, The Voyage and Boulder Dash. You just think, "How can it still be going this fast?"

When it comes to steel coasters, I actually think it's best for the coaster to be quite inefficient. Look at Skyrush for example; for a 200ft tall coaster, it seems very short and it visibly loses its energy very quickly but it's because of this that it's such an exciting ride. The constant high speed, powerful airtime, rapid direction changes and high G turns all come at the cost of kinetic energy. The result is a short ride that packs a massive punch and hits the brakes before it has chance to slow down.

 

[Johno]

I don't understand why more coasters don't use regenerative braking, especially in the current climate of high energy costs.

 

[Benzin]

I don't understand why more coasters don't use regenerative braking, especially in the current climate of high energy costs.

In a somewhat ironic sense, costs will prevent it, as well as the requirement of maintaining such a system...