I got to wonder about how B&M figured it out for the moisture prone Orlando area with Hulk to have consistent operations?
Attraction Lightning Rod
- Thread starter Unagi
- Start date
I got to wonder about how B&M figured it out for the moisture prone Orlando area with Hulk to have consistent operations?
B&M didn't build the launch, either. They told Universal the speed it needed at the top of the hill, and said good luck. The launch was developed in-house.
After being in charge of the ride for 3 years, I can confidently say Hulk does not operate in rain. The most you'll see it operate in is a light rain but when it becomes significant, the ride will shut down. The ride is prone to aborted launches if the trains get to wet. The undersides of the trains won't create enough friction to properly hold onto the launch motors causing a vast reduction of speed and leaving a train aborted at the top of the launch tunnel. This is why you'll see the coaster go down to 2 trains when a storm is approaching. If they do leave 3 trains on, one will sit out in the elements and depending on how quickly it drys, may be removed for 30-60 mins before it is added back on and into normal operation. Also depending on how bad the storm is, rain can still come all the down the launch tunnel if the wind is blowing just right soaking all 220 launch motors making it not possible to cycle.
A source inside the park has said that elements inside RMC were really pushing the idea of converting the launch area to steel with a wooden facade so that it would be solid and more sturdy and that rmc felt that it would work but that several senior people at the park had had enough with RMC launch fixes and was leading the convert charge. To the best of my knowledge tire launch was never considered. I would say this likely could put the final nail in the coffin for RMC launches at least for a while.
I am frankly surprised this wasn't the original design.
I’m curious if you know, and it doesn’t get anyone in trouble, was that suggestion early or late in the process?
I don't know at what stage it was first suggested but my understanding is a final decision on how to proceed was only relatively recently made.
Just a couple things about this conversion.
1. This isn't a new development. The park made this decision almost two years ago. I myself first found out about it when @Coasterguy95 posted this info here. I confirmed it with my industry sources who were under a strict NDA to keep quiet.
2. The lift/launch and its structure wasn't the primary cause of all the issues and problems.
1. This isn't a new development. The park made this decision almost two years ago. I myself first found out about it when @Coasterguy95 posted this info here. I confirmed it with my industry sources who were under a strict NDA to keep quiet.
2. The lift/launch and its structure wasn't the primary cause of all the issues and problems.
Given all the discussion around issues with the lift plaguing operations in various ways, can you disclose what the primary cause(s) is(are)?
I’m not him, but it’s the LSMs. If they’d had someone like indrivetec or intrasys do the launch instead of whoever RMC had do it we wouldn’t be having this conversation
But that's just it, @Unagi's post indicated that wasn't the primary issue causing the problems, which is breaking my brain a bit so hence I'm curious what is
Trains might be too heavy for the ride, it is supposedly getting new trains.
Coasterguy95
Intimidator 305 enjoyer, I make yt vids, watch em!
lol a friend tipped me off
Then why wouldn't that have fixed it without converting to a lift? I'm with Jonesta6. I want to know what the primary cause was because this isn't making a lot of sense.
The weight of the trains probably isn’t as much of the issue with the launch as they are with the wear on the ride and potential roughness