- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
But 6 or so I beams is not going to be very different in terms of cost efficiency that's what I'm not seeing here.
Incredible Hulk Coaster Refurb
- Thread starter Brian G.
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
The answer isn't that it's a solution to what were frequent stress fracture problems/repairs being needed? I know zero about roller coaster engineering, design, or build.
- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
I'm leaning towards that myself. You don't rebuild a coaster from top to bottom for no reason and that's just the bottom line here folks. Of course uni will never say that...ever.
There are at least 3. The latest Mako Madness video shows one of them that's already got a piece of track attached to it.Wow, there are two i-beam supports! Picture from above tweet.
I must get to the bottom of what is going on here. I am just not sure how I am going to do it. :saywhat:
- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
I'm speaking of the quality and pedestals that B&m's are put on..As in I'm shocked if this is true.
When did Hulk ever receive an extended downtime similar to a seasonal park for maintenance, though (a semi-serious question, as I don't know too much about Universal from the opening of IOA to about '09)? And while the SeaWorld Parks B&Ms haven't received much in the way of maintenance downtime, their lackluster operations naturally mean a serious difference in cycles, which would have an effect. The majority of B&Ms are in seasonal parks that have 4-6 months of downtime each year to completely strip down and rebuild the trains (something that can make a HUGE difference, also why I believe the SW B&Ms seem to be in relatively better shape, they seem to keep trains cycling through a similar tear down style maintenance), with probably half the cycles as Hulk per year. It may be comparing B&Ms, but it's more like comparing granny smith and red delicious apples.
Yes, B&M are kind of the BMW/MB of the coaster world in their reputation (not at all unearned, by the way), but just like with car maintenance, your engine will eventually need replaced/rebuilt, no matter what, and some engines have quirks or something that can cause that to happen faster than others.
- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
Speaking only in terms of track, kumba and montu have been around longer and never had a complete track rebuild. Now what I will say is that hulk is the most cycled coaster in Florida w/o a doubt so maybe, and only maybe they just decided it's too popular to not deserve it, or there were some major flaws that could not be ignored. But personally I do not believe hulk was ran into the ground.
All vehicles on Hulk can go into maintenance and stay there for a week for a total rebuild. They have more than they need at any one time. Same on all Universal attractions. They are not like parks that have a 5-6 month downtime.
That's what I thought...there is always a train in maintenance for every attraction, right?
As for Hulk..I think the main reason was that it was getting so rough..this is the first I'm hearing of it 'breaking'...I imagine Universal would have shut it down sooner if that were the case..
Just had Orientation on Monday and when they gave us upcoming news events they called this the "Incredible Hulk Enhancement Project". Guess this isn't really news but between that and my roomate getting hired for Hulk Opening crew and this website I'm and all about some hulk. Lol
- Jun 2, 2013
- 40
- 26
Oh absolutely, I'm not trying to suggest that they made a conscious decision to change the design of a few structural members to save a couple hundred bucks, just that nowadays more than ever structural design is focused on maximizing efficiency.
Whilst we're looking at an identical track design, there's a few things that suggest that at least certain elements have had structural redesigns (particular the changing of track connections, as this will be reducing the columns effective length). During the process of this redesign then if an I beam was found to be more efficient then it makes complete sense to select them for use. It's not out of the blue either, with similar type supports showing up on other recent B&M's for short columns.
I'm not really sure where the argument for the change in support type due to stress concentrations is coming from? I really think this is just a simple quirk that results from a small structural redesign, nothing aesthetic or to do with any possible deterioration of the original ride.
I'm not just pulling this out of my butt, I'm a third year structural design student and whilst I'd be happy if someone could come up with a more compelling argument, I'm no armchair engineer either. The AISC Steel Manual is a heavy book I'm all too familiar with.
Having said all this I don't think it really matters, it's refreshing to see Universal invest so much in an existing ride. Just a shame I won't be able to ride it again for years.
A couple thoughts...
First off - just a reccomendation that we collectively take a step back from the cliff in regards to any sort of panic regarding rides being worked on.
All rides breakdown and have things that need repairs, even roller coasters. I don't remember where or even which company (and I've worked for them all) but I remember once being told about the different types of welding they'll do on coasters. The general jist is that a ride that -isn't- getting the repairs is the one you don't want to be on. The one getting the repairs is preventing major issues. The safety systems will shut it down if a major issue occurs during operation. (I want to say there's a gas in there? And sensors?)
As for the coasters we're talking about specifically - I think when IOA was being built Universal gave B&M carte blanche to try some experimental elements - Hulk's launch and Dragon's inverted dueling. As with any first of their kinds, there's some room for improvement.
And to Universal's credit they're willing to rebuild Hulk while we are all here wondering what exactly prompted such a decision. Nothing was obviously wrong with it. Most companies would have just driven the ride into the ground and made endless repairs until it simply couldn't operate anymore (see: Horizons tensioning system and Journey into Imagination's carousel.)
First off - just a reccomendation that we collectively take a step back from the cliff in regards to any sort of panic regarding rides being worked on.
All rides breakdown and have things that need repairs, even roller coasters. I don't remember where or even which company (and I've worked for them all) but I remember once being told about the different types of welding they'll do on coasters. The general jist is that a ride that -isn't- getting the repairs is the one you don't want to be on. The one getting the repairs is preventing major issues. The safety systems will shut it down if a major issue occurs during operation. (I want to say there's a gas in there? And sensors?)
As for the coasters we're talking about specifically - I think when IOA was being built Universal gave B&M carte blanche to try some experimental elements - Hulk's launch and Dragon's inverted dueling. As with any first of their kinds, there's some room for improvement.
And to Universal's credit they're willing to rebuild Hulk while we are all here wondering what exactly prompted such a decision. Nothing was obviously wrong with it. Most companies would have just driven the ride into the ground and made endless repairs until it simply couldn't operate anymore (see: Horizons tensioning system and Journey into Imagination's carousel.)
- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
- Sep 15, 2015
- 1,492
- 1,783
OK I'm not knocking this at all. But dont the trains look just a little shoppy?
