Cedar Point | Steel Vengeance | RMC I-Box (Mean Streak Conversion)

[Alaeriia]

This thing keeps getting crazier. We have a hypercoaster-height drop at angles approaching Oblivion's, a minuscule bunny hill that will likely be a sharp punch of ejector, a massive unbanked CCI-like hill, the reverse-banked monstrosity, then a double-up into a roll into a dive under the lift into a wave turn. That's gonna be interesting: Airtime, flipping upside down only to get another punch of airtime at the peak and then dive into the lift supports. Certainly a good way to soil a few GP trousers.

Now the real question: What was Alan Schilke on when he made this and how can I get some?

 

[Bryan Wagner]

Can not wait to ride this thing. I would say that I am tempted not to keep looking for updated pictures and videos but anyone that loves coasters knows there is absolutely no way that would happen.

 

[Coaster Hipster]

RMC keep pushing the envelope. I really am amazed at how they're still able to outdo themselves. Very interesting Zero G-sorta Roll shape!

 

[Hyde]

Throughout the winter, I'm sure that the cranes have been taking up space near the railroad and road around the peninsula, and those obviously need to be running during the year. However, Mean Steak was originally built to have a giant plot of land surrounded by the track. In other words, if you look at an aerial view of Mean Streak, you see track in a distorted oval shape and a giant field in the center (even the long queue doesn't go through this field, it just went under the track).

To give some greater context, the area in between Mean Streak is actually quite utilized. While Mean Streak's queue original extended into the middle area, it was removed a number of years ago to make room for two warehouses: one for storage and the other for a haunted house during Halloweekends. You can also see from arial views a good deal of other equipment/items being stored throughout the center area.

​

While Cedar Point could do crane work from the inside area, it isn't a case where they have all the room in the world. Access is easier from the Perimeter Road, pathway immediately adjacent the ride, and back staff parking lot behind the roller coaster. These areas however are difficult to operate a construction site from during park operation, as all are directly interfering or sit closely to staff/guest flow (Cedar Point Railroad, staff parking, guest road access to Cedar Point Shores/Hotel Breakers, etc.).

Overall, I expect Mean Streak construction to dramatically slow down during the summer, if not cease altogether.

 

[CP Rundown]

More track has been added

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1383764751716626

 

[Hyde]

Live stream from in the park today. More photos to come once I can get in front of a computer.

https://www.facebook.com/

Edit - adding in photos:

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10154454626168639

The most important update: additional layout supports have been placed, indicating a turn into a second barrel roll, followed by a step down and step up into the MCBR. I mentioned on the live stream how surprisingly close the small airtime hill is next to the first drop. ... We are looking at a massively steep drop if Mean Streak does indeed peak ~215 ft.

 

[MLDesigns]

Amazing shots. These few new pics helped me puzzle together the entire first half of the layout (up until the MCBR). Video coming soon.

 

[JJLehto]

Yessss

 

[MLDesigns]

Video as promised I am 100% positive this is the first half of the layout.

 

[CrashCoaster]

I think progress is looking cool so far... are you going to add more that layout when new elements are added? Also, I bet they'll keep the mid course brake run because it will most likely be a long layout, so they'll probably want to run at least 3 trains to have maximum capacity (I mean, it is Cedar Point)... maybe we'll see trains with more than 24 riders per train, potentially up to 32? Who knows, but this ride sure does look exiting!

 

[Mossed]

^ Definitely going for maximum capacity. The second half of the layout should be pretty awesome, since the MCBR is pretty tall. I doubt we'll get longer trains, as RMCs maneuver through some tight transitions.

 

[balrog]

What does train length has to do with transition tightness ? The limitation is more about car length/articulation.
I thought that the main issue with train length is about the speed at which each element is taken, which varies with the row position, but for a gigantic coaster like that, with the large hills we see so far, that is not much of a problem.

 

[Mossed]

The second half of the ride will not have these expansive type elements you see early on. Already, there's a speed hump that I can't imagine would be fun in the back row of a 32 person train. A given segment of track must be engineered so that the linear and rotational accelerations experienced as the train goes over it are within acceptable ranges for all seats in the train. Alan Schilke does some crazy things with these coasters, things that can't be done with long trains.

Still, with a block break, this ride should have very good capacity. Maybe not quite GateKeeper level, but higher than Millennium, or Maverick, or Dragster.

 

[IG9887]

If its gonna be a STALL on a DOWNHILL?!?! And I thought the upwards roll was crazy enough!

 

[BigBad]

What does train length has to do with transition tightness ? The limitation is more about car length/articulation.
I thought that the main issue with train length is about the speed at which each element is taken, which varies with the row position, but for a gigantic coaster like that, with the large hills we see so far, that is not much of a problem.

What he means involves the second part of what you wrote. Think about some of the quick maneuvers on RMC coasters. I'm thinking of one particular hill on Iron Rattler. I've never ridden, but the POV makes the front seat seem like it has about as strong a pop of ejector air as there is on any coaster, so it will be even stronger in the back of a 6-car train. Adding another two cars makes the forces in the back even more extreme.

I wouldn't expect anything but a six cars with two rows of two for 24 passengers per train. That seems like the standard for RMCs.

 

[balrog]

Well, that depends on the profile of the element. If you make it to be symetrical for front and back, then it is going to be just as intense in the front than in the back. The difference of intensity between the middle of the train and the extremities is, I think, the main problem as it grows with the length of the train. You don't want your ride to be dull in the middle, nor to intense on the front/back.

Edit : I guess I now understand the issue with the RMC and the quick transitions : If the front of the train enters an element before the back cleared the previous one, then the speed of the train is still influenced by the height profile of the previous element. If you want to profile each element independantly, you need a shorter train.

 

[BigBad]

It's something like that. For my example of Iron Rattler, consider this related situation: Diamondback's trains on Valravn. I've not done any calculations, but I'd imagine that drop creating unsafe forces in the back of the train.

 

[balrog]

It's something like that. For my example of Iron Rattler, consider this related situation: Diamondback's trains on Valravn. I've not done any calculations, but I'd imagine that drop creating unsafe forces in the back of the train.

Well, not really. In the case of the bottom of a drop, longer train cannot increase the forces, but quite the contrary actually : On a short (dive-like) train, the whole train reach the lowest point at the same time, so each passenger reach the bottom (and the point with the highest g-force) approximately when the centre of mass of the train is at its lowest, and the speed at its maximum. The g-force is maximal for everybody.
If you take a longer train, when some given row hits the bottom, all the previous rows already started climbing the Immelman, while the following rows are still on the drop. The centre of mass of the train is therefore higher, the speed and g-forces, lower.
As the centre of mass of the train is the lower when the middle of the train reach the bottom, the strongest forces actually apply to the middle rows, not the back or front.
In the case on Valravn, and more generally in any valley, longer trains reduce the forces, especially for the front and back rows.

Longer trains increase the positive g-forces on the back row during a double down (and decrease the forces on the front row), as the centre of mass of the train is lower when the back row reaches the bottom of the first dip. It increases positive forces on the front row during double-ups for the same reason.

On a hill, longer train increase the airtime at the top for both extremities. For the front it increases airtime on the uphill but decrease it on the drop. For the back, it decreases airtime on the uphill and increase it on the drop.

 

[BigBad]

I meant negative forces. Imagine those super-long Diamondback trains going over Valravn's drop.

 

[Antinos]

Adding some photos to bolster what Hyde has already contributed:

The photos honestly don't do any justice. Cedar Point really is working on something unprecedented.

As already mentioned, a ton of ledger work took place over the past week. Thus, the first half of the layout is basically known at this point: prelift, lift and drop, bunny hill, full size camelback, outerbanked turning wtf hill, step-up, upwards barrel roll, turn under lift, 90* bank, downwards stall under lift (you can just make out the ledgers and rail interfaces that confirm this in my third photo), step down, step up, rising turn into brakes. I'm really hoping that the second half can deliver like I anticipate the first half will.