"Dizz", Maurer Söhne spinner for Bobbejaanland

[peep]

Yet another construction update today via their facebook account. It's going up quite quickly. It's also starting to look very interesting...

Link

 

[Lofty]

Ok, that could cause some AMAZING spinning.

 

[Martyn B]

So the lift, station and brake run etc are all using the usual Spinner track...

Why would they use the 2 different track types?

 

[Casio]

Maybe it's because of the sections over pathways, they obviously can't put supports in the middle of the path, so they just use a bigger spine so fewer supports are needed? Just an idea

 

[bob_3_]

Intamin vary their track styles enough and even Schwarzkopf used bi-rail for the brakes on his rides. There's loads of examples, I don't see how it's odd to have this style track for the lift and a different one for the ride.

 

[Casio]

Well I don't think they've ever done it before with their 15 or so other ones.

 

[Hixee]

^Yeah, but the point is that just because it's new doesn't necessarily mean it's odd. I suspect this is to do with the clearance for supports, they need the stronger spine to allow them to space out the supports a bit more. It wouldn't surprise me if this sort of track becomes more popular though.

 

[Martyn B]

Casio got my point, they've never done it before, so why now? But the supports theory is a good one I guess.

 

[bob_3_]

^ I think it's similar to the euro-fighters, they started off as purely bi-rail then one day tri-rail popped up. I think it's just improvements in design, there's probably millions of reasons for it, from costs to aesthetics. I love the new track though! I've always thought these spinners looked abit messy with the amount of supporting needed, so this will sleek up the look of the coaster nicely.

 

[Antinos]

Bob_3_ is right. It's called design iteration. Maurer Sohne, like any other engineering firm, constantly strives to improve their technology. Why should they stick with something old if their research shows that if they do something a little differently, there would be benefits? In this case, they probably concluded that adding a spine would create a stronger structure and allow for fewer supports, saving on a bit of cost.

 

[Martyn B]

^ Ok, that makes sense an all, but why didn't they do it before? Its clearly their X-Car track, which they've been using for years, so they should already know everything there is to know about that design?

 

[Hixee]

^Timing maybe? I'm completely guessing now, I have no idea, but it might just be that this was their first 'non-off-the-shelf' installation in a few years, only really giving them the chance to use this new track now.

Could make sense?

 

[Antinos]

It could also be that this spinner isn't as compact as their others. Since it's more spread out, it makes even more sense to save money on supports and foundations.

 

[Nic]

I can't get excited over this, but I'm sure someone will. They've put the technical drawings for the cars up on facebook

http://www.facebook.com/photos.php?id=4 ... 5556630821

 

[Hixee]

Well they're pretty much the standard cars. No changes there then sadly. Would've been interesting if they'd changed the cars too...

 

[Nic]

More construction pics have been added to their facebook. This thing is flying up!

 

[Uncle Arly]

I'm liking the track, especially black as it makes it look really nice.

The layout looks pretty cool too. Should provide some good spin!

 

[Martyn B]

There's pics on RCDB showing the layout in mor detail:

And it looks like this hasn't got the signature vertical turn thing. There is a similar small one, but it doesn't look like the usual one to me.

 

[ciallkennett]

^ The "smaller one" is the bit that goes over the path which led to the discussion on track design.

It's certainly a short layout, but this I can see spinning quite wildly! Small, short but fun

 

[Martyn B]

Well that definitely isn't a smaller version of them turns. I think this is the first MS spinner without one!