4th Dimensional Coasters

[madhjsp]

^Yeah, it's only really fair to look at the actual track and train costs. If a park wants to go ahead and double the cost with extensive theming, it's really not the same thing as saying the coaster cost that much if that makes sense.

Why not? At least in the cases of Expedition Everest and Verbolten, the theming is such a huge component of the ride, I think it definitely should be considered as part of the total ride cost. It's not like they built these coasters and then later went back and added theming, like Six Flags did with Bizarro. If the installation of a ride and everything that comes with it during primary construction is considered a singular project, then the truth is that Disney and Busch spent as much or more money on the EE and Verbolten projects than a park would on an S&S 4D project.

Now, I agree with you if we are limiting the discussion to the relative costs of ride types. In that case, yes, S&S 4D's cost more than any typical Vekoma or Zierer model based purely on the costs of track and hardware.

 

[Hixee]

^I think realistically that is the discussion we're having.

The hardware for an S&S 4D coaster is far far more than the hardware for most other coasters.

It would be like someone buying a crappy car for £1000, then adding £25,000 worth of bodykits and speakers to it, compared with buying a £26,000 car from the start. It might 'look' better, but at the end of the day its the underlying hardware that costs the money.

 

[Hyde]

Either way - it still goes to show that 4D coasters carry one of the largest costs in the industry.

 

[Gavin]

^Yeah, it's only really fair to look at the actual track and train costs. If a park wants to go ahead and double the cost with extensive theming, it's really not the same thing as saying the coaster cost that much if that makes sense.

Why not? At least in the cases of Expedition Everest and Verbolten, the theming is such a huge component of the ride, I think it definitely should be considered as part of the total ride cost. It's not like they built these coasters and then later went back and added theming, like Six Flags did with Bizarro. If the installation of a ride and everything that comes with it during primary construction is considered a singular project, then the truth is that Disney and Busch spent as much or more money on the EE and Verbolten projects than a park would on an S&S 4D project

That's what I'm trying to say though. Those parks could/would not be able to include such extensive theming if opted for a 4D coaster. The theming is integral for those rides, so they only way to make it possible is to use relatively "cheap" coasters as a base.

So in that respect, it absolutely is about hardware cost. Busch, one of the few parks that could afford such a coaster, are unlikely to go for a coaster with a $30m + price tag before even thinking about landscaping and theming.

 

[reddude333]

Alright, so I see the point about price and technical issues. And I definitely understand why some Asian parks would throw money at the idea. But what if I pose a new "on-the-side" question regarding the S&S 4D. Is there any chance they would be able to make them more affordable for parks? I understand that they have a lot more engineering involved due to the complex systems in the trains etc. but is there any way that S&S could make it cheaper for for both them and the potential buyer?

 

[Pokemaniac]

Continuing on the above, could these coasters be made smaller somehow? I mean, as far as coasters go, the 4Ds built so far are pretty darn big. Eejanaika is close to 80 metres tall, and when you start on that scale, things get complicated enough even for "regular" coasters. With great heights come great speeds, and with great speeds come great forces (or huge turns). And then they add insanely complex trains the size of buses into the equation, for good measure.
Would it be feasible to build a smaller 4D, say in the range of 30-50 metres, make it somewhat less forceful, and would that reduce the complexity of the system in some way? I guess part of the prize is due to the sheer size of these coasters, but do they necessarily have to be so big?

 

[Hyde]

The cost of the roller coaster is associated with the material needed to build. The three 4D's we have seen thus far all carry the same layout (spare for X2 having a normal airtime hill while the other two have a barrel roll), 3,600+ ft. long and 180 ft. tall. Massive structures that require lots and lots of steel. And with that comes the largest roller coaster trains ever seen. The cost is not associated with the ride systems, but simply the amount of material and work needed to construction the ride.

A smaller layout would bring down costs, and could definitely be done. We just have yet to see an alternative 4D coaster design.

 

[Gavin]

^Actually, Eejanaika is considerably taller than X2 at 250 feet; it's enormous.

I'm sure it would be possible to go smaller, say around the size of the current B&M wing coasters (using them as an example as the train width is similar and would have to be taken into consideration with the design), but it sort of negates the point of them I think. Parks are now more likely to go to B&M given a better track record - no rotating seats I know - or Intamin for a smaller, cheaper zacspin model.

Then it comes back around to reliability again. Is any park going to necessarily trust S&S to come up with what is essentially a complete redesign given the problems they have with even their established coaster types?

 

[reddude333]

Perhaps S&S can create a good reputation for their reliability with their 4D coasters in Asia? At the very least, it is a good testing ground for improving the technology/making it cheaper. I understand that B&M (Wing Coaster) and Intamin (Zacspin) are more likely candidates to most parks but neither can match the experience of the Arrow/S&S 4D.

 

[CoasterCrazy]

Perhaps, reasons for choosing another ride type include the nature of 4Ds, which although adored by enthusiasts, are enough to make numerous members of the public go green! For parks without other major attractions, maybe a 4D would be too much.

Saying all that though...http://rcdb.com/6412.htm

 

[Hyde]

Seemingly well timed with this thread, S&S Sansei discussed their plans forward for the 4D coaster.

1. Free Fly X - This is a modified version of the S&S Free Fly roller coaster which received IAAPA Ride of the Year 2011.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfYZO-ZLGgM[/youtube]

Swapping out the canoe-style seating for 4D seating, the seats rotate on an X-axis similar to the Free Fly model, instead of a Y-axis like on X2 and Eejanaika. Here is a computer animation and an S&S rep describing the design - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dsMftFJZHE&t=11m7s . It is worth pointing out the rider seats are free-swinging, not controlled by a guide rail or ride system. Here are some screenshots I lifted from that video to help you visualize the ride.

2. 4D FreeSpin - Similar to Intamin's Zacspin, this roller coaster model has a vertical lifthill that leads into a vertical slalom of hills and dips.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pep_RHz1KyE&feature=plcp[/youtube]

The change-up from Intamin's design is that S&S offers a train of numerous cars, not just one. S&S has also said they are taking out the guide rail control and instead controling train spin via a series of magnets. This underlines our own mention in this discussion of the possible costs affiliated with designing and maintaining a mechanically driven system. Again, here is an excerpt from Screamscape's video discussing the 4D FreeSpin, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dsMftFJZHE&t=12m19s . Pretty much an Intamin ZacSpin with controlled spinning.


I'll be interested to see if S&S could truly create a world class coaster with the first concept, Free Fly X. Thus far we have only seen one Free Fly roller coaster, a family thrill coaster. With B&M and Intamin moving into the fray with their own Wing Coaster designs, S&S must figure out how to edge opponents.