Cheetah Hunt- Intamin for Busch Gardens Tampa

[Antinos]

There is the possibility of a time constraint. Maybe they were running out of time?

 

[Xpress]

I still ponder where UC gets his information from, from time to time.... :?

As for "learning how they are built", someone with enough logic can get a good idea if they put 2 and 2 together.....

My $0.02 is that the support is not for the track.

 

[divvie_dave]

Any chance this support was designed with the possibility that the track may have needed to be "tweaked"... Its a rather far fetched idea... But I agree that this support is a waste of money in terms of just having it for themeing. They could have just whipped something up out of fiberglass or whatever for that to hold up a banner and have it still look convincing...

 

[furie]

Do we know the bottom of the A-frame is actually properly mounted?

They seem to be trying to make the support structure part of the theming, having a consistent look and feel... Making the supports seem superfluous, like their only purpose it the hold the banners, not the ride?

If the A-Frame isn't bedded in completely, then you lose the cost of digging and pouring. Looking at the image Erol posted, the A-frame is an offshoot of the main support there. There's then the banner between them. Was it cheaper to get Intamin to fabricate that "extension" than it would be to produce a separate banner pole (which looked like the Intamin support) and then pour smaller footers for the stand? When you're fabricating 1000's of yards of supports, an extra 5 yards doesn't add much.

 

[ECG]

I still ponder where UC gets his information from, from time to time.... :?

LOL!
I would be wondering where others get their illogical ideas, rather than questioning UC's. The fact that every one of UC's posts are well thought out should be enough, regardless of any insider information he might have.
Is this the only support of it's type on this baby?
Personally I'm going with what furie posted.

 

[furie]

I had a quick look back and you have the extensions (spikes) on the "figure 8" for the banners or flags or whatever. It must have just worked out cheaper to have a fabricated extension that blurs the lines between coaster bits on theme than to start installing separate tall banner poles.

I guess you know the supports and going to flap around high winds, so you can get the banners very close to the track without worry? It kind of makes sense, but the similarity between this support (and I think I spotted another similar in other photos, but it may have been the same one) and the "spikes" makes it pretty clear it's a designed theming point rather than a "mistake" or "just in case" support (which also doesn't compute anyway ).

 

[CMonster]

Yeah, you've got this one, the aforementioned figure eight ones, and the supports for the first turn right out of the station are significantly longer than necessary and have a spiked end - obviously for theme. There might be more.

So, maybe this is just for consistency? And what furie said.

 

[Gazza]

The other thing as well is that they could have just used thinner steel for the tubes that don't have to support any loads, so it could end up being pretty cheap after all.

 

[Screaming Coasters]

I KNOW WHAT ITS FOR!!!!!

I contacted Intamin this morning because of my frustration and curiosity over this matter... Basically its a new type of support that conducts electricity from the vibrations of trains passing by. Electricity is a huge expense in any park, big or small and this seemed like a logical method to generate it. This electricity would then be used to power a Burger King burger trailer, much like this one:

Actual photo of them unloading

Selling their new 1000gram 100% steak burger.
Heres the advert we didn't see UNTIL NOW!

And the new revised plans:

 

[tks]

Has anyone thought that it might be a really cheap copy of a support? Look at Thorpe's entrance

Because that is real track.

 

[Screaming Coasters]

i wud luv dat 2 b a reel coasta.

 

[furie]

Has anyone thought that it might be a really cheap copy of a support?

Why yes, yes they have...

The question then would be "is it a real support, or just some toilet roll tubing painted yellow?"

 

[Screaming Coasters]

Ohhh, I made soooo much for this too.

 

[CPcisco]

1. The ride is doing, at this point, exactly what it shows in the animation. Thus, it can be concluded that - since the animation was made before heavy construction started - that this part of the ride was finalized and not changed.

I just took a look back at the animation, and noticed that this support actually looks like it connects to the track in two places. :? Also, only the extra portion we see now has a vertical support portion in the animation. The part supporting the ride right now appears to be cantilevered in the animation. Now it is a possible mistake, but the rest of the supports for the ride are correct in the animation, so I don't see a reason for the difference here.

2. It is NOT cheaper to just "keep the support and footer." If you're saying things like this, it means you really don't understand how expensive these parts of the ride are. Trust me - if it wasn't needed, it wouldn't have been poured. The cost in changing a drawing is far, far cheaper than the cost of digging a footer and fabricating a support. This isn't to mention that changing the track layout that would have utilized said support would've required a change in the design anyway - meaning it would've been no extra cost to re-engineer the support.

Again, I don't think you guys truly understand the cost of footers and manufacturing supports. You should probably go look that up before claiming things like "they just left it there."

The cost of manufacture for the support was why my initial reasoning was that the support might have already been manufactured and then later modified. If the support was not initially needed then why go through the cost to manufacture it in the first place?

And yes I will admit that the whole footer idea was pretty stupid, but again I was simply trying to come up with a logical reason why you would still put it in if it wasn't needed.

3. Having said this, it's obvious the support was designed that way from the start - it has no track connection plate on top. If what you're claiming is true - the whole "well it was a real support, they just made a change and left it" thing - then it'd look like a complete coaster support. As it stands, it does not - it looks like one until the top, where it looks incomplete. This was designed that way from the start - after all, take it from an engineer - it wouldn't make any sense to go through the trouble of changing the design and only modify the plate on top of the support.

The reason for simply getting rid of the top connection plate was due to the possibility that the support had already been manufactured. If it had not been manufactured yet (and if a change occurred) then I do agree that it would not make any sense to simply get rid of the plate and not completely redesign the support.

EDIT: The best picture I could find of the back footer for this support is this one:

Now granted you can't actually see the footer in question, but if you follow the two support extensions back they do appear to end in the same spot.

This means that getting rid of the extra portion of the support would prompt re-manufacturing the bottom portion of the used support, if the support was already manufactured and a design change occurred.

 

[tks]

Has anyone thought that it might be a really cheap copy of a support?

Why yes, yes they have...

The question then would be "is it a real support, or just some toilet roll tubing painted yellow?"

Thank you for answering my question. I'm pleased to know there are other like-minded thinkers out there!

The direction of this topic?

ONE DIRECTION.

*ahem*

 

[nadroJ]

The middle one looks like my brother. A lot.

 

[Ben]

No, yes, no, yes, maybe.

 

[tks]

The middle one looks like my brother. A lot.

Is he over 18?

 

[Screaming Coasters]

I MADE SOOOO MUCH EFFORT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ECG]

I love all this discussion going on over that support when it looks like they've made a big change to the ride that wasn't in the videos the park posted.
It appears that the coaster will now hop the Sky Ride!

Something interesting to note though, from the height of the support in reference to the Sky Ride, Cheetah Hunt is going OVER the top.

Source: http://www.rollercoasterpro.com/updates/bgt2.5.11/