Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

The B&M Thread

Yes, they are words that are only associated with horribly thought out layouts with no theme and only built for the sake of being the tallest. None of them have any form of variation on anything. No swooping turns, no near misses, no interaction with parts of its ride.

Rides like El Toro, Bizzaro, Voyage, Twister (Knoebles), Ravine Flyer 2, any other ride that is below 250 all have an interesting layout and interacts with its surrounding scenery. Hence, giving you a better overall ride. Intamin only thought of the records they would be the holders of, which is honestly those coasters ONLY reasons for existing. Morgan tried to break the record (and curse I guess you could call it associated with rides over 300ft tall), but due to a lack luster layout, falls into the same category.

Given the chance, time and proper investment, an amazingly awesome 300-350 foot tall (cause I don't want to use labels to possibly offend or anger you) can be made so long as they plan out a lot of things. I305 is an example of this. They took the height of Millennium Force, and gave it the layout of Maverick. A genius idea for Intamin, but it relies on the layout, one or two airtime hills and its mass forces to be a top 10 coaster. Intamin just seems keen on building the rides with speed and force, while not focusing on other aspects of said ride.

Can you honestly respond "no" to the thought of a terrain styled, 300 foot tall monster that runs through the forest, interacts with near misses of trees, parts of the ride/other rides, goes underground, has airtime hills and a nice amount of forces during all transitions that when you get back to the station you are left breathless and the need to ride it again? Doesn't matter the maker at this point. B&M would give it an amazing layout, Intamin would give it a maverick styled track, Morgan could do a somewhat panned out Out and Back arrow.

Any company could do this really, but the challenges that come with it is something they don't want to possibly risk. It honestly can't be **** impossible for a genius of layout design to figure something out. I've given a very wonderful idea that can be used to generate a lot of focus on a medium to large sized park. It is plausible, it can work, and it isn't relying on a term to bring the crowd in.
 
Not saying it wouldn't be awesome. But I think parks are realizing that bigger dosn't always mean better. Think about the forces involved with coasters. 5G's is 5G's whether the first drop is 300 feet, or 150 feet, whether the train is moving 90 mph or 50 mph. Just saying that it's more practical to have a smaller, forceful coaster than a larger one, especially with the economy the way it is now. A great coaster dosn't mean a huge, expensive one.

Look at the figures, there's been one 300+ foot built coaster in the last 6 years. Just shows that, at least for now, parks are going away from that type of thing.
 
Height is still awesome no matter what.
Given my favorite rollercoaster is maverick.

I mean a 500 foot terrain coaster would be cool, but the height effect would be useless without that 500 feet of space between the track and the ground. Its the pure vertigo effect that really gets riders, especially on that first drop.

But I do love those mountain top coasters like Dragon Mountain. That thing is a terrain machine!

I have yet to see a good terrain B&M in the United States or North America.
 
Apparently the launch was installed by another company. Not 100% sure though, someone else will have to clarify this.

The Incredible Hulk is the only launched roller coaster produced by Bolliger & Mabillard. As a company, it is opposed to launched coasters because of perceived reliability problems,[citation needed] so it subcontracted the launch mechanism to another company.

from the wiki
 
They MIGHT in the far future, but they do stress reliability so much, I highly doubt it anytime soon.
 
I think one of the main reasons B&M doesn't do launched rides is simply because of the lack of reliability generally associated with launched rides. Hulk did have another company install the launching system (I remember a long drawn out conversation on another website about it) as B&M didn't want to try and design one out of sheer lack of experience in the field of launched rides. I can't recall the company who did the launching system, but apparently it has worked sofar. Not sure about the reliability issues associated with Hulk and I really haven't heard through trip reports of Hulk being down.

But for the most part, I don't think B&M will stray much into the launched rides category. It just doesn't speak B&M whenever I see a B&M launched ride amongst the virtual roller coaster community. There's something iconic about a B&M ride and the lift hill. It's almost like the cherry ontop the way they built them. And the end result is so clean, so flowing... It just compliments the ride. At least to me.

With that being said, it sure would be interesting to see another B&M launched ride, aside from Hulk. Knowing B&M, it could be pulled off AND have the reliability required to be a practical ride. What park owner wants the best, only to have it fail on the occasion?
 
Re: The B&M Thread

Then why does everyone get Intamins :3

I can see another Hulk happening in the future. Hulk (when i rode it so long ago) was smooth, launch was fun and honestly unexpected and I dont think Ive ever heard of it being down due to mechanical issues. Only issue I know of was their lack of painting upkeep on the ride.

I do feel the same way you do though Xpress, the lift hill is honestly like the cherry ontop of an amazing sundae or something; however, the only reason I feel they havent done another launch would be because of the fact that B&M isnt known for launches like some manufactuers are. Im sure if a park had the money and trully wanted a launched beemer, they would do what they did with Hulk and most likely go with that same sub contractor for the launch mechanism again.

Switching between the hideouts'...
 
It's only a matter of time before we see a B&M launcher, especially with the recent progress in LSM technology. The reliability of a LSM drive compared to a standard lift is pretty close, so that's no longer an issue in my eyes. Also with the addition to use LSM units as brakes you can save the kinetic energy of the train to the next launch, which makes it very energy efficient.

I mean in the last few years there have been a few launched B&M proposals, the latest one was for Tivoli Gardens in Copenhagen. Heck even Thorpe had a proposal for an Launched B&M looper before they settled on Colossus...
 
loefet said:
Heck even Thorpe had a proposal for an Launched B&M looper before they settled on Colossus...
Click to expand...
And what a decision that was... :roll:
 
I think I'll go with what loefet is saying, how it's only going to be a matter of time.

Perhaps B&M doesn't want to venture into the launched world until a more reliable system comes about and is put into use. Or maybe the parks just don't want a B&M launcher.. Maybe they just want the company to design them a ride that they already know is going to be foolproof...
 
B&M pricetag is already one of the highest out there, so adding the cost of a launch on top of that might have an impact...
 
Im sure maybe one day B&M will enter the launched market, but they shouldn't !!, there current roster of 8 work to near perfection as they generally use the same mechanics and technicalities as each other, and i think they should stick with this idea and just modify and develop in this manner, the Wingrider being my finest example.
 
Another problem with launched B&Ms is the fact that B&M trains are quite heavy, and the heaviness of that train accounts for some of the smoothness of the ride. If you think about it, it took all of those consecutive drive tires on the Hulk's launch just to bring it up to 40mph at the exit 110ft in the air (not to mention the power consumption).

If B&M were ever to do a launch though I do have to believe that it would be an LSM. I say this for two reasons, first you get the pushing and pulling effect of the magnets that would help to move a heavier train alot faster, then you also have no moving parts to have break on you (read increased reliability), and if something does fail you have an automatic anti-roll back. Plus, they have now been tested in industry (by Intamin no less) and if they are not having any problems with them they must be reliable. :lol:
 
Re: The B&M Thread

One big reason why Hulk need so much power is the due to the highly inclined launch track. The motors don't just have to overcome the inertia of the train, but also a big part of it's own weight which ''normal'' launch coasters don't...

So I actually doubt that there shouldn't be too hard to do. I mean look at BSG at USS they have about the same size train and launch up an incline, so if Vekoma can do it then it shouldn't really be any problems for B&M to do it on a ''flat'' launchtrack...

Posting on the go...
 
tomahawKSU said:
B&M pricetag is already one of the highest out there, so adding the cost of a launch on top of that might have an impact...
Click to expand...

Minus the initial height of the lift hill, the lift chain itself, the lift hill track, the chain return track, and the lift motors.

Then factor in LSMs, LSM carrying track, a lower initial height, and the LSM control system. Don't think that having a launched ride would cost much differently than a lift hill ride.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top