h a l f b a k e r yWith moderate power, comes moderate responsibility.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
2 because [waugsqueke] posted this idea before my time...but see annotates below.
Many rollercoaster include barrel rolls in their construction, but the cars always perpetrate a full twist.
How about creating a roller coaster with a track like a mobius loop - one edge and one side - the entire
track would have to be travelled around twice; once on each 'side', before return to the station platform.
I've been trying to visualise this in my head. I'm not sure if its physically possible.
If anyone can explain why this is not possible I'll figure its a WIBNI and delete.
(?) Support structure for Moebius Rollercoaster
http://mwburden.hom....com/mrcsupport.jpg
(What I was trying to do with ASCII graphics below) [mwburden, Feb 04 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
The Original
http://web.archive...._20Roller_20Coaster
as of 8th of May, 2001, many thanks to the web archive organisation. [yamahito, Sep 09 2002, last modified Oct 05 2004]
[link]
|
| |
Half-baked, I know we've done this one somewhere. The biggest argument was over how to support the track when cars will be on every part of it. Looks like it's been deleted, though... |
|
| |
<later. It's probably what Jutta said happened. I do that fairly often and usually delete the extra annotation, but I think that day is one that the IBM network kept barfing on me and I couldn't...> |
|
| |
Is there an echo in here StarChaser? Because you repeted yourself, yet the second post built upon the first. Quite odd. But on topic, I have seen this before too. Cool idea except for the problem StarChaser brought up. |
|
| |
Um, if the train had track below it as well as above it, then the suppports could switch to whatever section it wasn't using at a particular part of its journey...would this work? |
|
| |
If not maybe some giant magnetic field would do it, but that really is WIBNI |
|
| |
Yes, we had quite a bit of fun with this one a while back - methinks it was one of waugs ideas before he (literally) killed his account for a spell - it's not only been halfbaked, but is baked as well. I had a lot of fun designing an effect of this in a flash program - that never saw light of day though. |
|
| |
Cheers [thumbwax] Right - Its clearly been halfbaked it'll be gone next time I log in unless any one else has anything to say.... |
|
| |
[admin: "Is there an echo in here" -- sometimes people annotate a little and then, rather than editing their annotation, back out again, edit in the "add" form, and add again. The halfbakery used to automatically catch those if they happen quickly (apparently, that's one more feature that got lost in the move), but if there's more time (or if it just plain doesn't work), they can lead to duplicate annotations.
This is harmless, and I usually just delete the first version when I catch them, except that for every formal glitch I or its poster can easily fix, there's always someone who annotates about it, resulting in then-orphaned complaints.] |
|
| |
[admin: The official spelling of "It'll be gone next time I log in unless any one else has anything to say..." is "[marked-for-deletion]". That way, you don't have to remember it - you can, but you don't have to - and we don't have to trust you to remember it.] |
|
| |
Since the original author of the Mobius Roller Coaster seems to have withdrawn his or her idea, and since this is something that inevitably will be invented and reinvented again, why don't you rename it to Mobius Roller Coaster and have it take the place of its predecessor? It'll make some dangling links work again, for one thing... |
|
| |
[Or, or course, you can rename it to ... II, confuse everybody, and _not_ make those dangling links work. Sigh. Why do I even bother.] |
|
| |
With one caveat - I think a "Gentlemens Agreement" would tip the hand to the previous author - allowing the previous author to have dibs. I'd call this idea Mobius Roller Coaster II out of deference to previous author - but that's just me. This is an interesting subject with interesting links and possibilities, even mockups of how to do this - great mental exercise. Take a piece of paper... |
|
| |
'wax, thanks for remembering. "Moebius Roller Coaster" (note spelling), originally posted Nov 21, 2000, was indeed one idea in my original batch of ideas that were all torpedoed. It had garnered +33 and -1 by the time of eradication. |
|
| |
I still have it (as well as all the rest of my ideas) but I did not repost it since I considered the deleted ideas to be 'trodden ground'. If it's necessary to repost ideas in order to retain claim to the notion, as jutta seems to suggest, then I shall start doing so. |
|
| |
Incidently, 'wax, no, this idea is not baked. There is a double coaster at Blackpool which claims to be Moebius, but in actuality is not. (I have annotations and links from the idea to indicate this.) |
|
| |
As far as physically supporting the track, on sections that are horizontal, the supports could attach to the track on the side, and be wide enough for the car to pass between them. |
|
| |
#-----# <-- Car
+=+=======+=+ <-- Track
| |#-----#| | <-- Upside down car between supports
| +- -+ | <-- Lower rails between supports
| | <-- Supports
| | |
|
| |
Note that the lower rails are suspended from the track, and that the car that is upside-down sits on the lower rail on the "tops" of its wheels. There will probably be a small jolt during the transition from rightside-up to upside-down, but it shouldn't be noticeable among the rest of the jolting and stuff. |
|
| |
Er, that didn't quite work out as planned. I'll get back to you. |
|
| |
(Later) OK, try the link I added. It looks much nicer than the ASCII grapics did, even before all the spaces got lost! |
|
| |
Self-righting cars was one idea I had with my original version of this, austere. (which I think is visible in yama's link). |
|
| |