Roller coasters designers every year come up with taller and steeper drops. I was thinkin what if part of the ride went through a pool of water. At first i thought that people would be completly submerged for about 2 seconds that probably is not practical so maybe they would be submerged only up to their necks. Another problem is hitting the water at 60 mph can kill somebody so the car would slow down to safe speed or like 10 mph and once people are submerged the car would get a boost propelling people back to 60 mph. What do you think of this idea ? They got to come up with something new every year why not this ?
Another problem would be that you’d making people all wet. You’d have to provide them with special clothes, drying facilities, changing rooms, etc. There would hygiene issues and safety issues (not everyone’s the same height y’know). In short, it’s not very practical.
[sub]Of course, someone’s going to come in and tell me they’ve already made one now.[/sub]
Yup.
Well, sort of. Elitch’s in Denver has a ride that’s sort of like a rollercoaster, but ends up going through water. Also, I believe there’s one at Disneyworld - Thunder Mountain, or something like that.
I don’t think either of them actually go under water, but they do splash through more than enough water to get you completely soaked.
Oh I know about those ones - I was talking about the semi-submersion idea, where you’re actually IN the water. 
The seats can be adjusted by lifting up and down. The engineers can come up with all kinds of ways to make it safe.
When i went to disney world i didnt go on Thunder Mountain because the lines were so mad long probably one of longest around, which only speaks to the popularity of this kind of thing.
As to making people completly wet. Well thats just part of the ride.
At universal studios the Twister gets you pretty wet not completely socks you though.
Hitting water at a high speed is kinda like hitting cement - think of unintentional belly-flops. Even with a hydrodynamic nose on your coaster car, there’s gonna be a nasty deceleration followed by whiplash. I believe the coasters which end in sprays of water go thru relatively shallow pools.
Much as I love roller coasters, I’d not want to ride in one that stopped that way.
The getting wet part isn’t the problem. At King’s Island they had several water rides. Essentially roller coasters that splashed down into a pool at the end. (They may still have them. It’s been a while since I’ve been there last. I think they took at least one out though.)
That ended those rides though, they didn’t go on for more “rollercoaster-ness”. The boat/car rode in to the station.
Lots of people got wet, and that was the point. Loads of fun. (Girls in white shorts…Homer-esque “guhhhhh…”)
The problem would be getting the car going again. Hitting the water and blasting up the spray ate your momentum. Actually going under would probably break your neck.
So, good thought, but it’s been done. Sorta.
-Rue.
I “previewed” at there’s Athena’s post. So, “Yeah, what she said…”
You know like the Batman ride at Six Flags uses jet to accellarate you from 0 to 60 in a second. Well this will be the same thing except once safely submerged in water the jets would kick in blasting people though the water. Thats the whole premise of the ride to go fast though water instead of air.
How 'bout simply running the track thru a transparent tube that goes under water? With sharks!
Right idea, wrong park. “Big Thunder Mountain” at the Magic Kingdom is a runaway mine train-themed roller coaster - no water at all.
SeaWorld “Journey to Atlantis” is a water-coaster. The cars are wheeled boats (Greek fishing village-theme) -
Most of the ride is on water:
[li] Boat leaves the station in a standard water ride trough (free-floating vessel[/li][li] Lots of scenery and special effects (when they are functioning)[/li][li] Big drop (wheeee!)[/li][li] Trough curves around to next incline (with one very sharp dip and a large wave bounces back and washes over the front of the boat - I mean a LOT of water)[/li][li] Water drains out on sharp incline (roller coaster pull chain[/li][li] Wheels lock onto steel coaster track[/li][li] Roller coaster sharp drop and curve to the left[/li][li] Track leads into water trough (and lots of spray and waves)[/li][li] Final curve and boat returns to station.[/li]
All in all, the roller coaster section of the ride takes maybe 15 seconds maximum (haven’t timed it, but it is very short compared to the rest of the ride. It’s enough for them to call it a coaster, though.
I think of Thunder Mountain-type rides as flumes rather than roller coasters. In my mind, a roller coaster requires a large initial drop (as opposed to the climactic plunge of a flume), sustained high speed (most of Thunder Mountain is a semi-lazy float), and multiple, rapid-fire “stunts,” be they hills, loops, or banked turns. A good roller coaster will only have one chain pull, whereas a good flume requires several.
Given the state of roller coaster technology and the demad that exists for the next and hottest thing in amusements, I think that, if a submersion coaster were feasable, one would have gone into the works within the last several years. I think the saftey issue is at the heart of the problem; the possibility for injury is much too great were one to bring send a train of ~40 people underwater at anything approaching an acceptable roller coaster speed.
Now, a Raptor-type coaster that pulled a stunt like the one UncleBeer discribes–I’d ride that any day of the week and twice on Saturdays.
There is, or used to be, a flume ride at Six Flags Great America, outside Chicago, that was like being in the imploding wheelhouse in Titanic. The last drop sends up a huge spray, about fifty feet high, that completely engulfs the car. It subsides quickly, but as soon as it does, you go under an elevated walkway. Everyone goes, “Ah-h-h!” as icy water drips from the walkway and down the back of their necks. For a bonus, you can leave via the walkway and wait for another car to come down. Then you’re caught in a wall of water. If the walkway wasn’t enclosed in chain link, children, and maybe small adults, would be washed away.
Francesca, I wouldn’t call for changing rooms, etc., seeing as how these water rides operate without such facilities. If someone doesn’t know enough to wear their grubbies to an amusement park…
Six Flags Magic Mountain in CA has that ride, called Tidal Wave. It goes up, around, and down a hill and makes a big splash.
You get wet.
I was on a coaster (the Anaconda at Kings Dominion) that went into an underwater tunnel. No sharks though.
Well, the reason fish are extremely streamlined is that water creates a lot of drag.
If you partially submerge somebody and accelerate them to 60 mph you will basically rip them apart.
You might be able to creat and effect skipping on water, and, if you accelerate a stream of water to 60 mph or so, there’s no reason you couldn’t partially submerge a coaster in that, but there’s no realistic way of moving an individual through water at 60 mph without encapsulating him.
It would be a killer ride and I mean this literally.
The human body isn’t designed to be propelled through water at high speed and the force of the water on your body would be immense.
It only takes a pressure of eight pounds per square inch to break most bones in your body, I would imagine that the water hitting your body at 60 miles an hour would generate considerably more force than this. The ability to breathe wouldn’t even be an issue as the force on your chest would prevent you from drawing breath from any breathing apparatus.
Scylla was right on when he said the riders would have to be encapsulated.
I could probably get Lola to work out the physics on what would happen to your body.