Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Phantasialand | F. L. Y. | Vekoma Launched Flying Coaster | 2020

theGman said:
How much of that car park would they be able to build on if they were to get the other site? China has needed something major for while and they might be able to squeeze something onto the side of the area if the farmer doesn't scream to them to get off their land. I'd suggest a wooden coaster as one of the big gaps in their coaster lineup but I don't know if that'd cause sound problems for that side of the site.
Of course, with two seemingly thrill-based coasters in a row there are bigger priorities for the park right now in terms of expanding their lineup but I would just love to see what a park like Phantasia would do with a big complex wooden structure.. make it into the great wall of china?
Click to expand...

I agree - BUT I think Phantasialand's Chinese area would be PERFECT for one of the Large boat dark ride/stunt shows found at a couple of the Fantawild/Oriental heritage parks! - And that site you mention would be a perfect expansion, also considering it would an enclosed attraction - there would be less problems with neighbours than a wooden roller-coaster would cause!
 
Lofty said:
Well, technically that is absolutely an inversion ;)
Click to expand...
Of course, the track inverts, I'm not denying that. I'm just saying, unless your head ends up below your belly, you don't really have the inversion fright factor.
I'm not talking sensations or track behaviour. I'm just talking GP fear/no fear.

Personally, I think the flying position is going to affect the average visitor's psyche much more than an inversion, with only your restraint between your body and the ground far below. And that alone makes the idea of a flying family coaster slightly dubious.

And no, I didn't speak out my arse, you just did not try to understand what I was saying. Same goes for Chris Brown.
 
balrog said:
Of course, the track inverts, I'm not denying that. I'm just saying, unless your head ends up below your belly, you don't really have the inversion fright factor.
I'm not talking sensations or track behaviour. I'm just talking GP fear/no fear.

Personally, I think the flying position is going to affect the average visitor's psyche much more than an inversion, with only your restraint between your body and the ground far below. And that alone makes the idea of a flying family coaster slightly dubious.

And no, I didn't speak out my arse, you just did not try to understand what I was saying. Same goes for Chris Brown.
Click to expand...

Cmon man all I've done is post a picture of a Zero G roll after you said you'd only seen a fly to lie. I'm not bothered about your definition of an inversion on a flying coaster and whether that zero g is gonna be intense or not. You called me out saying I was wrong about there being an inversion, I posted a picture clearly showing said inversion. It's not about me not understanding your post at all it's about you missing the photo of an inversion posted two pages ago on this thread.

Edit: Oh I see, now your going back to your original comment and changing it, why go back and change such a fundamental mistake to your comment thus rendering this whole thread obsolete?
 
Last edited:
Chris Brown said:
Cmon man all I've done is post a picture of a Zero G roll after you said you'd only seen a fly to lie. I'm not bothered about your definition of an inversion on a flying coaster and whether that zero g is gonna be intense or not. You called me out saying I was wrong about there being an inversion, I posted a picture clearly showing said inversion. It's not about me not understanding your post at all it's about you missing the photo of an inversion posted two pages ago on this thread.

Edit: Oh I see, now your going back to your original comment and changing it, why go back and change such a fundamental mistake to your comment thus rendering this whole thread obsolete?
Click to expand...
The inversion may feel different because of the special riding position, but as you said, it is still an inversion. I think getting turned around by 360° rather quickly in that position can still be disorienting, intense and fun.
 
Chris Brown said:
Cmon man all I've done is post a picture of a Zero G roll after you said you'd only seen a fly to lie. I'm not bothered about your definition of an inversion on a flying coaster and whether that zero g is gonna be intense or not. You called me out saying I was wrong about there being an inversion, I posted a picture clearly showing said inversion. It's not about me not understanding your post at all it's about you missing the photo of an inversion posted two pages ago on this thread.

Edit: Oh I see, now your going back to your original comment and changing it, why go back and change such a fundamental mistake to your comment thus rendering this whole thread obsolete?
Click to expand...
Hmmm .. The only change i've made to the comment was to replace a o by a i to correct a misprint. My comment is just a follow up from a post I wrote a few pages earlier explain that track inversions on flyers do not invert riders, thus the denomination "fly to lie". Only steep drop actually invert riders, like on a vertical loop or pretzel. This is basically the same discussion (although in the opposite way) as for the inversion count on 4d coasters. The question is always, should we count how many time riders go upside down or how many time does the track inverts.

I thought that on a coaster enthousiast forum everybody was aware of what an inversion is and I could skip the basics to directly tickle the real questions. I was wrong.

Finally, my previous posts in this very thread show that I was aware of the existence of the zero-G roll.

To make my point clear, zero-G rolls on flyers are indeed considered as inversions as they are track inversions. They do not however put the riders upside down, but the rider experiences a fly to lie to fly. Therefore, I am unconvinced that their existence forbid the coaster to be family friendly. However, I am not convinced by the whole concept of family flyer as the flying position in itself is a serious fright factor.
 
Last edited:
balrog said:
To make my point clear, zero-G rolls on flyers are indeed considered as inversions as they are trackinversion. They do not however put the riders upside down, but the rider experiences a fly to lie to fly. Therefore, I am unconvinced that their existence forbid the coaster to be family friendly. However, I am not convinced by the whole concept of family flyer as the flying position in itself is a serious fright factor.
Click to expand...
Regardless of how we call it, as I said I think it will still be intense enough. Getting turned around that quickly should still be relatively intense and disorienting. But I can just guess, I have not been on a Flying Coaster yet. Does somebody have some experience? How does the Inline Twist on Galactica feel like? It looks rather slow though, I can imagine this Zero-G-Roll will be faster. Is there a Flying Coaster with an actual Zero-G-Roll?
 
^Tatsu has a zero-g roll. I'm sure there are others.

I haven't read through all of the discussion, but I'm definitely with balrog in that a zero-g roll on a flyer doesn't actually invert. If they count as an inversion so would (outside) top hats on regular coasters, as they put the riders in the same position.
 
Ireeb said:
Regardless of how we call it, as I said I think it will still be intense enough. Getting turned around that quickly should still be relatively intense and disorienting. But I can just guess, I have not been on a Flying Coaster yet. Does somebody have some experience? How does the Inline Twist on Galactica feel like? It looks rather slow though, I can imagine this Zero-G-Roll will be faster. Is there a Flying Coaster with an actual Zero-G-Roll?
Click to expand...

It's like doing a 360 in bed. ;)
 
The inversion debate is interesting, haven't seen it for a while actually.

My opinion is that... although technically the human body doesn't experience a complete 'inversion' in the traditional sense, there is definitely grounds for this being an inversion because A. the track inverts and B. the rider inverts from their original position.
 
ATI said:
It's like doing a 360 in bed. ;)
Click to expand...
It's a difference if you do it yourself in your bed, or if a giant steel machine does it, several meters over the ground and much faster, while you are floating.
(please do not take this post out of its context. Thanks.)
 
GuyWithAStick said:
Some say if you ask "Is it an inversion?" three times in a dark room, @furie will appear with The Chart.

Sent from my VS820 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

As if by magic...

inversions.jpg
 
My original photo of the inversion was more of a suggestion that the track inverted as opposed to an actual 'technical' inversion as shown in the charts. @balrog i certainly agree with your points regarding the fly to lie to fly argument and how they shouldn't be considered 'proper' inversions as they dont invert the rider on B&M flyers. I would however argue that this looks like more of a Zero G roll than an inline twist and as such the ride will never be flat on their back or on their front.

Seeing as we know little about this coaster but there is the prototype to suggest the seats are able to pivot and twist it could well be that the element in questions isn't even negotiated in the flying position. But that's just my imaginations running away from me a bit!
 
My thought is the following: In our head we've got our eyes and also a balance-organ in our ears that is able to sense gravitation, movement and rotation, and it's of course supported by our eyes. When in a flying coaster, you probably won't look straight to the ground, you'll rather look ahead. In that case your head is in a similar position like it is in a normal coaster. Now if we compare a heartline-roll on a flying vs. sitdown coaster, in both cases you look ahead and your head gets rotated by 360° sideways. You see the whole world in front of you spin and your balance sense is feeling something very similar to a normal heartline roll, since it gets rotated in a similar way.
The only difference is that your body isn't actually above your head, your brain registers that as well. That makes it less intense, but is it no inversion because of that? When something gets inverted, it gets turned around by 180°. When you are lying on your belly and then you lie on your back, didn't you just get turned around by 180° compared to the previous position?
And when you lie on your bed and let your head hang over the edge so you can look at the wall, doesn't it look and feel kinda upside-down?
My point is that it would be an inversion on a flying coasters, but they feel different to normal inversions and less intense, so you can't really compare them.
 
Well, this is really not the point I was trying to make. I am just saying that, considering a kid/inexperienced rider trying to decide whether or not riding this roller-coaster, you cannot compare the fright factor of lying on your back on top of this 0-g roll with the one of being wholly upside down on top on Mamba's. This is completely uncorrelated with actual on board experience.
But then again, I do firmly believe that - IN THIS CASE - the flying position in itself constitute a way bigger fright factor than Mamba's inversions.

If you want my personal opinion on inversions, I believe the distinction is rather pointless. Trying to determine if this or that element is an overbank or an inversion, or determine the limit between the two, feels completely disconnected from reality. And I also believe that we shouldn't count the number of inversions on a flyer, as depending on their type/profile, they might feel really differently and the very term is ill-defined anyway.
 
balrog said:
Well, this is really not the point I was trying to make. I am just saying that, considering a kid/inexperienced rider trying to decide whether or not riding this roller-coaster, you cannot compare the fright factor of lying on your back on top of this 0-g roll with the one of being wholly upside down on top on Mamba's. This is completely uncorrelated with actual on board experience.
But then again, I do firmly believe that - IN THIS CASE - the flying position in itself constitute a way bigger fright factor than Mamba's inversions.

If you want my personal opinion on inversions, I believe the distinction is rather pointless. Trying to determine if this or that element is an overbank or an inversion, or determine the limit between the two, feels completely disconnected from reality. And I also believe that we shouldn't count the number of inversions on a flyer, as depending on their type/profile, they might feel really differently and the very term is ill-defined anyway.
Click to expand...

Very much agreed. I doubt a member of the public is gonna get furies inversion chart out and base whether they ride it or not on his / her interpretation of an inversion! No offence Furie ;)
 
I mean, technically the term inversion isn't reduced to just meaning "upside down", to invert something is also to arrange something in the opposite position.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top