Roller coaster interaction

[andrus]

I personally think that esthetics is half the fun with roller coasters! It should be equally fun to watch the coaster as riding it imo A good coaster design can work both to intimidate the people standing in line for the ride as well as amaze the non-riding onlookers. A well thought-out coaster design can IOW entartain all the park visitors, not just the ones brave enough to ride it!

It might just be me as an architect student, but I think that the coaster manufacturers generally care too much for the ride experience and often neglect the onlookers. There are of course exceptions! My personal favourites are probably the loop across the lift hill on Kumba and the pathway through the loop on Black Mamba:

Beautiful interaction with intertwined corkscews, terrain interaction, the lift hill through the loop and a good area for taking pictures of it all! (Photo from TPR)

There's an actual pathway through the loop of Black Mamba, quite stunning if you ask me! (Photo from TPR)

With simple meathods you can achieve spectacular looking rides! What's your favourite coaster interaction?

 

[Rachel]

It might just be me as an architect student, but I think that the coaster manufacturers generally care too much for the ride experience and often neglect the onlookers. There are of course exceptions!

But what's the point in making a coaster that looks great but doesn't ride great?

 

[Smithy]

I think he's rather focusing on the lack of thought given to how the coaster will 'look' rather than saying they're wrong to focus heavily on the overall experience.

I'd tend to agree, the presentation of a ride can play a massive part in the overall experience, either through the ride being photogenic pre-visit (assuming I'm not the only one who actually bothers to check things beforehand) or being intimidating/enticing in person. A large part of Dragon Khan's charm has always been the overall experience which not only includes the ride experience, but also the view on ride and the view of the ride around the park.

 

[Martyn B]

I see what you're saying. It's something we have a lot of here in the UK (thinking more along the lines of pathways under coasters - see Thorpe and Alton). It really does enhance the experience IMO.

I don't what it's like all over the States, but I remember a few of the coasters in Orlando were hidden away; You can only really see Dragon Challenge when you're in the queue, half of Hulk is hidden behind a wall, H:RRR is hidden behind buildings, Montu (wasn't hidden as such) was all behind a fence, coudn't see much of Gwazi without being on it and Kraken was hidden away out of the park.

 

[Rachel]

I definitely would agree that being able to see a ride adds to the whole experience, when you're queuing it really adds to the excitement.

But overall for me personally the ride experience is more important than the aesthetics.

I will give a mention to the whole Dragon Khan/Shambhala area at PA. The way the coasters interact with eachother and over all the pathways is incredibly well done.

 

[Lofty]

This is a very tricky topic, I have an argument for both sides of this.;

Seeing a coaster running and hearing the screams etc. is always fantastic and really builds the tension up before you board, BUT, there's always the fear of the unknown with coasters that you can't actually see some of the elements on. Think Thirteen, indoor coasters etc. One of my favourite coasters (experience wise) is actually Revenge of the Mummy (Orlando), I love the whole experience and there's actually nothing of the ride you can see from outside.

I will give a mention to the whole Dragon Khan/Shambhala area at PA. The way the coasters interact with eachother and over all the pathways is incredibly well done.

That's another tricky one. I used to really love seeing Khan on it's own, formidable and vast on top of the hill. The fact it was the only thing there really added to it's aesthetic value. But, it's fantastic that you get much more interaction with it now and you can really see more of the ride, although it's bigger brother Shambhala is right over it.

 

[Gavin]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Nemesis yet. I'm loathe to be so obvious, but the queue line interaction with that is superb in the way that it sort of reveals different parts of the coaster as you move through the queue without ever really ever getting to see the whole layout. It's all very intimidating if you haven't ridden it before.

Being able to stand around Oblivion's hole is an excellent interactive feature, too.

I've also always liked the walkway that goes through the loop on French Revolution, though it's kind of wasted as it's quite tucked away and only leads to some crappy puppet show.

 

[ATTACKHAMMER]

I love walking under the coasters it's awesome, walking down the stairs past the fake blood really adds to the Nemesis experience.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

It might just be me as an architect student, but I think that the coaster manufacturers generally care too much for the ride experience and often neglect the onlookers. There are of course exceptions!

But what's the point in making a coaster that looks great but doesn't ride great?

If it looks great, it has a higher chance of riding great.

Psychology is fun.

Colossus is one of the best examples, I think. And it's popularity with guests 10 years on owes itself in part to the way it presents itself. It looks a whole lot bigger than it is because of the way you can get in and amongst it, and were until recently forced to in order to navigate the park. The noise it makes as it passes over you is (horrendous) incredibly loud, demanding the attention of passers by.

 

[Nick P]

It might just be me as an architect student, but I think that the coaster manufacturers generally care too much for the ride experience and often neglect the onlookers. There are of course exceptions!

But what's the point in making a coaster that looks great but doesn't ride great?

If it looks great, it has a higher chance of riding great.

Psychology is fun.

Colossus is one of the best examples, I think. And it's popularity with guests 10 years on owes itself in part to the way it presents itself. It looks a whole lot bigger than it is because of the way you can get in and amongst it, and were until recently forced to in order to navigate the park. The noise it makes as it passes over you is (horrendous) incredibly loud, demanding the attention of passers by.

Yes, this is definitely one way to attract a guests attention, especially when it comes to most B&M inverts.(Talon is filled with sand to reduce the noise) Most can be heard from more than halfway across the park.
(Although, if the appearance isn't too great, combined with the almost "frightful" roar the coaster makes, could this potentially deter non coaster enthusiasts from a ride...?) One example of this could be Great Bear @ Hershey. The unattractive black track, combined with the roar the ride, make it seem quite... grisly. (no pun intended)

 

[nadroJ]

I loved the way Blue Fire's launch lined up with the queueline at one point, you could feel the rush of wind in your face at it launched.

I also love in the Nemesis queue by the vertical loop, again the rush of air is amazing.

 

[Mark]

Gavin mentioned the queue interaction of Nemesis and I also think a nod towards the 'pit' area outside of the queue is due. It was only at the beginning of the year that I actually walked down there and realised just how close you can get to the track. It is a brilliant spot for photographs. I posted photos at the time and I seem to remember one of our American members (I think UC) commenting on how that kind of upclose to the track interaction is rare in the States.

I think the real proof of the pudding is some of the American coasters that really are just plonked on a car park. It didn't matter how good the coaster was, there was something really dissapointing about the overall experience for me. The point I am making is, they could have easily done just the same with the first example in this topic, Kumba. They could have just plonked it on some flat land but they didn't. They clearly built up the hills and contours around the attraction to compliment it well, giving it those terrain, ground hugging moments.

For me, it is incredibly important to have a coaster look as entertaining as it is to ride. I daresay that all of us have a variable number of people within our friends and family who hate rides. Some of us probably have those that hate riding the rollercoasters but actually enjoying being at a theme park and so. My mum is prime example, as kids growing up, she would often take up position as the bag lady but she said she was never bored or annoyed by the waiting around. She would always lament how much she enjoyed watching everyone having a good time and that she was always fascinated by how the rides move and operate and so on. Personally I think she is a closet coaster goon, but she can't ride them as they always make her sick lol.

Having those moments of interaction is what takes a good coaster into the realms of brilliance. As Jordan mentioned, the blast of air you get from Nemesis is great when queuing. Similar can be said of Oblivion with its pit and that isnt even for the benefit of those queuing. Instead it is a 'entertainment' for those that are not riding. Giving them a part of the experience so to speak. Would Scream at SFMM really give non-riders any form of experience that they could share with those that did ride? Well, I didn't think there was very much to look at to be honest, there is nothing unique about it and its just plonked on a car park and looks a bit neglected.

John Wardley has mentioned in previous interviews that it is important to entertain everyone including those who don't ride and I agree 100%. The moment you focus on only the rider is the moment the overal style and experience for visitors on the whole is diminished.

 

[Brookes]

I agree with Lofty that this is indeed a double-edged sword. On the one hand I love coasters that you can just sit and watch, building anticipation whilst in the queueline and also for onlookers. One example is California Screamin'. It's just a great looking ride which I could easily watch go around the track for quite a while (which is incidently what I did whilst waiting for World of Color to start).

On the other side of things you have the "unknown". I remember when I first rode Zeus, which was one of my first coasters. You can hardly see anything of it from the queue. Then you start to climb to the lift hill and upon looking left and right I was left amazed at how much track there was. Another example is Space Mountain: Mission 2. I rode it several days after Zeus and again the fear and excitement of it could not have been created with an attraction you could see before riding.

 

[Mark]

I do see where you are coming from, but my argument against hiding the coaster away is that anyone that doesn't ride is just left sat near a queue with only a building to look at. Not all that exciting.

Its funny because when Colossus at Thorpe Park opened, a TV show (Tommorows World I believe) did a study on how queuing amongst the ride compares to the ride being hidden away. The findings show that those who were hidden away from seeing the ride beforehand were less anxious/nervous/excited than those who had spent an hour in the queue with nothing to look at besides the coaster barreling through its 'intimidating' inversions etc. So although you may have an emmotional reaction to the surprise of a coaster when you don't know what happens it would seem that amongst the majority of people, the emmotional reaction is far more substantial if you have been subjected to what awaits for a period of time beforehand.

 

[Hyde]

Spot on topic andrus! You point out a very important aspect of design - form vs. function. It is always a trade off; how something looks compared to how it performs.

Imagine a car. If we wanted this car to go as fast as possible, everything would be geared towards performance. Huge engine, fuel injectors, stripped interior, perfect jet-stream body. It would be a fast, light car - perfect for the race track.

But how would the car look? Would it be practical for everyday driving?

The car pictured above is an Ariel Atom - a mini F1 race car that is road legal. You will be hard pressed to find a better car for a race lap. But without a roof, A/C, cupholders, or a passenger seat; this is not an ideal car.

So let's look at a car that is designed with form in mind. Forget performance and ability to drive. We want something that looks good, inside and out. Why not try on a Rolls Royce for size?

Considering your average Rolls weighs approximately one bazillion pounds - it is not going to give the fastest lap time. Instead, you trade off for the ultimate standard in car comfort. From the classic exterior to the 12 cows-killed-per-car leather and custom ashtray design, there is no arguing with the comfort achieved in this luxury sedan.

So we have a really fast car, and a really comfy car. But can you have both?

That is the problem designers persistently face - achieving something that not only performs, but looks good while doing it.

Again with the car example, let's take the Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG.

This is a super fast car that also carries all the comfortable amenities on the interior. It looks good, performs superbly, and is a rather good example of form meeting function.

Let's extrapolate this to roller coasters. Designers too face a trade off of creating good roller coaster designs and interacting with crowds.

You can have your blatant crowd interactions, such as Dragon Challenge at Islands of Adventure. Yet many can agree that this is not the best roller coaster design, feeling partial. It looks amazing, yet can sometimes not give such a ride.

You can also have an amazing roller coaster with zero crowd interaction, such as The Beast. It is a unique layout that interacts with the environment (and was famously custom built to avoid certain trees that were not worth chopping down). There is definitely an element of mystery as all park guests can see is the first hill of the ride.

And then there are roller coasters that can meld crowd interaction with an all-round good layout. This is the most difficult undertaking, but arguably leads to the best results. Expedition Everest springs to mind as a good example of showing park guests enough to get the gist of the ride... but not too much, leaving much of the layout out-of-sight.

It is good when coasters interact with their surroundings. It is also good when coasters have perfect layouts. But it is best when the two are skillfully melded.

 

[Lofty]

I wish. More like this;

 

[silenthillXD]

My favourite would have to be at the bottom of nemesis' drop as it follows the waterfall which leads down to the queue as you are heading down deeper into the crevice. I think it looks amazing, and it's certainly no coincidence how it's one of the most common photo opportunities on that ride.
Also how can anyone forget Oblivion, the fact guests can walk up to the hole in the ground is amazing as it even creates an experience people who are too scared to ride can enjoy. The rush of mist that comes up as the train enters the hole and just the enjoyment of watching people fall down is amazing, allthough not as good as actually riding.

 

[Error]

What comes to mind for me for some coaster interaction is 2 rides: Skyrush and Corkscrew (CP).

Skyrush has a small path linking to parts of the park together. Minus a section of Comet, all you get is a lovely showing of the layout of Skyrush. Marc and Myself spent a good hour taking pictures and video, partly because of the beauty and partly due to having to wait for trains.

Two I took:

Corkscrew at Cedar Point has it's namesake going OVER the midway, allowing guests to see exactly what it does above you. And over the many years, have become quite iconic:

 

[Hyde]

I wish. More like this;

Indeed. I am quite perplexed over Dragon Challenge - it is a remnant of a previous theme, and sits very awkwardly in Harry Potter World. Previously the gem of the Lost Continent, it now feels like it is presented as a sideshow to the Hogwarts castle.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Even previously, Duelling Dragon's was very limited in the interaction with non-riders. It was clearly a ride designed for spectacle, then nowhere for people to spectate was offered. I actually think it's pretty poorly designed.