Talk:Roller coaster
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Roller Coasters, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Roller coasters. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
|
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
As written at "About" website, the patent registration date might be twenty years later then said in the article (1885) which one is the right one?: check this out- (http://www.realcoasters.com/coasters.htm)
"All passengers, using modern safety technology, MUST be secured safely into the roller coaster car. Roller coasters in all parks are subject to stringent safety precautions and inspections."
Can this be rephrased? Ride safety regulations vary from state to state, and some roller coasters are only subject to in-house inspection.
How about the early 20th century alternative name for the roller coaster was "Scenic railway" ? -- Infrogmation 07:10 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Backwards Cars
I question listing Racer as the first coaster to "run a car backwards" -- perhaps it was the first to have it s riders seated backwards the whole way, but Kings Island itself had already had a coaster that sent riders backwards through a loop that they'd just went through forwards - the Screamin' Demon. Lambertman 12:48, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
It does look like The Screamin' Demon was the first shuttle train coaster in 1977, at least one from Arrow. The difference is that Racer physically turned the cars around on the track to have the riders run backwards, while a shuttle coaster is designed to be run backwards and forwards. The question would be whether the early-early coasters had cars that went backwards and forwards as well before the complete circuit coaster was created. SpikeJones 13:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] New record breaker on the way
Expect a new record breaking ride on Sep. 29 2004?... The main page will have to eventually be updated.
I think that the record breakers should be taken off this page and moved to the non-existant Notable roller coasters page, or we modify the List of tallest roller coasters page that already exists to include other records. This way we can list the record breaking history of all coasters involved over time instead of just updating a single "current" mention.SpikeJones 11:31, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
-
I think that's a good idea, and if it's going to a notable roller coasters page, the roller coaster firsts should go with it.
Also, is the line item for "longest operating" supposed to mean the coaster with the longest track that is currently operating, or is it the oldest still-operating coaster? SpikeJones 11:31, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
-
I made it "longest operating" to mean the longest length coaster which is still operating, as apposed to Steel dragon, which is longer, and is still standing, but not operating. Maybe there should still be some reference to that.
As for oldest roller coaster that's still operating, it's a hard one to define, because full information is not always available, especially with the complex evolution of roller coasters, the lines get blurred. To pinpoint one, though, most people go with Scenic Railway at Luna Park, which opened in 1912, and is still operating.
Well, a list of 'longest/tallest/fastest coasters' would include names, dates, and lengths and other details so we could follow that Steel Dragon would be on that list through such-and-such time . I could see combining those lists with the list of coaster firsts, as they would all pretty much be 'notable coasters' for one reason or other. Of course, that raises a question of coasters that are notable but not record-breaking or first -- would that be yet another category on the page? I think we all could see a place for something like Coney Island's Cyclone as being notable, but how would we decide whether "Six Flags Runaway Mine Train" is also notable or not? SpikeJones 16:08, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
-
I see where you're coming from here, and it is a problem. There are many coasters which most enthusiasts agree are notable, without being world first or record breakers. These are generally the genre defining, highly copied or revolutionary coasters. I think these do warrant a section of their own, maybe Other notable coasters, or something like that. I think these would generally be coasters which most enthusiasts would agree with as being notable, and as changing the coaster world in some way. I don't think we need any strict classification of what's notable and what isn't, but there's always someone who'll just add any old coaster and call it notable. I guess for every entry, you'd have to explain why you feel that particular coaster is notable, otherwise there's no point in having the list. So if anyone doesn't feel the reasons are good enough, it can be removed. The problem is, it's all very opinionative, which is not what wikipedia's about, but if the opinion is common enough, it's worth having metioning in the article.
While we're talking about making changes and possibly breaking some content off onto their own pages, do we need the section "Types of Roller Coasters" when there is already an entry for Category:Types of roller coasters? Besides, isn't listing "sitdown coaster" redundant, as the default coaster type is that one? If not, then make sure it's added to the Category listing as well. SpikeJones 03:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
-
Yeah, you're probably right about not needing to list the roller coaster types twice. Just refer to the external article.
About the sitting coaster, I feel it was needed in that article because of the way the article was indexed. Although it is the default coaster type, to an observer it would look as if steel coasters could be inverted, floorless, e.t.c, but not sitting. Although we don't have an article for steel sitting, it was probably needed there to avoid confusion. I'm not sure if it's needed in the main listing, because it's classified differently. Maybe we could just put it as "steel sitting coaster" and make it link to steel roller coaster (but that's only a small stub anyway, so is there any point?
Personally, I think that that whole indexing is wrong anyway, because things like hypercoaster and Giga Coaster should also go under steel coaster. But there's no point getting into that argument if the section's going anyway.
Also, and this applies to the category as well as the article, things like "duelling", "shuttle" and "out and back" are not types, they are designs of rollercoaster. Maybe there should be two articles, one for types, and one for designs. But maybe that would be more confusing, especially for people who didn't know the difference.
- Rewrote section on "Coaster Types" to address one part of the above discussion. Created Notable roller coasters page, to include "World Records", "Coaster Firsts", and "Notable Coasters". See that page for continued discussion, please. SpikeJones 19:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Reverse coasters?
I started a discussion at Talk:Kennywood about "reverse coasters", that is, that start on a hill with no lift and then roll down to the mechanical lift elsewhere on the ride. Never been on one, know nothing about them, but I figured I should mention the discussion here. Ortolan88 00:12, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] History
Need to do some more research on this, but the origins of the roller coaster can be traced back to the Russians who built "mountains of ice" to slide down, and then the French who actually developed the idea into an amusement device. See [1]
I'd like to suggest someone research and add something about the 'railroad' at Mauch Chunk (now Jim Thorpe), Penn. See [2]. I've heard that speeds exceeded 100 MPH in some places.
Check out this link: [ http://www.farmington.k12.mo.us/school/hs/departments/curr/rollercoaster/history.htm ]. I don't believe that Mauch Chauk exceeded 100mph; that would qualify as an urban legend. But I believe it did get to over 60mph, which for those days was quite fast.
Also, the picture of the "typical roller coaster" at the beginning of the Wikipedia article is actually not typical at all. It's a rough illustration taken from Harry Traver's patent application for his infamous Cyclone coasters, one of the most injurious and short-lived coaster designs ever created.
From the "History" section - "The Great Depression marked the end of the first Golden Age of roller coasters. Theme parks in general went into a decline that lasted until 1972, when the Racer was built at Kings Island in Mason, Ohio (near Cincinnati)." I don't know enough to edit this, but did the decline *really* last until 1972? (The following section describes Disney's tubular steel coaster of 1959 ...). Any thoughts, anyone? (132.244.246.25)
- 1972 and The Racer seem to be the starting point for a flurry of coaster- and park-building activity. Before that time, it had been many decades when there wasn't the sheer mass of new construction. The 70's are when many of the parks we love today started. WDW (1971), Great America (1976), King's Island (1972), Carowinds (1973), Magic Mountain (1971), Alton Towers (1980), Great Adventure (1974), etc. SpikeJones 12:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Rollercoaster or Roller Coaster
Since when was Rollercoaster two words? I've always considered it as a single word. Maybe it's a British/US thing. A Google search turns up >2,100,000 hits for the one word, and 1,600,000 for the two words (quoted). This might not be a totally fair search, depending on how Google does its thing though.Graham 00:57, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
-
- Good question. I wondered about this myself a while ago but didn't bother to say anything about it. I thought it was rollercoaster, one word, myself. However, AHD4, available online, which both online and in print I've found to be very reliable, lists "roller coaster," two words, but not "rollercoaster."
-
- The relevant USENET group is named rec.roller-coaster. Which suggests that whoever named the group thought of it as two words.
-
- Within that group, which presumably has a high percentage of people who actually care about the things, I find:
-
- Results 1 - 100 of 10,800 for "rollercoaster" group:rec.roller-coaster
-
- Results 1 - 100 of 293,000 for "roller coaster" group:rec.roller-coaster
-
- So that would be evidence for "two words."
-
- A few visits to sites like http://www.coasterbuzz.com/ and amusement parks make me think the two-word form really is predominant.
most of the rollercoaster websites are American. most of the rec.roller-coaster posters are American. the American Heritage Dictionary, reliable or not, is American. the English word is rollercoaster, one word, and the American form is two words. so if you speak American, not English, use two words. if you speak English, it is the one word form. just like tyres and tires... the two forms can happily coexist, there is neither a right or a wrong form but you should be consistent in your own writing. it seems that we are dealing with two different dialects, in the process of becoming two different languages.
-
- That British/American idea isn't true. The Br. Eng. term is actually "big dipper", but Collins (British) English dictionary lists "roller coaster" (two words) as "another term for big dipper". Two words is correct in the UK too.
Looking at the Roller Coaster category listing, there appears to be inconsistency there as well. Some articles are listed as "Coaster Name (rollercoaster)" while others are "Coaster Name (roller coaster)". Thoughts? SpikeJones 15:57, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Terms section
Does anyone else think a "terms" section might be useful to describe some of the roller coaster terms often used in more detail? It could be a subsection of this page or another separate page... It could include terms such as "clone" (when referring to coasters of course), airtime, types of restraints, and other terms that don't really warrant their own separate page but are still noteworthy. Anyone else concur? -- BrandonR 20:05, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] External Links cleanup
I think it would be a good idea to clean up the External Links section. Maybe we could create a seperate article with listings
As stated at External links Fan sites: On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such. In extreme cases, a link to a web directory of fansites can replace this link.
I also think we should consider using some of these sites: Joyrides (www.joyrides.com) - For the pictures Screamscape (www.screamscape.com) - The news site Theme Park Review (www.themeparkreview.com) - Primarily for the photo gallery and maybe the videos, although a forum registration is required for some of the POV videos Thrillride (www.thrillride.com) - Could be added once Robert Coker resumes updating regularly
Links that should be seriously be reconsidered: Coasterbuzz - "Sites with objectionable amounts of advertising" should not be linked A Ride Design Website - This site looks very unprofessional WillMcC 17:21, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
- The link I added, www.xtremecoastin.com, is a site which is very professional and contains no advertisements. It does, however, have descent videos, photo galleries, and a very active forum. They even have a wiki now that they are using to make an encyclopedia of roller coasters. This site is one of the best I've seen pertaining to the category, and deserves to be in the external link section. I don't appreciate people removing it and accusing me of "exchanging links." --Dunlevyd 08:48, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
:I would also like to add that I am not a member of this site, and am not trying to promote it in any way. I am merely trying to contribute to the link section for those who seek the appropriate follow up sites. --Dunlevyd 08:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)♥
[edit] Internal links cleanup
This article seems to contain too many internal links to unrelated topics, such as the patent article. Should some of these be unlinked? R'nway 15:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
- Of course. This is a perennial problem on Wikipedia; some editors seem to enjoy linking anything that can be linked. The relevant policy page is Make only links relevant to the context. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] PLC's on older coasters?
I wonder about the blanket description of the use of PLCs in the safety section. Some roller coasters give the impression of being quite old and not having changed much over the years.
Can one assume that historic wooden roller coasters like, say, Canobie Lake Park's Yankee Cannonball, built in the 1930s, or Rye, NY Playland's Dragon Coaster, "captivating people for over 75 years," have, contrary to appearances, been computerized?
Where are the PLCs installed? Where would one look for them on an older coaster? Dpbsmith (talk) 15:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed passage about Cedar Point and Six Flags
I removed the following passage from the article because it wasn't really part of roller coaster history. However, this passage could be a good addition to either Cedar Point or Six Flags Magic Mountain.
- Cedar Point in Sandusky, Ohio has called itself the Roller Coaster Capital of the World (alternatively calling itself America's Roller Coast in some promotional material), as the park has a number of world-record (or former world-record) roller coasters amongst the sixteen at the park.
- Six Flags Magic Mountain also claims to be the best location in America/the world for roller coaster fans. Although Cedar Point and Six Flags Magic Mountain have apparently never actually claimed that they were in competition, their history of building new roller coasters seems to indicate that they may be motivated by each others' advancements.
-- R'nway [ T C ] 22:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Trivia
Should we really have a trivia section or should that be removed? -- R'nway [ T C ] 18:25, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Videos
I have two great videos taken on roller coasters (The Great White and The Rattler) using a snuck aboard camera. The Great White video worked out extremely well. I'd love to link them, but they're too big to upload, and I don't have the bandwidth to host them. What would you all recommend? Email me with meqme@dauqghtersoqftiresias.org (remove qs to despammify). Also, I have some extremely high quality still shots taken on roller coasters on the Six Flags Fiesta Texas and SeaWorld pages. Is there interest in having any of them here, either mixed in with the flow of the article or as part of a gallery? -- Rei 04:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
- For large videos, you may want to consider uploading them to YouTube or Google Video for sharing, although that may not help getting them here. Perhaps the WikiCommons media area, as they have some videos there? I don't recommend scattering more images into this article, even as a gallery, when those images would better be served on the pages for the individual coasters or parks. SpikeJones 11:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] cost
could someone add a cost estimate of a medium-sized rollercoaster, or give examples of some rollercoaster prices ???-- ExpImptalkcon 20:27, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] September 5th?
The Safety section begins by saying that there was a tradgedy on September 5th... but on other pages, the death of Torres is listed as 2nd september. Which is correct? Which should be used?
- Outside references I've seen all say Sept 5.SpikeJones 16:31, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Height Section: Roller coaster term designations and their origins
As far as i know in reality Hypercoaster was a term coined by Arrow Dynamics when they built the magnum XL for cedar point, they used it in promotional materials and the term stuck for fans and was emulated by B&M for their "tall, fast & hill-filled" coasters and thus it became the standard for such... as far as the rest of the terms applied to roller coasters.... Mega- Giga- Strata- .. these are just production "models" used by Intamin AG ... for when parks go "roller coaster shopping", in fact if you look on the train there actually is a steel stamp with the rollercoaster's production designation and this goes for all Intamin trains (that i have seen at least, 15+)
