Talk:Shock Wave (Six Flags Over Texas)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Amusement Parks / Roller Coasters / Six Flags (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Amusement Parks, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Amusement parks on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Roller Coasters task force (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Six Flags task force (marked as Mid-importance).

G-force: 4.2 or 6 G?[edit]

Which value is correct: 4.2 or 6 G? From the shape of the loops ("circularity" of the clothoid) I would guess 6 G, since the Schwarzkopf Coaster "Nessie" (Hansapark, Northern Germany) has a very similar-shaped loop and reaches 5.6 G according to the operator. 4.2 is more common for modern-type loops with very their slim appearance (very gentle curvature near entrance and exit, very narrow at the top). Maybe 6 G is correct for the entrance of the first loop, where the cars reach their top speed. But citations are needed!--SiriusB (talk) 10:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Update: 6 G's was correct (actually 5.9, see the reference). However, the ride is currently being remodeled, according to the article, and therefore the loops might probably be redesigned for weaker forces, as done with the "Thriller" (also known as Zonga), another famous Schwarzkopf ride.--SiriusB (talk) 09:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

no they are not redoing the loops they are just remoldeling the track because its in bad shape —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpshuler (talkcontribs) 01:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

What does "in bad shape" exactly mean? Bad design? Or just deformation due to aging effects (it is known that some steel roller coasters get "bumpy" after several years and need some renovation)? However, you can also lower the G forces in the loops by lowering the first drop. This may cause negative Gs at the top of the loops (and therefore cancel one important property of a proper loop); a similar thing has been done to "Zonga" by elevating the first two (circular) loops by a few feet. I don't know whether or not ths caused negative G's, but its at least likely close to the limit. I also suspect that this was also the method of keeping the G forces low at the Olympia Looping. The first twin loop (actually loops #2 and #3 of five altogether) are of a similar size shape as the Shockwave loops, but the peak forces are only about 5.2 G's (according to the showman). The track is of the same height as Shockwave (32 metres), but there is one huge loop before the first twin loop, consuming some of the kinetic energy. However, I did not notice considerable minus G's on a ride last September.--SiriusB (talk) 13:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

they are redoing the track because its in bad shape plus they are only redoing the bunny hop and turn around at the end of the ride —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dpshuler (talkcontribs) 21:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Summer 2013 ride status[edit]

I know that rumor websites are suggesting that Shock Wave may be closed for the remainder of the season. The emphasis on this is rumor. Pending an announcement from the park itself, or a similar reliable source, the ride remains operational. Even if it were down for repairs, I would defer to however RCDB decides to list it; if Duane changes the status of Shock Wave from "Operating" to "SBNO", then we should as well. --McDoobAU93 03:14, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

UPDATE: The park has spoken, and all it has said is the ride is "temporarily closed". That does not change the ride's status to SBNO. --McDoobAU93 03:23, 30 June 2013 (UTC)