I think you're really pushing the load the human body can take by doing that. All your weight plus the g-forces are going right into your shoulders. You'd end up with a lot of cracked clavicles. IMO.
This doesn't seem right. Reverse banking FTW
- Thread starter Otturo
- Start date
I think you're really pushing the load the human body can take by doing that. All your weight plus the g-forces are going right into your shoulders. You'd end up with a lot of cracked clavicles. IMO.
I made a quick case study just for visual evidence.
I built this coaster with as many continuous turns as possible. The only difference between the two coasters is the direction of banking on all turns.
The blue coaster has an outward banking that is completely reverse and sideways. The red coaster has a traditional inward banking.
The nausea does rise on the outward banking coaster, but is it very significant? Keep in mind I made this very quickly, and could probably reduce the nausea with a little more time and effort.
I built this coaster with as many continuous turns as possible. The only difference between the two coasters is the direction of banking on all turns.
The blue coaster has an outward banking that is completely reverse and sideways. The red coaster has a traditional inward banking.
The nausea does rise on the outward banking coaster, but is it very significant? Keep in mind I made this very quickly, and could probably reduce the nausea with a little more time and effort.
Last edited:
This seems like something that definitely needs to be addressed!
From Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-force#Vertical
Resistance to "negative" or "downward" g, which drives blood to the head, is much lower. This limit is typically in the −2 to −3 g0 (−20 to −29 m/s2) range. This condition is sometimes referred to as red out where vision is figuratively reddened due to the blood laden lower eyelid being pulled into the field of vision. Negative g is generally unpleasant and can cause damage. Blood vessels in the eyes or brain may swell or burst under the increased blood pressure, resulting in degraded sight or even blindness.
There is also a nifty graph at the beginning of the human tolerance section showing that our tolerance for negative g is quite low, especially during extended periods of time more then a few seconds.
Resistance to "negative" or "downward" g, which drives blood to the head, is much lower. This limit is typically in the −2 to −3 g0 (−20 to −29 m/s2) range. This condition is sometimes referred to as red out where vision is figuratively reddened due to the blood laden lower eyelid being pulled into the field of vision. Negative g is generally unpleasant and can cause damage. Blood vessels in the eyes or brain may swell or burst under the increased blood pressure, resulting in degraded sight or even blindness.
There is also a nifty graph at the beginning of the human tolerance section showing that our tolerance for negative g is quite low, especially during extended periods of time more then a few seconds.
On a somewhat related point, Otturo's paired coaster examples illustrate another issue I take with the coaster ratings. In the outward-banking coaster, excitement ratings vary between c.8.5 and 10.5 for most of the ride, *except for the lift hill*. Given that the coaster's excitement rating is only 7.76, one must conclude - in line with what many others have said on these forums previously - that the existence of a lift hill brings down the overall excitement value.
If so, this is incredibly frustrating. It means that any coaster which builds anticipation through a slow scenic segment (c.f. the pre-launch section of Europa Park's Blue Fire coaster) or lift hill is less exiting than the same coaster without said slower section. It also, presumably, favours short-but-brutal rides over longer ones. Surely the overall excitement rating should be built up progressively based on the length of 'high excitement' sections, rather than being based on an average of the whole ride?!
If so, this is incredibly frustrating. It means that any coaster which builds anticipation through a slow scenic segment (c.f. the pre-launch section of Europa Park's Blue Fire coaster) or lift hill is less exiting than the same coaster without said slower section. It also, presumably, favours short-but-brutal rides over longer ones. Surely the overall excitement rating should be built up progressively based on the length of 'high excitement' sections, rather than being based on an average of the whole ride?!
Last edited:
Thank you for the pictures and the test.
All I can really say about the test is that the results are ridiculous. I hope they can fix this issue.
I believe I figured it out. Airtime on coasters isn't a negative g force. It's the lack of the normal 1g we all feel. (Ok some coasters may tug you down a bit, but that is a pretty small amount of negative G). If the game had correctly incorporated the resting 1g load, then you could achieve airtime by bringing that below 1. But you could still stay out of negative Gs
You never experience much of a negative G force on any coaster and if you. Do it's incredibly short duration and a small amount. Negative Gs are bad. Can quite easily cause all sort of significant medical damage
The solution to fix this is two parts.
First off. Make any negative G loads over say 1g really bad. But that borks any airtime anyone has made.
So they would have to also change the base G load at rest to 1g. Like it should be. Then redo their positive g load ratings with that addition of 1g
Last edited:
Wrong wrong wrong wrong. Many real coasters hit -1 to -1.5g negative. Turbo Drop towers are a sustained -1.5g. Some flat rides can hit more than that, like if you come around the bottom of a Zipper with the car upside down.
Aerobatic pilots routinely pull -8 to -10 in certain maneuvers.
Yea no. I'd like to see some proof of -8.
I'm ok with -1ish. That's reasonable. -2+ is bad
And considering you started with "wrong wrong wrong wrong" your post is actually agreeing with what I said.
Negative G loads are pretty low. If your only issue with it is I said over -1 and you think it's anything over -2 then that's a pretty minor issue you're taking.
Last edited:
TylerE is right with his figures on G's
- At Redbull air race they pull +12G with no negative.
- Aerobatic Pilots though flying an airshow 10 positive and 5-6 negative.
- Aerobatic competition they are more often (time wise) under negative G at upto 8G's and around 10G positive.
We have studied positive G significantly in the western world but not so much negative G so don't know long term effects. In other comment pilots often have around 3-4 hours recovery between each flight for Aerobatic flights.
Edit: What we do know, Red Out,
- At Redbull air race they pull +12G with no negative.
- Aerobatic Pilots though flying an airshow 10 positive and 5-6 negative.
- Aerobatic competition they are more often (time wise) under negative G at upto 8G's and around 10G positive.
We have studied positive G significantly in the western world but not so much negative G so don't know long term effects. In other comment pilots often have around 3-4 hours recovery between each flight for Aerobatic flights.
Edit: What we do know, Red Out,
Last edited:
I don't think it's useful to compare fighter pilots, aerobatic pilots etc with your average theme park goer. Only a very small number of individuals can withstand these kinds of forces, which is why not everyone can become a fighter pilot. They train to cope with the G-forces and wear G-suits to mitigate against the changes in blood flow that take place in their bodies.
You saying the same thing as him (and talking about positive Gs) isn't proof. Lol
From the info I've found sustained negative Gs even in the -2 to -3 range can cause severe problems.
And even very short duration negative Gs around 5+ can cause severe problems and is pretty much the limit of human tolerance
I don't know where y'all are getting this 8+ negative G thing. Maybe if it's for under a second.
Last edited:
No but we was just discussing the dangers of negative G and someone mentioned that -1G would be instant pain etc and that we can't cope with it so both myself and Tyler were just showing that info false.
Negative G on coasters is very limited though and nothing above -2G from what I have found. Skyrush was -2.1 G's
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I stated and showed negative G's are at 8 with Aerobatic competition and lower at around 5-6 for a show and almost nothing when doing a race as they don't really do any inversions or stalls & freefall.
Please take your time reading what was shown. This is direct from the Rebull pilots.
Edit: Here is the link http://www.teamchambliss.com/news/what-are-gs-and-how-much-do-we-know-about-them
Edit: Just because you don't want to look yourself and when someone states something doesn't mean they are wrong or lying so why be so dismissive and wrong about what was even written at the same time.
Last edited:
Need a better source than that. That's not a scientific source at all
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I have looked at the science literature. The numbers you are referencing is what the peak was. They would hit that for a fraction of a second. Nobody can tolerate close to that sustained for a second or two.
Last edited:
Why does it have to scientific. What have you got, source? Stop suggesting everyone is lying. What gain does a professional stunt pilot have for lying in the media?
Edit: And clearly this isn't without a G-suit but the point was that to say that -1G is then the end is wrong. As I pointed out Skyrush was -2.1G
Edit 2: Most documents I find state between -2 to -3G for a standard human and no suit. So the 2+ is instantly bad isn't true.
Last edited:
Sigh. G suits are made to counter positive Gs. They squeeze the lower body to force blood to stay up in the head and in the vitals. They provide absolutely nothing to counter negative Gs
And if you don't think acrobatic pilots love to brag about how many Gs they can take.. well I have a bridge for sale
Last edited:
I never said that was the case. I was just pointing out that it's not a particularly useful comparison to make.
And I corrected myself. -1.5 sustained is about the limit any ride would ever want to go. -2 is really pushing the limits of what a human can take. And -3 could be deadly.
But my entire point in that post was never about wether the number was -1 or -1.5 or whatever. It's that the game is not using a base 1g. So any sort of free fall in the game instead of giving a 0g rating it gives a -1. Which means any air time you get in this game is already approaching the max limits any ride would use.
They need to redo it so free fall is 0g. And then you can add to that if you want the coaster to pull people down a bit.