Top Thrill 2 Pit Stop | Episode 2

It could be as simple as unit conversion. The ride was presumably designed at their headquarters in Italy, and if so, they probably worked toward a whole number velocity in kph. And the launch system needs to have some margin above the minimum needed to get an empty train over the top hat, so if their target launch speed was 195 kph, that would translate to 121.7 mph, technically "over" 120 mph.

Or maybe he was tired during what was one of several repetitive early morning interviews and misspoke.

Or maybe this is why there isn’t another episode.

Have they said anything about what's at the top of the spike? The concept art looks like the track continues a bit past the support tower, then just stops. Will probably have an airplane warning light. Would they need some kind of end stops in case of some kind of lsm failure that accelerates too much? (Is that even possible?) Weather looks good for the first half of the week, looking forward to seeing the progress.

This wasn't any of you guys was it? https://apnews.com/article/police-drone-shot-down-florida...

Hudson:

Have they said anything about what's at the top of the spike?

A restaurant, obviously.

This article has some info on restrictions with drones.

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/...cords-say/

Pretty dumb of that guy to go and fly that thing without doing any research into what sort of requirements or restrictions are in place, but I got a chuckle out of two of the four charges he's facing:

• Inducing panic by committing an offense with reckless disregard
• Disorderly conduct in a physically offensive condition

Seems just a wee bit of an overreaction all things considered.

Expect that portions of the criminal code hasn't really kept up with modern technology. Can be something of round peg in square hole trying to apply certain provisions to modern tech. Though presumably the provisions under which he has the most legal problems are the ones that directly apply to drones.

Jeff:

Wrong. The park does not have jurisdiction over the air space. Furthermore, you're not flying over people if there are no people in the park and you're not flying over where the people are working

Wrong? Nope. I said park rules prohibit flying drones over the park, and that is a fact, go to the FAQ on cedar points web page. I never said it was illegal. You inferred that on your own in your rush to judgement.

As for there being “no people in the park”, how would you go about verifying this before taking off? One might argue there is always someone in the park even if that is just security or maintenance.

Anything goes inside the designated smoking areas.

If only drones had some way to see where you were going.

Drone morality thread 2.0!