Drachen Fire

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Always interesting to see new vids about Drachen Fire, but it seems pretty bold to claim that the "true story" is that B&M played no role in the concept for it, then provide no actual sources or evidence to support the claim. I had never heard the theory that B&M had already designed Drachen Fire, only that ride concepts had been discussed.

He even says in the video that BG sent Arrow back to the drawing board because the Arrow-style coaster they initially presented wasn't what they wanted. They wanted new elements, perhaps like the B&M concepts included...

I wrote an article on BGWFans in 2009 that got deleted for whatever reason (The Infamous Drachen Fire), but it at least provided circumstantial evidence that Arrow took on B&M concepts for this ride (and never used them again). I'm supposed to believe that Arrow, the king of copy/paste design, never used the concepts for this ride again? In reality, there will never be hard evidence found (unless I missed it in the video) to confirm the origins, so circumstantial evidence has to be used.

I guess I'm just confused why the YouTube comments seem to just accept this is the "true story" of Drachen Fire. I would welcome actual evidence that makes it more probable that a B&M concept never played a role in the design of Drachen Fire though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Thrills & Chills WQAQ, Backorack, xyz476 and 9 others
Chris said:
Always interesting to see new vids about Drachen Fire, but it seems pretty bold to claim that the "true story" is that B&M played no role in the concept for it, then provide no actual sources or evidence to support the claim. I had never heard the theory that B&M had already designed Drachen Fire, only that ride concepts had been discussed.

He even says in the video that BG sent Arrow back to the drawing board because the Arrow-style coaster they initially presented wasn't what they wanted. They wanted new elements, perhaps like the B&M concepts included...

I wrote an article on BGWFans in 2009 that got deleted for whatever reason (The Infamous Drachen Fire), but it at least provided circumstantial evidence that Arrow took on B&M concepts for this ride (and never used them again). I'm supposed to believe that Arrow, the king of copy/paste design, never used the concepts for this ride again? In reality, there will never be hard evidence found (unless I missed it in the video) to confirm the origins, so circumstantial evidence has to be used.

I guess I'm just confused why the YouTube comments seem to just accept this is the "true story" of Drachen Fire. I would welcome actual evidence that makes it more probable that a B&M concept never played a role in the design of Drachen Fire though.
Click to expand...
I agree. From what I can gather, the park liked B&M's minimal design, so they pressed arrow to come up with something similar. I've NEVER heard that BGW didn't trust B&M to build DF like ETR implies, but then again, if you're relatively popular on the internet, you can spin any story up out of your butt and your followers will probably accept it as truth. I don't think ETR is trying to mislead anyone, probably just that they only had a few poor sources that provided info, which very well could be incorrect. My proof? The fact that anyone who has spent any time at the park knows that there is no I in Festa. Even then, I worked there for 6 years and only heard a guest say "Fiesta Italia" once. Can't believe that ETR has deep enough sources that never once said the words "Festa Italia" to them, but they somehow know "tHE tRutH" about Drachen Fire. To me, the bigger problem is not providing any proof/sources and just saying that you're right. [/rant].
 
  • Like
Reactions: xyz476, Coasternerd, Mwe BGW and 3 others
Chris said:
Always interesting to see new vids about Drachen Fire, but it seems pretty bold to claim that the "true story" is that B&M played no role in the concept for it, then provide no actual sources or evidence to support the claim. I had never heard the theory that B&M had already designed Drachen Fire, only that ride concepts had been discussed.

He even says in the video that BG sent Arrow back to the drawing board because the Arrow-style coaster they initially presented wasn't what they wanted. They wanted new elements, perhaps like the B&M concepts included...

I wrote an article on BGWFans in 2009 that got deleted for whatever reason (The Infamous Drachen Fire), but it at least provided circumstantial evidence that Arrow took on B&M concepts for this ride (and never used them again). I'm supposed to believe that Arrow, the king of copy/paste design, never used the concepts for this ride again? In reality, there will never be hard evidence found (unless I missed it in the video) to confirm the origins, so circumstantial evidence has to be used.

I guess I'm just confused why the YouTube comments seem to just accept this is the "true story" of Drachen Fire. I would welcome actual evidence that makes it more probable that a B&M concept never played a role in the design of Drachen Fire though.
Click to expand...
Holy crap it's been forever, Welcome back dude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gavin, Coasternerd, Mwe BGW and 5 others
The Drachen returns...


Even though Kevin from Defunctland commented on the video that he was wrong, was he?

His story is probably somewhat correct in that it's likely the park had preliminary design and layout work done based on what was then probably Giavanola/Intamin's capabilities given this project's timeline vs. B&M's starting portfolio as ETR's video presents the case for. The park had basic documents showing what they want to send out for bidding.

However, what likely happened was that Walter and Claude were too busy so declined to bid or priced it way too high intentionally, Arrow wasn't known for being that business-savvy for pricing and since they were a known quantity to the park they were chosen.

That would also fit with the narrative that the elements on the ride were wonky alongside what ETR presented with the lack of heart lining.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coasternerd, Mwe BGW and kmccarthy27
If I were to speculate on what happened, based on my knowledge of how coasters are bid, BGW reached out to all parties they were interested in, including both Arrow and B&M, with the plot information, as well as a target track length, then said "wow us." This is a pretty common practice when parks are not looking for a specific ride from a specific manufacturer. B&M came up with a good design, but either intentionally over-bid or told them that they would only take only one ride from the AB parks, as to avoid being over worked for that year. This happens a lot with smaller companies, who don't have the resources to take every client, or are at some other significant disadvantage that would make taking the work undesirable. (Reference: the HVAC company who wanted over $10,000 to replace the AC unit in our garage. Not the ductwork, just the unit) It's also understandable to come up with a basic "bid" design/layout as to show what they are capable of and what they may do with the space. What I would say happened was that BGW gave Arrow this bid design and told them to re-bid using this bid design as a reference. That happened and we ended up with a lemon. DF was such an off-the wall design for Arrow that there is no way that B&M didn't have a part in the design process for DF. Unfortunately, there will probably be no way of knowing unless Clyde or Walter talks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xyz476, Coasternerd and Jonesta6
I think the thing that trips me up is the support structure.

B&M's distinct style came from work Intamin/Giavanola produced - unless I'm mistaken, this kind of support design was already in the market before this ride even if Arrow didn't previously use it.

Alan Schilke goes into detail in an ACE interview video (part of the Legacy of Arrow series) about how their design/build process was out of sync - basically they didn't have the machinery to precisely fabricate what was designed until Tennessee Tornado, which was their first ride using a modern design/build process.

Looking further at other Arrow loopers and corkscrews on RCDB, TT was the only ride since DF to use free-standing tubular supports, and it appears not many if any more were made that way either.

Based on the interview and timeline, it doesn't make sense that they'd have thought to use that kind of support system on their own, and I highly doubt the park specifically requested it on their own either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coasternerd, Mwe BGW and kmccarthy27
Jonesta6 said:
I think the thing that trips me up is the support structure.
Click to expand...

^^^ The video covers that, noting that the DF support infrastructure was not designed by Arrow but rather by John A Martin Associates.

And guess who worked (or consulted?) for John A Martin at the time as a structural engineer, apparently working on DF's support structure... Alan Schilke, who was prominently involved years later as an employee with Arrow on Tennessee Tornado.

I hadn't previously made that connection to John A. Martin/DF, and I do find it compelling. I'm only about 70% enthusiastic for these El Toro Ryan videos, but this time I did learn something.

The support structure was the one thing I looked at years ago and said, "No way that was just a coincidence." But now I see that there is both a connection to a proven non-Arrow (at the time) design mind at work, and the chronological precedence of DF getting the incline-column treatment under its lift before B&M ever did it. The John A. Martin folks may simply have looked at the prevailing Swiss column designs in the wild (e.g. Batman The Escape) and decided they were better than Arrow's lattice grids and vertical column farms, with the lift support design being seemingly the first of its kind.

So it is possible that either of the two rides' lift structures informed the other, directly or via a B&M concept shared with Arrow; or that both were done independently; or that both were inspired by the same prior design somewhere; or that both were suggested by the Busch parks for their respective '92/'93 additions because it was a style they both liked. But nothing strongly dictates to me that DF's lift structure must have been lifted from a B&M concept.

IMO only B&M or someone like Keith Kasen (exec VP and GM of BGW at the time) would be able to confirm either way at this point. There is so much rumor and speculation around it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coasternerd and Jonesta6
I guess I must have mentally skipped that connection in the video, thanks for the correction!
 
Chris said:
I guess I'm just confused why the YouTube comments seem to just accept this is the "true story" of Drachen Fire. I would welcome actual evidence that makes it more probable that a B&M concept never played a role in the design of Drachen Fire though.
Click to expand...

I put as much stake in the youtube comment section for their critical thinking skills as I do with those on reddit saying their home park is getting an RMC.

I used to work with ETR back in our ride op days, both of us made quite a few connections elsewhere into the industry but a bigger thing with the stories that ETR tells is it's impossible to actually source much of what he claims and it's something that I've even come to question sometimes as well. He's definitely gotten some things outright wrong in his videos in the past (El Toro's pricetag, NJ requiring OTSRs on Kingda Ka, things you would think would be nailed down considering we both worked at that park for 4+ years).

ETR imo runs into the same issue that other thoosietubers like Defunctland run into, their content is only as accurate as the information they're able to get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xyz476, Coasternerd and ControlsEE
I'm surprised that ETR didn't try to interview any executives from BGW at the time. Surely they would know the full story and I would think they wouldn't be that hard to track down?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mwe BGW
Quick little story. This was either 15 or 16 years ago at this point, but I had emailed BGW with some questions for a physics project I was working on at the time in school involving roller coasters. GR put me in contact with Larry Giles who was even an engineer at the park all the way back in 1992. While I had his ear through email, I asked about Drachen Fire and he indeed shared with me that B&M was the original firm they had in mind for Drachen Fire and did share some concept work with the park. But, as the story we all know goes, Walter and Claude were't too keen on the timeline for delivery. Anheuser-Busch said fine okay fair enough we still want an addition for 92, we'll take some of these ideas and see what Arrow can come up with since we have a prior relationship. So while yes B&M didn't have direct involvement on DF, they still had some influence and I got it straight from Larry Giles. So ETR is going a little far to say B&M had zero influence whatsoever here.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: SLC Headache, Thrills & Chills WQAQ, ijerngvidsnvk and 11 others
newsie said:
Quick little story. This was either 15 or 16 years ago at this point, but I had emailed BGW with some questions for a physics project I was working on at the time in school involving roller coasters. GR put me in contact with Larry Giles who was even an engineer at the park all the way back in 1992. While I had his ear through email, I asked about Drachen Fire and he indeed shared with me that B&M was the original firm they had in mind for Drachen Fire and did share some concept work with the park. But, as the story we all know goes, Walter and Claude were't too keen on the timeline for delivery. Anheuser-Busch said fine okay fair enough we still want an addition for 92, we'll take some of these ideas and see what Arrow can come up with since we have a prior relationship. So while yes B&M didn't have direct involvement on DF, they still had some influence and I got it straight from Larry Giles. So ETR is going a little far to say B&M had zero influence whatsoever here.
Click to expand...
Assuming that's true, that fits the narrative Kevin's video presents.

Without at least having a chat with a different manufacturer first, where would the park have gotten the idea to request some of things ETR claims they asked for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coasternerd and Mwe BGW
I think this whole convo goes to say that ETR can't really make the claim that his version is the "true" story of DF. If this were a court case, there is more than enough evidence for reasonable doubt. Thoosies gonna thoose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xyz476, Icer, Coasternerd and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad