Login or Register to Hide This Ad

Jonesta6

Glumble
Feb 14, 2019
4,007
3,737
250
I see no point in having custom fabrication done just to keep the ride as is. It can be rebuilt from the ground up while paying homage to the original. If it wasn't for the interlocking loops, I doubt anyone would care. A single rail that follows just about the same path and eliminates the 2nd lift hill would be fantastic while throwing in something extra as well.

In today's modern coaster era and corporate management devolving the value prop of this jewel of a park down to somewhere between the coaster-wars era CP or any of the 3 SF parks that SF corporate actually cares about, it's also conceivable they may go a similar route though I highly doubt they'd do a single rail using a similar layout.

Honestly, I'd highly doubt they'd attempt to recreate the layout if they were to ever attempt such a thing with a different ride type.

But like I stated above, this ride is the core of all BGW coasters (and arguably all attractions in general). It was the first custom coaster built for the park, I believe also holding a height record the year it opened. It still is good as a transitional coaster for young ones and those generally frightened of coasters. And, IMO, you just can't reasonably remove it or attempt to replace it without eroding the soul of the park - not to mention the actual erosion problems in the RPA buffer the park would have to contend with which will likely dramatically add lead time and potentially considerable expense to whatever they would decide to do.
 
Mar 18, 2017
696
531
210
I think the rate of (planned/potential) additions is the best evidence for any plans to replace it, what are they buttering us up for? I do think B&M and others could make a great replacement following the same layout, although they can't overcome the problems with running interlocking loops simultaneously (see DDragons). It's one of the few coasters that could get a true replacement.

I don't think Anaconda is going away anytime soon, despite thoosies almost universally hating it and every coaster youtube channel says it is near the end. But it's a young one ('91) compared to Ness.
 

horsesboy

DarKoaster stalker
Advisory Panel
Silver Donor
Jun 16, 2013
4,191
9,049
250
I see no point in having custom fabrication done just to keep the ride as is. It can be rebuilt from the ground up while paying homage to the original. If it wasn't for the interlocking loops, I doubt anyone would care. A single rail that follows just about the same path and eliminates the 2nd lift hill would be fantastic while throwing in something extra as well.
Another issue with a ground up rebuild on Nessie is her proximity to the Pipeline which she actually crosses. It's highly questionable if Colonial Pipeline would allow that kind of construction in this day and age. If they did it would add all kinds of hurdles to the project as even 40+ years ago when she was built staff from the Pipeline were on site with oversight and override authority for the construction from beginning to end.
 
Last edited:

Zachary

BGW Eggspert
Administrator
Sep 23, 2009
15,199
42,803
260
If/when Nessie is removed, I HIGHLY doubt a new coaster would be constructed on the site. The regulatory and practical hurtles are IMMENSE. Even just trying to remove Nessie would be a nightmare.

BGW tried to cross the Rhine with Madrid and scrapped it. BGW keeps trying to avoid the pipeline like a plague. It makes no sense for them to take on all the extra complexity, difficulty, and cost to create solutions for the Nessie site when they can just build new rides much cheaper and easier elsewhere in the park.

Anyway, this seems like an especially silly conversation right now since Nessie is seeing some of the longest lines it has had in YEARS, it is one of the cheapest coasters to operate, and it just got new trains. BGW clearly doesn't want to kill it anytime soon.
 

Nicole

Administrator
Jul 22, 2013
10,783
28,294
260
Arlington, VA
I see no point in having custom fabrication done just to keep the ride as is. It can be rebuilt from the ground up while paying homage to the original. If it wasn't for the interlocking loops, I doubt anyone would care. A single rail that follows just about the same path and eliminates the 2nd lift hill would be fantastic while throwing in something extra as well.

Actually, for me that first drop is unparalleled and has some kind of secret sauce. I’m not sure what it is. Maybe the precise angle and speed? Whatever the reason, I have never found the same stomach pull elsewhere.

Racer had similar forces, before they neutered it with the retrack. InvadR oddly has a mini-version. But Nessie for me stands alone.

I will admit that my personal coaster count is only 274, but even if there are other similar drops out there (I’m sure they must be), I still think preserving such a perfect element/experience is worthwhile. The fact that Nessie is iconic, historic, and part of the park’s identity and soul only buttresses my preference that she remain operational as long as possible.

There are plenty of newer attractions. I’m not sure why it is necessary or desirable to rip out everything that isn’t cutting edge and replace them with what would probably be yet another launched spike. Variety has value.
 
Nov 30, 2018
1,150
1,102
250
Something I could see would be keeping the loops there as a monument of sorts while removing the rest of the ride and maybe building a family coaster on the Scotland side of the river as part of a kids section expansion that could connect with the Sesame St area. Family and kids rides is definitely an area that BGW struggles with, particularly with how spread out the limited ones they have are, so using that plot for more kids attractions could create more continuity for that guest group.
 

Coasternerd

What’s better than one coaster? 2 coasters!
Dec 7, 2021
585
868
210
If anything, I would expect it to be fully rebuilt with modern technology/design (with new track and structural replacement as necessary) before it would ever be removed. There's nothing better for it's location.
I could see a retracking similar to Efteling’s Python.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mwe BGW

Jonesta6

Glumble
Feb 14, 2019
4,007
3,737
250
As was Invadr so is that going to be removed to?

Who said Nessie was being removed anytime soon?

Eventually I'd think all rides will be torn down or massively overhauled based on service life and whatnot, but who knows which will be the first to fall from the current lineup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: michaeelaln

horsesboy

DarKoaster stalker
Advisory Panel
Silver Donor
Jun 16, 2013
4,191
9,049
250
Loch Ness Monster and Alpengeist both have 3 trains. Nessie will never run with 3, however because ops are slow enough to get the hypothetical third train stuck at lift 2 and that requires more attention than some think.
Nessie HAD three it's my understanding that when they redid the trains for her 40th that they only did two. Part of the reasoning for that was that when they reprogrammed her controls so that there would not be two trains hitting the loops at the same time it became pretty much impossible to actually run 3 trains..
 

AIR

Busch Gardens Flying Coaster
Jul 7, 2017
231
884
210
Williamsburg VA
Loch Ness opens and runs with 2 and will never run with 3 again. They have 3, however. One lives downstairs and becomes the fresh train for the following year.

It is also not true that it was reprogrammed to not loop together. That would honestly not make sense with the block system present. Operations, first of all, is not allowed to let it loop together, but even if they wanted to, guests and the workers are too slow to make it happen.
 

Coasternerd

What’s better than one coaster? 2 coasters!
Dec 7, 2021
585
868
210
Loch Ness opens and runs with 2 and will never run with 3 again. They have 3, however. One lives downstairs and becomes the fresh train for the following year.

It is also not true that it was reprogrammed to not loop together. That would honestly not make sense with the block system present. Operations, first of all, is not allowed to let it loop together, but even if they wanted to, guests and the workers are too slow to make it happen.
They don’t even have a third train right now. When they got the new trains for the 40th they only purchased 2 trains. Hoping they get a 3rd train, if only to be able to run 2 trains all the time.
 

Jonesta6

Glumble
Feb 14, 2019
4,007
3,737
250
It is also not true that it was reprogrammed to not loop together. That would honestly not make sense with the block system present. Operations, first of all, is not allowed to let it loop together, but even if they wanted to, guests and the workers are too slow to make it happen.

If I remember correctly from a few pages back (too lazy to go look), the programming was changed in the last 15 years - give or take - so that even with a fast crew the board won't allow ops to dispatch until either a proxy sensor was tripped or a certain time after the last train was dispatched. The reason was to reduce wear on high stress areas such as the loops... And potentially as a byproduct also reduce cycles in an operating season which also reduces overall wear and tear (though I've got no clue if it makes much of a difference in the long run).

Nowadays the only way to get the trains to shoot the loops at the same time is to run it in maintenance/manual mode which should only be done without guests on board.

I'd also have to imagine it'd take several tries even with the general dispatch timing intervals known and regularly achievable as conditions such as lift speeds, train speed as it warms up, impact of trim and mcbr (though as I understand it's no longer a block control point and used more like a trim if at all) brakes to the train's speed make it difficult to get the timing precise enough.
 
Nov 5, 2009
1,336
1,322
250
If I remember correctly from a few pages back (too lazy to go look), the programming was changed in the last 15 years - give or take - so that even with a fast crew the board won't allow ops to dispatch until either a proxy sensor was tripped or a certain time after the last train was dispatched. The reason was to reduce wear on high stress areas such as the loops... And potentially as a byproduct also reduce cycles in an operating season which also reduces overall wear and tear (though I've got no clue if it makes much of a difference in the long run).

Nowadays the only way to get the trains to shoot the loops at the same time is to run it in maintenance/manual mode which should only be done without guests on board.

I'd also have to imagine it'd take several tries even with the general dispatch timing intervals known and regularly achievable as conditions such as lift speeds, train speed as it warms up, impact of trim and mcbr (though as I understand it's no longer a block control point and used more like a trim if at all) brakes to the train's speed make it difficult to get the timing precise enough.
yeah the lift is way too slow now. to loop at the same time now you would have to dispatch WHILE the first train is cresting the lift, which is not possible.
 
Login or Register to Hide This Ad