Project 2019: Finnegan's Flyer (S&S Screamin' Swing)
- Thread starter Adam
- Start date
- Status
Animator said:
What giga?
all seriousness, if there is going to be a giga, and there is exactly 0 evidence of that, this seems unlikely if for no other reason than the gas line.
(but I could have my geography wrong, I am not one of the map people)
madmax said:
Wow, your sources must be very highly placed!
RollyCoaster said:
I think I saw somewhere they will do some sampling, so I would bet you see them soonish if they are doing anything. Looking there the other day though this is a tough area to get a great look at, and the best place might be while on the train when it's on Loch Ness Trestle.
madmax said:
This is not the Madrid thread, so I would point you at the data that Nicole and Zachary have so painstakingly put together. Even still I ask what hints? Then I will point out that all we know is that there is a 315' height waiver. That could be a god damn elevator to nothing for all we know.
I have pretty solid info that what ever this is it won't involve construction going to far into the valley in the direction of the wild reserve area. No idea what it is but a pretty solid source say there not building back that way. So I am thinking either building of some sort or flat as I have s hard time invisioning a coaster built in the direction of the bridge and Nessi.
There were some updates to the documents posted on the James City County website. Some additional information:
"Structure will be approximately 115 feet in height."
"The structure's foundation will be constructed at approximately 40' above sea level, and structure will extend to approximately 155' above sea level."
Also interesting to note is that one of the documents says:"Action: Please review this application by May 18, 2016" Could be that they just messed up the date. Or it could be they are re-using documentation from 2 years ago.
"Structure will be approximately 115 feet in height."
"The structure's foundation will be constructed at approximately 40' above sea level, and structure will extend to approximately 155' above sea level."
Also interesting to note is that one of the documents says:"Action: Please review this application by May 18, 2016" Could be that they just messed up the date. Or it could be they are re-using documentation from 2 years ago.
Can someone shed light on the lingo "Structure will extend to 155 feet above sea level?" Is that lending itself to the idea that this "thing" could move (swing?) to that height? The actual height of 115 feet is stated before that.
Bring Back Questor 87 said:
Sea level is 40 feet below where the structure will stand on the ground. The structure itself will stand 115 feet from the ground level.
Looking back at one of Zachary's posts, if the foundation of this structure is going to be at elevation 40, then it seems like there is going to be some serious excavating. A good chunk of the site is around elevation 60, so that's 20' of excavating potentially. This really makes me believe this is an actual building rather than a ride. I can't see them excavating 20' (requiring retaining walls) to build an attraction. Seems more to me like a basement of a building. Also, in the past JCC refers to attractions as such in the terminology on their site, so it seems like this might not be a ride.
I think just about every addition to Hastings/Ireland since the park opened has required some type of basement (Castle O'Sullivan, Battle For Eire, etc.). The terrain and structures in Ireland are so strange. I don't know if anything aside from the AST, COS (post-Catapult), and BFE were built that way.
However, the fact that boring is happening across 1.5 acres indicates a large gravity load system. This could indicate a coaster or dark ride.
The article made some interesting claims: http://coaster-nation.com/documents-reveal-a-new-coaster-could-be-coming-to-busch-gardens-williamsburg/
The article made some interesting claims: http://coaster-nation.com/documents-reveal-a-new-coaster-could-be-coming-to-busch-gardens-williamsburg/
gforces1994 said:
That's pretty much standard fair though. You got to test a much larger area to make sure there isn't any sink holes, the bedrock or at least hard soils are there, etc. Just because they test a fairly large area doesn't mean coaster.
I dunno, with this new information, of going down to 40 feet above sea level; max height from there of 155'; 90 feet above grade.
So total height of 155, you take off the 90 feet for the height above grade: you are left with starting grade of 65 feet. 40 feet above sealevel being the lowest point means is going about 15 feet into the ground.
Looking at topographic maps of the area, the grades change in the area almost makes that necessary to have to go 'that deep' to make sure the foundation goes into the ground and you manage to keep the peak height of where you want it.
This blueprint (though small) would follow the same description:
It's max height would be say 15 feet above grade, with a total height of say 50 feet starting at say 10 feet above sea level (making something up with that sea level number).
So that bit of extra there going 40 feet above sea level can be either the lowest elevation we see foundation, or they are digging into the ground to that level.
mdb07 said:
This is what I was stating back on post #77 in response to Zach's original pictures. That this will be a very tall structure/building which will be 90 feet above the bridge and 115 feet above the existing grade of valley. It sounds like the application was modified to clarify actual heights.
- Status