Project Drachen Spire: Multi-Launch Shuttle Giga (Cancelled?)

Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!

General Information:​

"Project Drachen Spire," is a community-generated identifier for the Intamin-made, multi-launch, shuttle giga coaster that was originally slated to open at Busch Gardens Williamsburg in 2021. The attraction is planned to utilize the currently-vacant land behind Verbolten, Festhaus Park—the former home of Drachen Fire.

The coaster's main layout—as leaked before the addition was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic—featured two launches, two spikes (one spiral, one vertical-ish), and a couple of banked turns. Drachen Spire was designed to run two trains by means of a pair of switch tracks connecting the primary, shuttle portion of the layout to the station platform.

Important Articles:​

  • Most Up-To-Date Understanding of the Layout:
    bgwfans.com

    Leaked Electrical Plan Depicts Busch Gardens Williamsburg's 2021 Roller Coaster in Detail – BGWFans

    If there’s a god, he’s up there laughing this afternoon. Why? Because BGWFans just had one of those classic sitcom moments. Yesterday, we published our painstakingly detailed analysis of the footer plan for what we believe is Busch Gardens Williamsburg’s 2021 roller coaster—seemingly a huge...
    bgwfans.com bgwfans.com
  • Most Recent Status Update:
    bgwfans.com

    Drachen Spire Height Waiver Extension Details – BGWFans

    Just over a week ago, we reported on the renewal of the notorious 355 foot Festhaus Park height waiver that was originally requested for the controversial, Intamin-made, multi-launch, giga, shuttle coaster we’ve dubbed Drachen Spire. In last week’s article, we were very careful to leave the door...
    bgwfans.com bgwfans.com

NoLimits Model of the Layout:​

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Direct Link to Embedded Media Source

Additional Coverage (Newest to Oldest):​

Previous Thread:​

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
b.mac said:
That math is wrong. If Apollo's lift base is 390 feet long and it's 170 feet tall the lift angle is 23.6 degrees. Griffon's would be 47.9 degrees.

B&M's giga coasters have had lift angles of 40 degrees, Intamin's have been at 50 degrees. The only company that has come feasibly close to breaking 300 feet with a beyond 50 degree lift is Gerstlauer with Karnan.
Click to expand...

Given my math was not great, but the thought still remains - they can get fairly high up using less space with a steeper angle, and the technology and techniques appear to be available to make it happen.

Looking at FP, there's roughly 350'-400' of cleared land paralleling VB if you start close to the old merch booth, another 350' or so down the side of the woods next to VB's covered bridge drop.

In either scenario, launch or lift, there seems to be room there to go pretty high without a whole lot of buffer clearing needed. Coming down and the rest of the track layout would be key to know here.

It could be, as suggested, the crest location changing in the design process to work around buffer protection issues and projected environmental impacts.

... Or it could be a really tall Dippin' Dots stand
 
Last edited:
Jonesta6 said:
Given my math was not great, but the thought still remains - they can get fairly high up using less space with a steeper angle, and the technology and techniques appear to be available to make it happen.

Looking at FP, there's roughly 350'-400' of cleared land paralleling VB if you start close to the old merch booth, another 350' or so down the side of the woods next to VB's covered bridge drop.

In either scenario, launch or lift, there seems to be room there to go pretty high without a whole lot of buffer clearing needed. Coming down and the rest of the track layout would be key to know here.

It could be, as suggested, the crest location changing in the design process to work around buffer protection issues and projected environmental impacts.

... Or it could be a really tall dipping dots stand
Click to expand...

I think you mean dippin' dots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jonesta6
Giga coaster with 90º vertical lift! That would actually be really terrifying. 350+ foot vertical lift. I find even the small ones scary enough.
 
Zachary said:
My current best guess for the highest point of this thing is somewhere in this area:

View attachment 15558

@kingadam has done some actual analysis and put together a much better, far more informative map than this. If he gets time, hopefully he can share it and explain his process.

In the meantime, I wanted to get my guestimate map out to give people an idea of where we're currently looking though.
Click to expand...
As @Zachary alluded to earlier, I put together a rough map last night when him and I were talking, using JCC's GIS layers, AutoCAD, Google Maps, and some known information from the public hearing. The aerial image from Google Maps is far from perfect, but it at least illustrates the point.

So discussed last night in the public hearing, they said the highest point would be roughly 1,000' from the nearest property line and roughly 1,750' from Wareham's Pond Rd - the point labeled as such in my image with a green dot. Since there is certainly some room for error in the distances, I created the red shaded area representing a 100' offset from either direction of both green lines (distances to property line and Wareham's Pond Rd.). We also know that the rough elevation below the highest point is ~80', so I traced/labeled any contour in the red shaded area within +/- 2' elevation (labeled in red).

Since it was claimed at the public hearing that the highest point has been moved close to Verbolten's bridge, we could be looking at the uppermost labeled contour area (~78' elevation). As always, take this all with a grain of salt, as these are rough estimates based on information we have been told.

If this is in fact where we see the tallest point of the attraction, I would find it hard to believe that a tower ride would go that far back into the park without substantial improvements to the surrounding area.

15564
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf33, Unagi, hyperrider and 16 others
My last comment on the possibility of a tower ride:

How does anyone see that without being redundant with Mäch Tower? And there's a -100% chance of Mäch Tower being taken out.
 
I agree with @kingadam's assessment that the location deemed as the possible waiver location cannot host a tower to ride. Topography, Verbolten tracks, etc. would make it impossible to create a shorter access. The walk from the Black Forest entrance is prohibitive.

@warfelg Mach Tower is a bucket of bolts. I know first hand it "goes down" quite a lot on a daily basis. Had there been a new tower, perhaps they made it an observation only (like Christmas Town) platform. That's what they get for buying a bargain basement attraction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf33, SLC Headache and Zachary
Also there's a variety of tower rides that do more than just drop, which is why a Star Flyer has been brought up so often in this thread. I have my doubts about this being a coaster mostly because of how easily BGW is willing to move around the height waiver. A tower ride at least can be built with a deck platform for loading like what a few rides at BGW already have and doesn't have the area impact of a major coaster. Their circumference of activity is only about 205 feet, which is fairly easy to plop almost anywhere in a park.

My main concern is what @kingadam and @Zachary brought up, how its current location of discussion is not suitable for easy accessibility. Guests will surely see it, but not many will have an easy time getting there. The only way that accessibility can be addressed would be multiple other rides being added along with the Star Flyer.
 
I, too, agree that if our highest point analysis is correct, there's probably a coaster here.

The path back to the woods between FHP and the Rhine is nearly a fifth of a mile. For context, that's the length of the walk from Pompeii's gift shop to Roman Rapids. That much new park area will need A LOT of new stuff of some kind to fill it. I just don't see how that amount of park expansion is even remotely feasible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alf33, wombat96, jornor and 5 others
GrandpaD said:
View attachment 15562

Using DF as a "model", I guess (based on your analysis) they could use the DF station but instead of going right (looking at the pic) they go left under a similar queue bridge and then up towards the Rhine side of the snack bar (taco stand) parallel to the Verbolten building. DF was 150ft, so you can imagine how deep into the trees they'd have to go.
Click to expand...

That's what I was getting at. I think that it is more that they were moving around how it exited the station and that effected where the highest point is.

Cjeiban said:
I remember when I brought up this subject back in March that Kingsmill had considerable influence on BGW's potential projects. There is a reason why I said that before...To really get this approved, more information is going to have to become public than BGW might normally want to disclose. Like everyone said, this next meeting should be very interesting...
Click to expand...

This was basically the extent of their influence. No matter their opinions on this project as we have discussed multiple times they don't have the power to actually stop BGW. BGW works with them because it is the path of least resistance not because they have to. If BGW wanted to they would be able to use their power in the city to have this project approved over KMs objections. They don't because it's easier this way.

I do think that ultimately the park will release a little bit more information about the ride in an effort to extend an olive branch and appease KM. But ultimately if KM wants to fight this the park ultimately will win in the end.

Cjeiban said:
I'm not fully disagreeing with you on that. My point is that Kingsmill always has and can use their influence on the park. It has always been a delicate balance between the two, even when ownership was under the same roof. I think the two will find common ground on this and ultimately move this thing forward. This is one of the first times in recent memory though where Kingsmill has played this card. My thinking is that the last two years of speculation without much information has irked Kingsmill.

Sure you can say that plenty of information exists through public records, filings, plans, etc., but nothing substantial, nor fully confirmed by the park has made them worry. If you think about it, from Kingsmill's perspective, at one time, it looked like BGW could be adding two rides over 300' in less than a two year period... Obviously that's not going to happen but through those filings, certainly seemed possible.
Click to expand...

Like I said above this is about as far as KM can get with their influence. They won't really be able to stop BGW.

I do understand their concerns about this attraction though especially when it seemed like there were two attractions that were both over 300 feet in back to back years. I can understand them wanting to better understand how it affects them and I think the park should do more to explain that to them. I still ultimately think that even if the park can't get KM on board the height waiver will ultimately be approved.

I posted some quotes from the meeting last night given by members of the board that outline why ultimately they will side with BGW.

TL;DR is that BGW brings in the money for the county. Without BGW paying property taxes and bringing the tourist money, the county would be losing a lot of revenue.
 
kingadam said:
As @Zachary alluded to earlier, I put together a rough map last night when him and I were talking, using JCC's GIS layers, AutoCAD, Google Maps, and some known information from the public hearing. The aerial image from Google Maps is far from perfect, but it at least illustrates the point.

So discussed last night in the public hearing, they said the highest point would be roughly 1,000' from the nearest property line and roughly 1,750' from Wareham's Pond Rd - the point labeled as such in my image with a green dot. Since there is certainly some room for error in the distances, I created the red shaded area representing a 100' offset from either direction of both green lines (distances to property line and Wareham's Pond Rd.). We also know that the rough elevation below the highest point is ~80', so I traced/labeled any contour in the red shaded area within +/- 2' elevation (labeled in red).

Since it was claimed at the public hearing that the highest point has been moved close to Verbolten's bridge, we could be looking at the uppermost labeled contour area (~78' elevation). As always, take this all with a grain of salt, as these are rough estimates based on information we have been told.

If this is in fact where we see the tallest point of the attraction, I would find it hard to believe that a tower ride would go that far back into the park without substantial improvements to the surrounding area.

View attachment 15564
Click to expand...
Thanks for that excellent analysis. That is a very interesting highest point would make for a killer drop on a coaster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jornor, Adam and Zachary
Ok, just looking at some things and (as always) am confused. The photo with the line says 355f5 "above existing grade". So, using @kingadam's analysis, does that mean 335 PLUS the 75ft elevation?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jornor
GrandpaD said:
Ok, just looking at some things and (as always) am confused. The photo with the line says 355f5 "above existing grade". So, using @kingadam's analysis, does that mean 335 PLUS the 75ft elevation?
Click to expand...


That's exactly what it means. They gave the height above sea level as well which was another interesting bit of info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jornor, BGWnut, Adam and 1 other person
I just watched the whole hearing. Wow what a show.

Listening to Andrew talk kinda makes me want to shout "AAANDREW!" As loud as I can anytime I'm atop any of the tall rides... That guy is seriously a piece of work.

A few takeaways that I haven't seen mentioned here before now.

During Andrew's public comments, he actually cited bgwfan's material info about the project. I found that to be interesting.

Also, if anyone is planning to attend or watch the next hearing; there will not be another public comment section specifically for this agenda item. Instead, there is an open comment section earlier in the meeting in which any topic can be brought up. Something to be aware of.

Lastly, seeing Ms. Suzy Cheely's description of the ride came off as a lot more vague when watching her than reading her direct quotes. Her hand motion depiction of the ride added ambiguity to the words coming out of her mouth. I believe this to be intentional. I was also rather amused by Suzy's comments about how people have gotten "very good" at figuring out what a ride is going to do based on footers etc. She didn't say bgwfans but I think Zachary can take credit for that one :)

Curious about your take on this @Zachary
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Alf33, jornor, Logang and 4 others
So, if the rumor of an Intamin package deal is true...BGW picked up 1 of two new concepts from the Swiss boys; the Parc Asterix triple launch.

The other concept that debuted was what they termed a "Mega Coaster" to be built in Walibi in 2021. That coaster is to be 165 feet and have a bunch of elements (no inversions) with "some unique".

For you engineering types, can something like that (I'm talking the elements) translate to a coaster twice the height? I guess what I'm hoping for (if it's a giga) is something more than "whoopee, we go high, then fast". (Yawn)

Here's the "mega" from the Intamin presentation.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

View: https://youtu.be/l9Z1iW1qFIo
 
  • Like
Reactions: jornor, Logang, tursiops and 1 other person
GrandpaD said:
So, if the rumor of an Intamin package deal is true...BGW picked up 1 of two new concepts from the Swiss boys; the Parc Asterix triple launch.

The other concept that debuted was what they termed a "Mega Coaster" to be built in Walibi in 2021. That coaster is to be 165 feet and have a bunch of elements (no inversions) with "some unique".

For you engineering types, can something like that (I'm talking the elements) translate to a coaster twice the height? I guess what I'm hoping for (if it's a giga) is something more than "whoopee, we go high, then fast". (Yawn)

Here's the "mega" from the Intamin presentation.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

View: https://youtu.be/l9Z1iW1qFIo
Click to expand...

Also, that cobra role would pay homage to drachen fire no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: scottyholiday
Something interesting as I watch the meeting, they describe the peak as 355 above finished grade, 435 above lowest level, with a low point that could reach the lowest elevation to mitigate noise and visual impact. That strikes me as something that I would consider a coaster. Suzy said that they did 3 balloon tests before picking the 3rd and final one based on impact to KM. Another interesting thing I picked up on....Suzy (got I hope I'm spelling this right) said the sound study was done using the size of the structure and type of vehicle. That's something the strikes me as an interesting set of words.

I haven't had the chance to meet Kevin. He is VERY well spoken and I am very impressed and glad he's the park president. Suzy is also really well spoken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wombat96, jornor, lightninlady and 6 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad