Project 2021/Drachen Spire: Intamin Multi-Launch Shuttle Giga Coaster [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...
Maybe I’m connecting dots that aren’t there but here it goes anyways:

Tied to project MMXX we got those site plans for dredging and retention basins within the Rhine. In it there was a small basin on the MMXX side, and as were seeing there’s much less hillside disturbance going on. There was a huge one planned for the Festhaus side. Could whatever project 2021 is end up clearing that much space off the hillside?
 
But we're those dredging plans for "project Madrid" or MMXX?

Since "project Madrid" was cancelled the waters have been muddied in this regard.

The basin on the festhaus side may not actually be planned anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ijerngvidsnvk
Jahrules said:
But we're those dredging plans for "project Madrid" or MMXX?

Since "project Madrid" was cancelled the waters have been muddied in this regard.
Click to expand...

Yes. The dredging application that also referenced wooden pilings capped by concrete was filed in 2017 and referenced "Project Madrid" as the project name.

Whether it still applies to MMXX, or Project 2021, or is now just a relic of the original Madrid, I don't know.
 
Last edited:
Also... if I recall, the disposition of that application was that no permit was required being non-tidal. So no status, or expiration, etc. to track.

But it was forwarded to Army Corps of Engineers for review...and I'm not sure if that went anywhere.

Bottom-line, that dredging reference may well be "overcome by events" until when/if any related 2020 or 2021 work is significantly different enough to warrant the park going through a permitting/waiver/etc. process again.
 
Last edited:
It may be a while until we get new info, and I’m ok with that - we have MMXX construction to get excited about lol
Then again that deer-themed Giga steeplechase hype
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenWilkerson
Just something I thought of on the coaster vs. tower debate. It’s been discussed that the 300’ waiver in Festa was for the now cancelled “Project Madrid” and they used the same waiver for MMXX because they already had it.

If 2021 was a tower and not a coaster, wouldn’t it have made more sense to put the tower where MMXX is now going and use the height waiver you already had? Then build a coaster similar to MMXX in Festhaus Park? Then you wouldn’t have even had the whole fiasco over a second 300’ waiver because it wouldn’t have even been necessary to file it in FP that high, they could have just filed for 180’ or whatever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DolphinzRock, BenWilkerson, BGWnut and 1 other person
@Zachary requesting your help.

I've been scouring the James City County website looking for a summary of the citizen correspondence for the height waiver from the June BOS meeting (similar to the document you linked in your article)

Having trouble finding it. I was curious to see for myself the "overwhelming response" to this issue and maybe get a count of emails for/against.

As a side note: the correspondence link in your article is no longer working for me.

On Android it looks like this:
17066

On iPhone it looks like this:
17067


But neither open. I messed around with the pop-up setting on my Android a bit but still couldn't get it to go.

Perhaps this bit is a question for @Gavin ?

Edit side note: I originally planned this as a private message to Zachary.. but then thought that probably other people might also be interested in this data.
 
Last edited:
Hmm...well I can’t seem to find them on our server, so @Zachary is going to have to fix it. It is possible that it was working, then @Zachary edited it and messed it up. It does clearly reference a file on a Windows Computer (?), and there is actually one other link broken in that post as well.
 
There was speculation with the project formerly known as 'Madrid' that it might span across the river. Is that feasible from the Festhaus side, as well?
 
An attraction can’t spawn both sides anymore I think with MMXX in the way and the pastures. Everything would have to be contained to the Festhaus area.
 
A span stretching from one side to the other is by definition stretching in the opposite direction as well, so in that sense it is certainly feasible, given that it was considered for Madrid (newly built obstacles may complicate this!).

Cost effective? Necessary? Worthwhile? I haven’t seen any 2021 plans so I can’t say it’s comprehensively ruled out. But I would not expect it. Scuttlebutt suggests that Madrid was dumped in favor of a plan for two separate rides on opposite sides of the water, with no new crossing. I strongly believe that’s true, but only time (or leaks! will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnD, BGWnut, GrandpaD and 2 others
Busch Gardens land is owned over the other side of the lake as well, over the railroad to the east all the way to the dam and Kingsmill golf course. I suppose that land across the lake is possible to be used just as much as anything, but that is a long crossing as the lake is very wide there.
 
AIR said:
Busch Gardens land is owned over the other side of the lake as well, over the railroad to the east all the way to the dam and Kingsmill golf course. I suppose that land across the lake is possible to be used just as much as anything, but that is a long crossing as the lake is very wide there.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the RPA buffers and any other standing land preservation issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad