Project 2021/Drachen Spire: Intamin Multi-Launch Shuttle Giga Coaster [Cancelled]

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:
  
  

  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
• Most Recent Status Update:
  
  

  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

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.

Accept third party cookies

Direct Link to Embedded Media Source

Additional Coverage (Newest to Oldest):​

• https://bgwfans.com/2022/drachen-spire-height-waiver-extension-details/
• https://bgwfans.com/2022/drachen-spire-height-waiver-renewal/
• https://bgwfans.com/2021/drachen-spires-slumber/
• https://bgwfans.com/2020/leaked-ele...-williamsburgs-2021-roller-coaster-in-detail/
• https://bgwfans.com/2020/busch-gardens-williamsburg-2021-shuttle-giga-coaster/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/germany-expansion-site-plans/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/2021-rpa-impacts-plan/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/newly-leaked-document-depicts-project-2021s-station/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/project-2021-height-waiver-vote-happens-tomorrow/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/born-from-the-ashes/
• https://bgwfans.com/2019/bgw-project-2021/

Previous Thread:​

https://parkfans.net/threads/january-2019-festhaus-park-height-survey.5696/

 

[Jahrules]

From my understanding, the dredging/structures permit for the Rhine was likely associated with Project Madrid, and thus scrapped with the project.

I wouldn't be so fast to jump to that conclusion.. there's nothing to say they wouldn't reuse parts of the permits as they see fit for other projects. In fact, we know without a doubt that they already did this when they didn't apply for a new height waiver for Pantheon since they could just reuse the waiver for Madrid.

From a cost perspective; why would they apply for a new dredging permit when the existing approved one meets their needs?

I'm not saying it was/wasn't but saying something is scrapped based solely off of the Madrid project cancellation is an incorrect assumption.

 

[Adam]

I wouldn't be so fast to jump to that conclusion.. there's nothing to say they wouldn't reuse parts of the permits as they see fit for other projects. In fact, we know without a doubt that they already did this when they didn't apply for a new height waiver for Pantheon since they could just reuse the waiver for Madrid.

From a cost perspective; why would they apply for a new dredging permit when the existing approved one meets their needs?

I'm not saying it was/wasn't but saying something is scrapped based solely off of the Madrid project cancellation is an incorrect assumption.

I am under the impression that the particular layout of the "concrete-capped wood piles" that were mentioned in the permit filing were specific to Project Madrid, hence why I believe the permit would be scrapped. They might be able to make an amendment to the existing permit, but we would have seen that by now most likely (the original permit was filed nearly two years ago).

 

[warfelg]

I am under the impression that the particular layout of the "concrete-capped wood piles" that were mentioned in the permit filing were specific to Project Madrid, hence why I believe the permit would be scrapped. They might be able to make an amendment to the existing permit, but we would have seen that by now most likely (the original permit was filed nearly two years ago).

I’m going to be expanding this post later, but I came through and idea this morning based on something I’ve been consulting on. I’m just not in front of my computer to properly express my thoughts.

 

[JohnD]

View attachment 17481

This one?

Welcome thoughts on the relationship between the speculated construction in the river, and all the details in the inlet.

 

[warfelg]

I’m going to be expanding this post later, but I came through and idea this morning based on something I’ve been consulting on. I’m just not in front of my computer to properly express my thoughts.

Ok....so....what if that dredging site plan was in reaction to the change of direction with the plans. And those cement capped logs aren't for a bridge, or anything to do with the rides. What if those are docking stations for whatever boats will go down to do the dredging work periodically.

 

[Jahrules]

Permanent "hitching posts" for a dredge ship seems like a needless expense. Why wouldn't they just use anchors like every other vessel from the last two millennia and beyond?

 

[Irishman]

Platform for fireworks ?

 

[GrandpaD]

I’m going to be expanding this post later, but I came through and idea this morning based on something I’ve been consulting on. I’m just not in front of my computer to properly express my thoughts.

 

[warfelg]

Permanent "hitching posts" for a dredge ship seems like a needless expense. Why wouldn't they just use anchors like every other vessel from the last two millennia and beyond?

Because it depends on how they are dredging. Just anchoring means that the boats could move around and float. With a mooring station, they can park the dredging boat between them and leave the middle of the waterway open for Rhine River cruises. Often times (knowledge from sailing) these mooring stations are also signs of shallow waters to watch out for.

The thing that came up with those of us that discussed it beforehand was the fact that none of them line up with each other. I was consulting on a project for a community that wants water ways for more home docks for small boats, and one thing that kept coming up was based on sediment flow rates, the water ways would need to be dredged once every 5 years. In a particularly wider part of the water ways they were looking for ways to best do the dredging, and the hydrologist advising on the project advised shallow water mooring stations as a way to control boat traffic and minimize the amount of movement by the dredging rig.

 

[Jahrules]

Couldn't you also do 2/3 point anchoring? My understanding is this is how drilling ships and such limit drift. Don't see why it wouldn't work for something like this too.

 

[warfelg]

Because it's a matter of how deep you anchor, the base you anchor to, the weight of the anchor, and the weight of the line. When most ships anchor, they drop both front anchors and point the bow of the ship into the current. When it's ocean/river currents, they tend to shift direction very slowly and at a rate the ship can pull anchor and re-adjust. In a body of water like the Rhine River (enclosed), currents tend to be more enclosed and shift much faster than open water or rivers.

 

[thopping]

From my understanding, the dredging/structures permit for the Rhine was likely associated with Project Madrid, and thus scrapped with the project.

It was more than likely, it actually did reference Madrid in the application (I double-checked). Other than the fate of Madrid of course, do you have any basis for saying it was scrapped?

Really what I want to understand is the underlying purpose and need for the structures in the Rhine, even more so but in addition to the dredging. The stormwater management pieces make sense with the Madrid/Pantheon/2021 work, even if those may change as the associated attractions changed.

Despite the fact that this work could relate to 2021, it also could relate to Pantheon, and of course it did with Madrid apparently, and could be something completely unrelated... therefore, thinking it may now deserve a thread unto itself to better keep 2021 on topic.

 

[Adam]

It was more than likely, it actually did reference Madrid in the application (I double-checked). Other than the fate of Madrid of course, do you have any basis for saying it was scrapped?

Really what I want to understand is the underlying purpose and need for the structures in the Rhine, even more so but in addition to the dredging. The stormwater management pieces make sense with the Madrid/Pantheon/2021 work, even if those may change as the associated attractions changed.

Despite the fact that this work could relate to 2021, it also could relate to Pantheon, and of course it did with Madrid apparently, and could be something completely unrelated... therefore, thinking it may now deserve a thread unto itself to better keep 2021 on topic.

I am working under the assumption that the dredging was either incidental to the pile driving, or it was just routine maintenance lumped into the same permit. From what I have heard rumored, Project Madrid in its original form may have utilized both sides of the Rhine to some extent, thus needing a crossing over the Rhine.

 

[madmax]

I don’t think we should completely rule out a traditional giga, even with the latest leak.

 

[ControlsEE]

Watch this "attraction" to really turn out to be a cell tower. I can just see the meeting now... "Lets put a cell tower up, but initially file it as an 'attraction!' It'll make all the enthusiasts go crazy for nothing! Muh haha!"


I seriously doubt that, but it would be the troll of the millennia.

 

[Gavin]

 

[cb0355]

I think that the chances of this being a new hamlet are slim to none..however, an extension of the Black Forest or Oktoberfest would be plausible. Personally, I think that this is either one singular attraction or 2 attractions in one (coaster-drop tower combo)...I am putting my money on the first. A drop tower would be somewhat redundant unless the days of Mach Tower are numbered...a loss I would not cry over honestly. I'd love to see them put a HUSS style top spinner or something comparable in that attraction place...wish they would bring back the Spider that used to occupy that spot. Putting money into a potential expansion that showcases 2 rides would be amazing!! But highly unlikely. This also made me wonder about the possibility of a bridge connecting Festa Field across the Rhine that would give better access to an attraction located at the rumored highest peak location (Festhaus Park) Is that posible to have an walkway that connected Festa Field and cross the Rhine....lead to tower ride and continue around to 2021's station. Is that feasible? Instead of a drop tower..have there been any roller coaster-sky swing combo's? Or a pendulum ride housed in the middle of the top hat (spire)? A giant pendulum ride that rotated 360 degrees while doing a complete rotation with the gondola would be insane!

 

[Vigil]

So another of those interesting tidbits that can't really be confirmed. I have a friend who just left Busch that had a friend in marketing. He was told several years ago that the name "Project Madrid" was specifically chosen to throw people (ahem...like us) off. He also mentioned he was told very few details about the proposed ride, but he gleaned it was a Top Thrill Dragster-like ride. He also had no idea that Project Madrid was cancelled and replaced. So this wasn't for this project, just maybe at some point an accelerator was the plan.

 

[thopping]

So... last two posts touch on some things. Following is just my gut on all of this; no claim to reliably-sourced information (outside of random deer).

1. Madrid was a TTD/Red Force/top hat one-trick-pony type coaster. Power, further from Kingsmill, pedestrian access from Festa, etc. drove Festa Field placement.

2. As discussions w/ Intamin progressed, a two-for package option materialized.

3. Parties thought the larger MMXX/Pantheon layout would work better in Festa Field, so the original Madrid top hat, and associated height waivers, shifted to Festhaus Park.

4. Madrid was simply SEAS' exiting naming convention based on city names. If there was any tie-in or evasion strategy, it was to simply NOT pick an Italy or Germany city name. Never was it intended to refer to a hamlet or Spain.

5. Neither coaster will introduce a hamlet (Pantheon's layout now confirms that one). Possibility for some flats, dippin' dots stand, etc. in Festhaus Park as an extension of Oktoberfest, call it Black Forest or Bavaria if you like, whatever, but that's it. Park feels the top hat one-trick-pony will be tall and exciting enough to draw people back there w/o needing additional attractions (not sure I agree); so one of the secondary concerns about DF's failure--location--is not a concern here.

6. Neither will introduce a pedestrian bridge. Structures detailed in the dredging permit are unrelated to people or attractions crossing the Rhine. Cost, topography, piling structural details, Pantheon layout, lack of hamlets on either side, etc. rule that out.

7. In fact, no new hamlet is ever planned, short of a massive expansion and (closer to) year around operation, which is also not planned. Closest thing to a new hamlet would be the SP-in-the-France-parking lot, which would be another gate, fulfill contractual obligations, and be more of a draw in SEAS' minds than a hamlet.

So enjoy the coasters as they'll be the last for a while, and which will fill out most of their land w/o crossing the other tributary of Grove Creek, which would require the massive expansion. Anything beyond this will be smaller infill, dark, and replacement attractions.

 

[BGWnut]

So... last two posts touch on some things. Following is just my gut on all of this; no claim to reliably-sourced information (outside of random deer).

1. Madrid was a TTD/Red Force/top hat one-trick-pony type coaster. Power, further from Kingsmill, pedestrian access from Festa, etc. drove Festa Field placement.

2. As discussions w/ Intamin progressed, a two-for package option materialized.

3. Parties thought the larger MMXX/Pantheon layout would work better in Festa Field, so the original Madrid top hat, and associated height waivers, shifted to Festhaus Park.

4. Madrid was simply SEAS' exiting naming convention based on city names. If there was any tie-in or evasion strategy, it was to simply NOT pick an Italy or Germany city name. Never was it intended to refer to a hamlet or Spain.

5. Neither coaster will introduce a hamlet (Pantheon's layout now confirms that one). Possibility for some flats, dippin' dots stand, etc. in Festhaus Park as an extension of Oktoberfest, call it Black Forest or Bavaria if you like, whatever, but that's it. Park feels the top hat one-trick-pony will be tall and exciting enough to draw people back there w/o needing additional attractions (not sure I agree); so one of the secondary concerns about DF's failure--location--is not a concern here.

6. Neither will introduce a pedestrian bridge. Structures detailed in the dredging permit are unrelated to people or attractions crossing the Rhine. Cost, topography, piling structural details, Pantheon layout, lack of hamlets on either side, etc. rule that out.

7. In fact, no new hamlet is ever planned, short of a massive expansion and (closer to) year around operation, which is also not planned. Closest thing to a new hamlet would be the SP-in-the-France-parking lot, which would be another gate, fulfill contractual obligations, and be more of a draw in SEAS' minds than a hamlet.

So enjoy the coasters as they'll be the last for a while, and which will fill out most of their land w/o crossing the other tributary of Grove Creek, which would require the massive expansion. Anything beyond this will be smaller infill, dark, and replacement attractions.

I just want to point out that from what I've been able to gather that Madrid being a red force clone is either. From what I have been able to gather and from what I understand it was to be a more traditional giga that crossed the river.

I do agree with all of your other points. I do think that at some point in the discussion Intamin/SEAS suggested a bundle of 2 rides. This is why it got delayed and we got Finnegan's this year instead of Madrid because it was initially meant to be in 2019. It shifted from there to 2020 and 2021. I'm not sure where the Red force clone rumor started but my understanding at the current moment is that it was not a red force clone before being cancelled and split into 2 projects.