Cheetah Hunt and Stormrunner are two of my top three favorite Intamin coasters. Unfortunately, there are more coasters of theirs I don't like than like.
Project 2022: Pantheon
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
- Status
Ok ok ok......Something struck me that annoys me here! And I didn't think of it until your post that riders don't always come to the top of the spike. Let's say that it's up to 76 MPH as it's top speed, it's highly unlikely that it's getting anywhere near the top of the spike. So they spent money for a height waiver, spent money on a FAA waiver, extra structure.....wow. That just seems like a lot of senseless spending if you ask me.
Welcome to Busch Gardens WIlliamsburg
I asked the same a while ago. Superman, Escape from Krypton is shown as 415ft. Yet they list the drop at 328ft. So a lot of "wasted tower", so to speak. (That ride is 104mph).
A wildcard few people have considered:
Everyone sees 315 feet and assumes a 315 foot drop. That's not the same thing. Maybe the launch track is 30 feet above the base of the spike's tower—leading to a 315 foot above grade tower supporting a spike that is only really 285 feet tall. We can remove 5 feet from that number for the a lighting rod (I assume it needs one of those?), the FAA-required red light, etc. That gets the actual height of the spike down to 280-ish feet. Drop another 30 feet or so (?) for the buffer between the expected highest point of the back of the train and the end of the spike and you only have an actual peak train height (read: drop) of 250-ish feet. Maybe that gets us closer to that 76 MPH number?
Edit: @GrandpaD just touched on the same idea as I was typing. Great minds think alike!
Everyone sees 315 feet and assumes a 315 foot drop. That's not the same thing. Maybe the launch track is 30 feet above the base of the spike's tower—leading to a 315 foot above grade tower supporting a spike that is only really 285 feet tall. We can remove 5 feet from that number for the a lighting rod (I assume it needs one of those?), the FAA-required red light, etc. That gets the actual height of the spike down to 280-ish feet. Drop another 30 feet or so (?) for the buffer between the expected highest point of the back of the train and the end of the spike and you only have an actual peak train height (read: drop) of 250-ish feet. Maybe that gets us closer to that 76 MPH number?
Edit: @GrandpaD just touched on the same idea as I was typing. Great minds think alike!
Only issue I have there is SwD is ~195 ft Tall spike with a top speed of ~77 MPH. Still lots of space wasted. About 60 ft, and I'm not sure how far up the spike SwD goes.
https://rcdb.com/13420.htm#p=75881
EDIT:
I dunno if this link will take you to the picture or not, but picture 21 of 51 shows SwD train getting quite short from the top. I'm not sure the distance there. Of course there is one more launch after this, so I'm going to presume that this version wouldn't go 76 MPH backwards anyways.
Here's another shot. Hard to gauge height.
EDIT - Look close and you can see the lighting rod and FAA light.
Question - Because of the height difference in the spikes, could the LSM launcher be boosted? My thinking is it goes backwards up the spike slightly faster than SwD. Then forward up whatever (Top Hat?) then a final boost to 77ish up the spike with no boost coming down and forward(?)
EDIT - Look close and you can see the lighting rod and FAA light.
Question - Because of the height difference in the spikes, could the LSM launcher be boosted? My thinking is it goes backwards up the spike slightly faster than SwD. Then forward up whatever (Top Hat?) then a final boost to 77ish up the spike with no boost coming down and forward(?)
Attachments
Last edited:
First, you are absolutely NOT wasting anyone’s time.
Second, I think you have captured everything I dislike about the concept depicted in the slides.
Finally, I really, really hope this “leak” is old or fake information.
Last edited:
What if I told you I’m not a fan of it because we don’t all have to like the same rides. And to me the thought of a park with 2 “gimmick” launch coasters getting another “gimmick” launch coaster is a waste of resources, land, time, and effort.
Not picking on you, but you keep forgetting the G. It's Soaring
Attachments
Except this isn't a gimmick ride lol. It's literally a standard Intamin mega coaster with a backwards launch at the beginning. Do you not see the overbank and airtime hills?
I just told you: It's a full circuit Intamin coaster just with a funky beginning. You still get your drop into the ravine for crying out loud lol.
It even has a high capacity.
Many people like (with good reason) traditional lift hills and drops. Don't know why that offends you so much @madmax.
The park has plenty of those. There's no rule that says you can only have 2 launch coasters.
I mean I would love a giga obviously but I'd be down for Soarin With Dragon on a terrain.
The only thing I don't want is an extremely short ride.
I personally wouldn’t enjoy seeing a park have a near 50/50 split in lift/launch (4 v 3). Launches do not give the same anticipation as lifts, take up just as much space, and frankly (from what I’ve seen) are less reliable. The park has 2 multi-launches, one that goes backwards on a launch, one that does terrain with a launch. The only launch that could be a really different experience is a Hulk like launch.
I think a lot of people would be disappointed with a SwD like ride not because of what it is, but rather it reels repetitive with what’s there. If this is what went to SWO, I think there would be more excitement. But at BGW it doesn’t really check off all that much that they don’t have.
Things that BGW could do that they don’t have or isn’t in the area:
S&S looper, B&M Flying, B&M wing, B&M Giga (and spare me the “too much like Apollo crap”), heavily themed Mack, Gershlauer infinity coaster, RMCTRex, RMC Raptor.
And that’s not even getting into what the area has that they could do better on like a B&M looper, Intamin Giga, RMC I-box ground up.
All of that I rather see over a 3rd launch coaster that replicates elements of the other two the park already has.
I think a lot of people would be disappointed with a SwD like ride not because of what it is, but rather it reels repetitive with what’s there. If this is what went to SWO, I think there would be more excitement. But at BGW it doesn’t really check off all that much that they don’t have.
Things that BGW could do that they don’t have or isn’t in the area:
S&S looper, B&M Flying, B&M wing, B&M Giga (and spare me the “too much like Apollo crap”), heavily themed Mack, Gershlauer infinity coaster, RMCTRex, RMC Raptor.
And that’s not even getting into what the area has that they could do better on like a B&M looper, Intamin Giga, RMC I-box ground up.
All of that I rather see over a 3rd launch coaster that replicates elements of the other two the park already has.
Ok, I'm an old guy. Pretty traditional overall. But (and it's a big but) I always loved BGW because, when it came to coasters, they pushed the envelope.
Loch Ness - tallest, fastest and only interlocking loop.
Apollo - First ever B&M hyper (the "goose in the face" effect fortunately cancelled)
BBW - First successful suspended coaster
Alpengeist - World's tallest complete circuit inverted coaster
Tempesto - (I got nuttin')
Anyway, my feeling is IF it is a clone of SwD they will have continued the trend that put them in the map. Yes, it doesn't have a lift hill. But that's it. SwD has an inside top hat, a dive loop, an overbanked curve, a S-curve, a S-hump, banked curves and several airtime elements. Hopefully, if this is the new BGW coaster it had all these and maybe more. (Sorry if it sounds like an Intamin PR piece).
I know I won't sway anyone that is determined BGW needs a giga. But this ol' guy doesn't care about how the coaster starts...I want one that makes me want to come back for more.
FYI - My second choice would be a Flying Aces type coaster. (Intamin fan boy?)
(Besides, coasters are good for getting rid of kidney stones)
Loch Ness - tallest, fastest and only interlocking loop.
Apollo - First ever B&M hyper (the "goose in the face" effect fortunately cancelled)
BBW - First successful suspended coaster
Alpengeist - World's tallest complete circuit inverted coaster
Tempesto - (I got nuttin')
Anyway, my feeling is IF it is a clone of SwD they will have continued the trend that put them in the map. Yes, it doesn't have a lift hill. But that's it. SwD has an inside top hat, a dive loop, an overbanked curve, a S-curve, a S-hump, banked curves and several airtime elements. Hopefully, if this is the new BGW coaster it had all these and maybe more. (Sorry if it sounds like an Intamin PR piece).
I know I won't sway anyone that is determined BGW needs a giga. But this ol' guy doesn't care about how the coaster starts...I want one that makes me want to come back for more.
FYI - My second choice would be a Flying Aces type coaster. (Intamin fan boy?)
(Besides, coasters are good for getting rid of kidney stones)
Last edited:
How how HOW is a terrain launch coaster even remotely the same as Verbolten? There’s no drop track and there’s no indoor section.
I think @Zachary 's point was to try to make you remove the personal opinion aspect from this, since you seem to be taking this all too personal, and rebutting semi-personally as well.
Just like how you like and what what you do, others like and want different. Shouldn't be such a problem.
There can be debate and discussion on other things, since like how you won't budge on your stance, most likely you won't be convincing someone to like your stance.
- Status