Project 2022: Pantheon

[Dylon]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

That would require riding Mach Tower.

Which for some is a task in itself....

 

[Dylon]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

Looking at the star on the map, doesn't that seem awfully close to the Rhine River to be a 315ft flat ride? 1. It seems odd that they would put it in a spot that is not centrally located in the field (i.e. it is not the "centerpiece" of the new area). 2. That spot is right on the edge of undevelopable slopes, so it seems like a lot of hassle to try to engineer a foundation solid enough to hold up a 300+ ft tower on the edge of such steep slopes.  I have attached an image with the JCC contours for that area, with the red dot as an approximate location of the balloon test. Note, I tried to match this as closely as possible with the documents BGWFans has provided, but I couldn't match it exactly, so I made the dot large enough to encompass an area that I feel was close to the spot.

For some reason that reminds me of Verboltens footers on the final turn..... That's not even that steep.

 

[Adam]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

Looking at the star on the map, doesn't that seem awfully close to the Rhine River to be a 315ft flat ride? 1. It seems odd that they would put it in a spot that is not centrally located in the field (i.e. it is not the "centerpiece" of the new area). 2. That spot is right on the edge of undevelopable slopes, so it seems like a lot of hassle to try to engineer a foundation solid enough to hold up a 300+ ft tower on the edge of such steep slopes.  I have attached an image with the JCC contours for that area, with the red dot as an approximate location of the balloon test. Note, I tried to match this as closely as possible with the documents BGWFans has provided, but I couldn't match it exactly, so I made the dot large enough to encompass an area that I feel was close to the spot.

For some reason that reminds me of Verboltens footers on the final turn..... That's not even that steep.

Yes, but those footers aren't holding nearly as much weight as a 315ft tower foundation would be holding.

 

[Bring Back Questor 87]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

I believe they would put a Star Flyer smack dab against other rides like they have done with Tempesto, and Mach Tower being so close to Verbolten and Der Wirbelwind.

This location is ideal for a coaster that uses the real estate and terrain near the river. A flat out there isolated in that manner means significant path work to a single tower swing. Busch is smarter than that.

Also, didn't they close the stables/animal reserve area over there? Future development precursor?

 

[MAZ]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

If this thing is in fact a coaster, with its peak height at 315 feet that close to the Rhine, I can't help but wonder if they are going for 'the mother of all drops'. If it drops from that high, down to the water like Apollo, you might as well tack on an extra 50 feet for a 365 ft drop. Talk about exciting!

 

[Ghost of Pretzel Kaiser]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

Would love to see BGW on the map again.

 

[Adam]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

If this thing is in fact a coaster, with its peak height at 315 feet that close to the Rhine, I can't help but wonder if they are going for 'the mother of all drops'. If it drops from that high, down to the water like Apollo, you might as well tack on an extra 50 feet for a 365 ft drop. Talk about exciting!

That's exactly what I was thinking as well! Only issue would be having enough clearance for the Rhine River Cruises, since they go out that way.

Also I'm going to play my own devil's advocate against a coaster and put it out there that if they build anything that encroaches upon the "river" they will need a lot of permits since they will be disturbing a Resource Protection Area (RPA). They were able to get around this with Verbolten since they re-used Big Bad Wolf's footers that were in the RPA/RPA Buffer, but I don't think it will be that easy with anything brand new. With that being said though, I don't think a coaster is out of the picture, considering we already know BG can do a lot with only small spaces if they are not going to encroach upon the water, case in point InvadR and Tempesto.

 

[Bring Back Questor 87]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

If this thing is in fact a coaster, with its peak height at 315 feet that close to the Rhine, I can't help but wonder if they are going for 'the mother of all drops'. If it drops from that high, down to the water like Apollo, you might as well tack on an extra 50 feet for a 365 ft drop. Talk about exciting!

That's exactly what I was thinking as well! Only issue would be having enough clearance for the Rhine River Cruises, since they go out that way.  

Also I'm going to play my own devil's advocate against a coaster and put it out there that if they build anything that encroaches upon the "river" they will need a lot of permits since they will be disturbing a Resource Protection Area (RPA). They were able to get around this with Verbolten since they re-used Big Bad Wolf's footers that were in the RPA/RPA Buffer, but I don't think it will be that easy with anything brand new. With that being said though, I don't think a coaster is out of the picture, considering we already know BG can do a lot with only small spaces if they are not going to encroach upon the water, case in point InvadR and Tempesto.

Were similar permits involved with Apollo's water interaction?

 

[Adam]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

If this thing is in fact a coaster, with its peak height at 315 feet that close to the Rhine, I can't help but wonder if they are going for 'the mother of all drops'. If it drops from that high, down to the water like Apollo, you might as well tack on an extra 50 feet for a 365 ft drop. Talk about exciting!

That's exactly what I was thinking as well! Only issue would be having enough clearance for the Rhine River Cruises, since they go out that way.  

Also I'm going to play my own devil's advocate against a coaster and put it out there that if they build anything that encroaches upon the "river" they will need a lot of permits since they will be disturbing a Resource Protection Area (RPA). They were able to get around this with Verbolten since they re-used Big Bad Wolf's footers that were in the RPA/RPA Buffer, but I don't think it will be that easy with anything brand new. With that being said though, I don't think a coaster is out of the picture, considering we already know BG can do a lot with only small spaces if they are not going to encroach upon the water, case in point InvadR and Tempesto.

Were similar permits involved with Apollo's water interaction?

I'm not quite sure of the exact details, but from what I understand it was built before needing such permits. Then again, I may be completely wrong.

 

[Adam]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

To throw another wrench into anyone's theories, how will BG do any large-scale (including a coaster, flat ride, country, etc.) improvements in the area where the height waiver was issued due to the Colonial Pipeline that crosses that area? I don't know the specifics of the easement, but it certainly would be difficult building anything on top of it, especially a coaster, which would limit the area BG has to work with.

 

[Dylon]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

Looking at the star on the map, doesn't that seem awfully close to the Rhine River to be a 315ft flat ride? 1. It seems odd that they would put it in a spot that is not centrally located in the field (i.e. it is not the "centerpiece" of the new area). 2. That spot is right on the edge of undevelopable slopes, so it seems like a lot of hassle to try to engineer a foundation solid enough to hold up a 300+ ft tower on the edge of such steep slopes.  I have attached an image with the JCC contours for that area, with the red dot as an approximate location of the balloon test. Note, I tried to match this as closely as possible with the documents BGWFans has provided, but I couldn't match it exactly, so I made the dot large enough to encompass an area that I feel was close to the spot.

For some reason that reminds me of Verboltens footers on the final turn..... That's not even that steep.

Yes, but those footers aren't holding nearly as much weight as a 315ft tower foundation would be holding.

Yeah I know, I should have stated that previously. Just thought I'd throw that out there as it came to my mind.

 

[mtpelepele]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

To throw another wrench into anyone's theories, how will BG do any large-scale (including a coaster, flat ride, country, etc.) improvements in the area where the height waiver was issued due to the Colonial Pipeline that crosses that area?  I don't know the specifics of the easement, but it certainly would be difficult building anything on top of it, especially a coaster, which would limit the area BG has to work with.

All depends on how it's built. Nessie was built over the pipeline, and uses a truss structure to cross it. Modern day coasters are being built with far longer unsupported spans (look at I305's lift hill!), so that may not be a problem.

 

[basseyfish]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

I hope they go with intamin if it's a coaster. I don't wanna see some ugly mack coaster or a hypetwist style trains

 

[warfelg]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

To throw another wrench into anyone's theories, how will BG do any large-scale (including a coaster, flat ride, country, etc.) improvements in the area where the height waiver was issued due to the Colonial Pipeline that crosses that area?  I don't know the specifics of the easement, but it certainly would be difficult building anything on top of it, especially a coaster, which would limit the area BG has to work with.

All depends on how it's built.  Nessie was built over the pipeline, and uses a truss structure to cross it.  Modern day coasters are being built with far longer unsupported spans (look at I305's lift hill!), so that may not be a problem.

I305 and Skyrush (Hersheypark) is way I think they could build a really nice tall coaster without needing too many supports.

Unrelated:
315 isn't going to be the peak peak height. I bet it would top out at about 300 even, and if it uses the River as a low point, its only going to add about 35-40 feet to the drop.

Given every coaster (except Invadr) interacts with the River, I would be more inclined to think this is going to be a coaster. Having a second "showcase" lift that you can see from the entrance. Would be cool if it went the opposing direction from Apollo though.

 

[Eric]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

 Given every coaster (except Invadr) interacts with the River.

and tempesto, unless of course you believe it's not a coaster and just a flat

 

[Unagi]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

I hope they go with intamin if it's a coaster. I don't wanna see some ugly mack coaster or a hypetwist style trains

As you're new here you are most likely not clued in to the fact that BGW has not installed an Intamin attraction (Escape from Pompeii) in almost 25 years and will not due to the serious issues the park has had with the ride.

 

[CarterGee]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

Starflyer
Pro:

• Increases ride diversity
• Appeals to more types of guests
• Cheap-ish
• Relatively high chance of getting approved / not disruptive

Con:

• KD has one
• Not really a hugely popular ride
• Not super close to anything existing, would require lotsa development

Giga Coaster
Pro:

• Major attraction that undercuts KD's main draw
• Would definitely drive attendance
• Doesn't need a new area (max height is close enough for station + lifhill with existing infrastructure)
• GOD PLEAAAAAASE

Con:

• KD has one
• Major investment

 

[horsesboy]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

I hope they go with intamin if it's a coaster. I don't wanna see some ugly mack coaster or a hypetwist style trains

As you're new here you are most likely not clued in to the fact that BGW has not installed an Intamin attraction (Escape from Pompeii) in almost 25 years and will not due to the serious issues the park has had with the ride.

While I find it unlikely that they would I wouldn't say never many people said never about a wooden coaster and we got Invadr. I know Larry has his issues with the company but the Sea World company aas a whole has had some firly decent dealings with them so I wouldn't totally rule anythingout till a final plan is released or other wise aquired by Zackery

 

[Bring Back Questor 87]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

^^And they surely won't add a similar Giga with I-305 a short jaunt away. There's nothing Intamin could do for Busch to accept a 300 foot tall design so similar to what's already at KD.

B&M, however, has had great success with their installations at Carowinds and Canada's Wonderland. I'm sure Busch would love a flagship B&M-giga that has the newest in B&M's train technology and a more intrepid layout than Apollo (which I will always love until death do us part no matter what this ride becomes)!

Just imagine giving Apollo a big brother of even more "Mythical Proportions" for a true mythological coaster representation.

 

[Unagi]

RE: June 2017 Height Waiver: New Hamlet? Madrid?

While I find it unlikely that they would I wouldn't say never many people said never about a wooden coaster and we got Invadr.  I know Larry has his issues with the company but the Sea World company aas a whole has had some firly decent dealings with them so I wouldn't totally rule anythingout till a final plan is released or other wise aquired by Zackery

Larry Giles hates them. And as long as he's in the park running things, you won't see an Intamin installed.