Also, Tempesto's documents, which BGWFans also leaked, never showed comfort collars.
Project 2022: Pantheon
- Thread starter Shane
- Start date
- Status
Jesus are we really having this convo again?
There isn't anywhere shown to put the collars like there is on the Premier trains. Just assume it's the Taron trains unless a verifiable source or the real thing says otherwise (which I highly doubt since SeaWorld is already getting a looper with lap bars in 2020).
Also...that carabiner on Tigris is not for the collars. They need to add a seat belt buckle if they're going to put them on.
There isn't anywhere shown to put the collars like there is on the Premier trains. Just assume it's the Taron trains unless a verifiable source or the real thing says otherwise (which I highly doubt since SeaWorld is already getting a looper with lap bars in 2020).
Also...that carabiner on Tigris is not for the collars. They need to add a seat belt buckle if they're going to put them on.
Meanwhile...back at MMXX....
Ok....I did some "Columbo-ing", Googling and chatting. This is what I think we might see-
The FAA came back with a "Determination" which is basically saying all is cool for height as @chrisorris24 posted. That's what the DET column is on the blue square.
The determination also includes language that cranes, etc. used to construct are part of the height calculations.
The lat./long on the determination waiver is shown with the red circled X. It is very close to the same location in the plat as @b.mac posted and on this map. According to FAA the structure must be within 250 ft. of this location. As I measured the "Spike" is approximately 165ft from the center point. The top hat is over 275ft. The Spike is also close to the center line denoting the distance to the airport as on the waiver. Not so the top hat.
One last thing. The blue box DNE column. The FAA definition is Do Not Exceed. It's of the opinion that the actual structure is 253ft and 325ft above sea level (adding the terrain height).
So, I think we're looking at a 253-ish ft spike. Maybe the top 10-15ft is a small "pole" with the required FAA light.
Ok, fire away.
Ok....I did some "Columbo-ing", Googling and chatting. This is what I think we might see-
The FAA came back with a "Determination" which is basically saying all is cool for height as @chrisorris24 posted. That's what the DET column is on the blue square.
The determination also includes language that cranes, etc. used to construct are part of the height calculations.
The lat./long on the determination waiver is shown with the red circled X. It is very close to the same location in the plat as @b.mac posted and on this map. According to FAA the structure must be within 250 ft. of this location. As I measured the "Spike" is approximately 165ft from the center point. The top hat is over 275ft. The Spike is also close to the center line denoting the distance to the airport as on the waiver. Not so the top hat.
One last thing. The blue box DNE column. The FAA definition is Do Not Exceed. It's of the opinion that the actual structure is 253ft and 325ft above sea level (adding the terrain height).
So, I think we're looking at a 253-ish ft spike. Maybe the top 10-15ft is a small "pole" with the required FAA light.
Ok, fire away.
Attachments
Last edited:
did you go to the park on preview day? they changed the comfort collars on tempesto and the latch they're using is the exact same as the one shown on those tigris trains. there are photos in other threads showing these new collars on electric eel as well, also using the same latch.
here is the link to the post btw
The new intamin is simplifying things and only offer one train design now to use on both mega and multi launch coasters.
What “fact?” What evidence? Which data?
Woah okay I missed a bit of this. Thanks for the plot map @GrandpaD, the DET you're worrying about likely stands for Dynamic Environment and Terrain. Which just means that BGW isn't getting any sort of leeway thanks to the terrain in the area.
I'm curious about that equation used to get the 253 foot limit on the spike. What would the maximum height be for the top hat using that same equation (yes I know it is outside of the FAA permit range).
FAA permits normally need to be applied for any project within a certain range of an Airport (in NJ I think it's 3 miles) and / or any structure that exceeds 200 feet. There's a whole standardization for FAA lighting based on height and nature of a structure I can link later on when I get the time.
I'm curious about that equation used to get the 253 foot limit on the spike. What would the maximum height be for the top hat using that same equation (yes I know it is outside of the FAA permit range).
FAA permits normally need to be applied for any project within a certain range of an Airport (in NJ I think it's 3 miles) and / or any structure that exceeds 200 feet. There's a whole standardization for FAA lighting based on height and nature of a structure I can link later on when I get the time.
RMC Gwazi is using lap bars right?
That means that SeaWorld is willing to put lap bars on looping coasters, which means the comfort collar talk is moot until proven otherwise.
We have no idea what harness style gwazi is using.
The SRIIs also don't have comfort collars except for at SEAS parks. So there is precedent for them to put something like them on a coaster where they typically don't exist.
@b.mac Honestly, my single idea of the 253ft is the second column of the blue square from the FAA definition list...DNE which say on the FAA pages as Do Not Exceed. Below that is height plus terrain. (Again, my research).
I just guessed the height of an red FAA light, which the entire waiver permit indicates will be present.
No clue on the top hat. The waiver only indicates 1 structure.
I just guessed the height of an red FAA light, which the entire waiver permit indicates will be present.
No clue on the top hat. The waiver only indicates 1 structure.
Last edited:
That's my thought. And those that did the recreations.
THEY ARE NOT PUTTING OTSRs ON RMC GWAZI BECAUSE IT DOES NOT USE THE RAPTOR TRAIN.
Way to ignore the rest of the points that were made there.
I’m not bothering with them because it’s pure nonsense.
Look at the RMC hybrid train and tell me how an OTSR would work
Like was said above money talks and if SEAS wants them there RMC will figure out a way
Oh ok so show me the train they’re developing with comfort collars for hybrid
- Status