Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
Status
Not open for further replies.
We should try to get aerial footage of it testing



They said it’s running 3. I don’t think they’d order 4 unless they just want one to switch out all the time.
Where did you read it was running 3? The press release for the ride says 2. There was a rumor during IAAPA that the park had ordered a 3rd train. Never heard it confirmed.
 
What if they try and ban you from the park because of all this?

I guess I'd have to charter planes more often then... And Kings Dominion would probably get a ton of new, really high-quality reporting to promote their projects to the enthusiast community.

Seriously though, I'd do this same stuff regarding BGW even if I were to be banned from the park. I have strong convictions about press freedoms and will report on public records until I'm blue in the face. Proxies would have to take up photographing things inside the park, but ultimately BGWFans could easily persist even if I didn't have the ability to enter the property.

Would I be sad? Yes, I love BGW. Would I be mad? As hell. Would it break my resolve? The opposite.
 
Commercial pilot here. Sign me up if you ever need help! ?

I fly down from the northeast all the time, and one of the arrivals into Raleigh (flew it yesterday) takes us right over the park, but I can never spot it from 21000.

I did fly over KD the day before yesterday on my way to Philly. Of course, trying to take a picture of it with my phone, it somehow turns into a pixelated grain of sand. Did see a little bit of red and yellow down there, though. <3
 
Last edited:
Where did you read it was running 3? The press release for the ride says 2. There was a rumor during IAAPA that the park had ordered a 3rd train. Never heard it confirmed.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Was from here.

Also @Zachary what camera did you use for the pics? I can zoom in a lot and they still don’t look pixelated lol. Great quality.
 
In theory, on busy days, 3 trains could run.
Train 1 would have to crest the top hat before train 2 could depart (in case of a roll back). Train 3 could be sitting just outside the station ready to roll to load. Once train 1 crests and train 2 departs train 3 could roll into load position.

OR, they bought 3 trains with one in standby in case of mechanical issues.

Perhaps this might be addressed with the press tour (because this attending obviously read BGWFans ?). But, in my opinion, a single tweet is not confirmation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGWnut and Le Moose
Especially when said tweet didn't include attribution to a park source (or infer that they spoke with a knowledgeable anonymous source).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BGWnut
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


Was from here.

Also @Zachary what camera did you use for the pics? I can zoom in a lot and they still don’t look pixelated lol. Great quality.

That still isn't a confirmation. Nothing but a rumor still at this point. They could have just misspoken.
 
Also @Zachary what camera did you use for the pics? I can zoom in a lot and they still don’t look pixelated lol. Great quality.

Just my normal old Canon T5i with the 18-135mm on it. I would seriously consider upgrading the lens before I try this again though. I really felt like I needed a lot more zoom range than I had. Also, the shots that made the post were all essentially "saved" through heavy editing in Lightroom... And many of the photos I took aren't even good enough to be rescued. Another big issue was that we had to go first thing in the morning as it was the only slot available that would give us enough lead time to get the article out before the park's media event. That made the lighting conditions (especially from certain angles) really difficult.

On a different note, if anyone out there has access to a small plane in the Williamsburg area and would like to see more content like this in the future, get in touch! I know flight time isn't cheap, but if you have a connection that may be able to make it any cheaper, I'd love to know more!
 
Last edited:
Unless I'm mistaken, I am pretty sure they only have the ability to store 2 trains unless they leave one out in the elements, which I highly doubt they would want to do. By my count, they could only store one in the station and one in the maintenance shed.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, I am pretty sure they only have the ability to store 2 trains unless they leave one out in the elements, which I highly doubt they would want to do. By my count, they could only store one in the station and one in the maintenance shed.

Unless the winter option is to use DK as a maintenance storage area and take 1 train completely off the tracks.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, I am pretty sure they only have the ability to store 2 trains unless they leave one out in the elements, which I highly doubt they would want to do. By my count, they could only store one in the station and one in the maintenance shed.
I think the maintenance bay might be long enough for two trains but I'm not sure.
 
The only other logical explanation (if the 3 train purchase is correct) would be a portion of Train 3 would be used in the "can you fit?" display and the remainder is space parts stored somewhere (isn't the maintenance shed somewhat elevated so you could store under the track?).
 
Well, at least marketing finally got the stats straight...
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


The "178 feet" thing is still really sketchy. The park always (rightfully, in my opinion) markets every other coaster by its drop height (180 feet in Pantheon's case). Why they are arbitrarily using the height of the spike here, I don't understand.
 
The "178 feet" thing is still really sketchy. The park always (rightfully, in my opinion) markets every other coaster by its drop height (180 feet in Pantheon's case). Why they are arbitrarily using the height of the spike here, I don't understand.
Agreed, but for clarity, where did that 180ft number come from? Is it possible that it was just rounded from the 178ft number? I am just curious, because I could see it either way.

I mean at this point we are splitting hairs over a 2ft difference, but I do think it is warranted, considering the park's history of reporting the drop height and the current state of the marketing department. I don't know why marketing would opt for 178ft anyways.. I would think that 180ft sounds taller, and it's within a reasonable tolerance (not to mention it likely is truly a 180ft drop).

Then again, this is the same marketing department that omits the true record-holders.. I mean if they're going stretch the truth, why not say it's a 200ft drop?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenWilkerson
Status
Not open for further replies.
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad