Jump to content

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, jcovelli said:

Either way if it was correct, that would make the station 30' x 11'. Kids coasters have bigger stations than that lol

I forgot about this. 

Fury's station is 50 feet long and Leviathan's is like 60. If we go with 50 feet for our station, the horizontal lift hill run is more like 400/450ft long. That makes a lot more sense.

For the record, the trigonometry along the backbone there brings it to 335'-377' not accounting for the curve at the top, assuming we stop halfway between the two largest supports 

 

  • Like 6
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So my buddy caught a glimpse of the crew testing the equipment again tonight and this popped up on the screen! Could it be?!?          SPOILER ALERT       S

Ok y’all! It’s time for a vote! Here is the final 4!  Trophy for this one! Heart for This one! Laugh for This one! The 4th option is the above with Mako Purple inste

Posted Images

I was able to find the blueprints online to both Banshee and Diamondback, is it possible that someone who is more capable than me found the blueprints to Kings Mills Antique Autos and overlaid a giga layout? 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post @RuthlessAirtime ive been driving for 2 hours trying to think everything through and all the possibilities and i couldnt even figure out where to start. I do have a question though.  If these leaked plans were real would we be able to find information on if Kings Island or b&m filed a lawsuit against the person for breaking NDA?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kirbias1 said:

If it's only 300' feet high, where is extra 30 feet coming from?

There is a small slope in front of the lift hill around 30-40 feet in height.  It will go right back up and the rest of the coaster is at a higher elevation but it’s enough to give it a 330 foot drop.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kenban said:

There is a small slope in front of the lift hill around 30-40 feet in height.  It will go right back up and the rest of the coaster is at a higher elevation but it’s enough to give it a 330 foot drop.

Sounds good. Hope you're right!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that it is going to drop into the ravine that’s cleared in Dino’s alive. There is a 30-50 drop in elevation according to the site plan gradient lines. Each one represents 10 feet (the small ones you can barely see are 2 feet each). I’ve circled in Red the faint footers that you can see as it starts to climb back out.a3b27cd41c287739823e98e6d29beb0c.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FUN&ONLY! said:

Let’s say it is not a giga coaster, and it is some 200-footer... I am ruling out a dive, a wing, and all other CURRENT B&M coaster models as they all have some inversions in their layouts

Maybe B&M has a new launch coaster model that is solely focused on air-time, and it could launch up the lift and complete the course around 70MPH

It’s a spinner. B&M has developed a 200 ft tall, non-inverting spinner.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the scale being wrong: use the Pythagorean theorem and the coordinates of any two footers to find the distance between them. Then measure them on the front page. The measurement using the scale will be shorter. 

I promise you an incorrect little scale on an overview drawing that is never used except as an overview is a lot easier to accept than EVERY COORDINATE on a page full of exact coordinates for every footer, which is used to actually place them, being wrong. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Magenta Lizard said:

As for the scale being wrong: use the Pythagorean theorem and the coordinates of any two footers to find the distance between them. Then measure them on the front page. The measurement using the scale will be shorter. 

I promise you an incorrect little scale on an overview drawing that is never used except as an overview is a lot easier to accept than EVERY COORDINATE on a page full of exact coordinates for every footer, which is used to actually place them, being wrong. 

I kinda forgot about all the coordinate work that went into this. There's been a lot going on heh.

Ok I'm team giga again ignore my post

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2020 going to be a great year. This coaster is only the second most important thing I'm looking forward to. Can't talk about the first, but lets just say that Canada's Wonderland could become my main park if it doesn't happen.:lol:

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kirbias1 said:

Based on what we know, does first hill look like it drops into ravine?

That all depends on if we believe the leaked layout. There's been some folks split on that one here. It's possible. It's also possible that the height estimates thrown out could be off by a bit. Not sure if it could be enough to make it taller than Fury or not.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, DonkeyKong said:

I was able to find the blueprints online to both Banshee and Diamondback, is it possible that someone who is more capable than me found the blueprints to Kings Mills Antique Autos and overlaid a giga layout? 

Yes. For example, I have the complete CAD site plans to Mystic Timbers. Contractors ask for the CAD files all the time to do takeoffs. Engineers also receive CAD files (along with an NDA) when the architect/owner sends them an RFP. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
 
 
 
 
 
 
5
6 hours ago, Kenban said:

I do not want this post to come across as a complaint, because I am happy we are getting a new coaster.  But I have absolutely no idea as to why Cedar Fair is building this specific coaster.  For a number of reasons I expected a 2020 coaster at Kings Island, maybe even a giga, but when I look at what is likely the layout, and I look at the blue print for the lift hill and drop, I have no idea why someone would green light this ride.

According to Richard Zimmerman

He literally made that statement two days ago on a conference call in relation to the 2019 coasters.  But there are no records being broken here, there is no extra mile, people have said Fury is too new so its not going to break those records, frankly why bother building it then?  A giga coaster is expensive and unnecessary unless its going to end up on top ten lists.  This is Leviathan 2.0 in every way I can see.  A decent coaster but a waste of money.

The amount of money being spent on this coaster could have made a much better ride if it was not this tall and fast.  This is a $30 million dollar ride, that only enthusiasts outside of the Cincinnati area will remember for more than a year or two.  Its still better then the amount of waste that has gone into rides like Escape from Krypton at Magic Mountain but so far this ride just screams we ran out of money, which is typically a sign that the park or chain is building the wrong attraction.

Maybe the reveal or construction will change my mind, but I am uncertain as to what they could possibly show at this point which would convince me that the money would not have been better spent on a different type of coaster.

If you think Levi is a decent coaster/ waste of money, you've clearly never rode it haha. It's an elite coaster, better than MF and was ranked #8 in the golden ticket awards (idc about this but others do). So yeah, if KI gets Leviathan 2.0, don't complain. 

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RuthlessAirtime said:

Okay, big post incoming. I want to rehash some things and retrace some steps so bear with me. Feels like we need a recap to reorient ourselves. I talked with my brother about all this after sending him the link to this thread and I'm sort of leaning toward this not being a giga at all. He is not a coaster nut like any of us, but he has worked in project management for a few years and sees many blueprints that look like our coaster prints we have on hand, so he knows a thing or two. And for the record, he has combed through this thread, and as a project management professional, all the inconsistencies we've found are bugging the hell out of him as well.

The first thing that confuses me about all this is the lift hill height we first discussed when the blueprints dropped. We had some discussion on whether or not the scale at the bottom of the image is correct. At first I was willing to believe that the scale is incorrect, but that makes almost zero sense the more that I think about it. That would be a wild clerical error to make for plans like this. I'm inclined to believe that they would definitely not be wrong for a project of this scale – I cannot imagine the wrench that would throw in the gears for construction.

BUT, just for a second, let's assume something is off about the scale. Fine. Based on the specs of the footers on the other pages, if you scale the lift hill blueprint appropriately, here's what you end up with:

 

You can ignore the scale on the overview page. The real numbers are the footer coords and the angle on the backbone footer. Those are what the surveyors and concrete guys are going to use. They aren't going to be sitting there with a yard stick and that page trying to estimate how far to put the next footer at a 1:20 or 1:40 scale. 

37 minutes ago, ohiocoasterfan said:

 

 

I think the records on this thing are going to be drop and speed as I mentioned a few pages ago. Drop around 330 speed around 96. Both of those would be a record for a non launches steel coaster.

 

 

From where the widest lift footer is, to the very deepest part of that ravine is a 30 ft drop according to Google earth. They cannot get the top of the track down to that 30 ft point. You have the thickness of the track, The support, and the footer itself. You are 5 or 6 foot minimum off the ground that way and thats if they go straight from track to footer. You also would never put a footer in the middle of a ravine. Too much erosion potential. They'd put them up on the bank. So we are, at best, 20 foot from the top of the high point of the drop footers now. Next, that ravine is too narrow to actually put track into. It will pass above it. It is also almost to the point where the coaster peaks again and turns towards the turnaround according to the supports shown on the leaked layout. When it gets to that ravine, it'll already be on its way back up. Not to mention the point where the peak of the drop footers are is 10 ft taller than the station height. So it's not even going to be a true 300 tall at that point. This thing is going to need the ravine drop just to get over 300 ft on the drop.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ohiocoasterfan said:


I beg to differa7d1806280e95cc5a45f49eb1e56cf2f.jpg

I haven’t seen Fury in person, but that photo the track is still elevated off the ground... 

edit: what I am saying is the height is 325 but the drop is 320.  If there is a 30ft elevation change we would only be using about 25 of that. I don’t see it possible to go any farther without digging.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
I’ll just believe it when I see it.  After spending the last two days reading over all of this I think I need a vacation haha.  Anyone else feeling overwhelmed?  and after reading all the engineers comments I feel like a moron haha
I feel the same way but I'm afraid of getting too far behind

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, FirefighterENG44 said:

If any Cedar Fair executives are reading this thread...they may just give us all the middle finger and install this after what some people have said

B6E7F167-0DCD-46CE-90DE-A163ECC98128.jpeg

It would still be longer than the leaked plans. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

The helix in the leaked plan does look pretty interesting. Is there any way to tell whether it's upward or downward? It crosses paths with the track that comes after the first drop, I assume it's passing over the top at that point which could provide a near miss opportunity on the drop. Or if it's passing under a near miss coming out of the helix. Also, does anyone know of a similar shaped helix on another coaster? It's not quite the traditional perfect circle with an entrance and an exit, but more like a spiral that's getting tighter as you move through it, gradually increasing your positive g's. I assume given how short this looks there will even be a decent amount of speed left. Might even be complimented well with some air time right before it.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading for the last week, I have come to the conclusion that we are too caught-up in the numbers. Height, potential speed, drop, length, etc...

Guys, it is Kings Island. Cedar Fair. B&M. And a massive land clearing. This will be a phenomenal ride.

Mystic Timber's numbers are not good at all. The layout looked boring. We all had reservations. And now it is the best ride in the park.

Chill out on the details (that haven't even been confirmed by the park). KI/CF/B&M know what they are doing.

  • Like 16
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve had a few brewskis and quickly scrolled through... read a few here and there.   But.  What if this is like a weird cross of Mav and a Gig?  Like launch your happy self up a 286 ft lift down a 300 ft drop and then do fun stuff.  

But then again. You can’t have two launch coasters next to each other...

 

or can you.  

Record breaker: the ONLY park with two launch coasters within 100 yards of each other. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • malem locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...