Shaggy

As I understood, yes. By the time Vortex was built, Arrow had "perfected" a number of elements. So its layout was more or less just a collection of their standard inversions arranged in a unique layout.

If memory serves me, the 2 loops were 50 feet in diameter standing 72 and 62 feet tall. The 2 corkscrews were 30 feet in diameter and 200 feet long. The “boomerang turn” was a 2-inversion element 60 feet in diameter from its lowest to highest point.

I suspect, and hope, they will install pavers back there. At the Orion announcement, I took note that the concrete was cracking/breaking up in places. I noticed this because I saw a kid pick up a broken piece of concrete and throw it! So replacement/repair was needed.

Here’s a picture taken by me on the last weekend of operation for verification/comparison to the demolition photo above. The entire station - including the spire is gone.

Looks like a fenced lock out area to me. Lots of coasters have them in areas where the track gets very close to the ground. I believe Fury does. Diamondback has one too.

A correction to what I posted - SOB media day was around April 28th and it soft opened to the public that weekend after modifications were made following media rides. It ran that weekend and was then closed indefinitely for further, more extensive, modifications to that same area. It did not “officially” open- according to the park - until late May (26th.)

There was a severe “jolt” at the top of the hill following the large drop. It.was.bad. So they re-banked and re-tracked that portion of the ride.

I don’t have any knowledge of the patch jobs done after the 2006 issues. Truth be told, I was over SOB by then. I guess they probably had to usher in a large crane for the loop removal etc - but not necessarily one of those large semi- permanent ones with the box type structure. I thought you meant after it ran for media day (when I first rode) and they ripped out the curve leading up into the rose bowl. BTW - for posterity - SOB never quite ran for the public as originally designed and built. It’s a real shame because media day rides were far superior - albeit was too extreme for the GP. I’ll never forget that experience. Such a shame... doomed from the start.

The crane in the rose bowl was not there when it opened. The crane in the final helix/lift area was (if I recall properly.) SOB was delayed - by several weeks. Those pictures were taken at the very start of the 2000 season before construction of SOB was complete. SOB took its first “official” riders - PKI executives - on Easter 2000. How do I know? I was there :-)

Yes. It was called (if memory serves me) "Flight Team Aerial Tours." You had the choice of different flights, which affected the per person cost. It lasted - again, if memory serves me - 2-3 seasons.

Remember KI once had helicopter tours over the park as an upcharge attraction. So there was no ban then. Worth noting, the copter pad was located approximately where Firehawk and Orion's ques are (will be) located. Here's some nostalgic photos for you - courtesy of yours truly - that show the construction of the pad, and an overview of area where Orion has been built. Looks a bit different, wouldn't you say?

Did his hair come off? ;-) KIDDING

First off, welcome to ACE! I've been a member of ACE for a long long time. I do not belong to any other coaster clubs. I enjoy and respect ACE and what it offers. My primary enjoyment is based on friendships, of course, but also it the fact that it is a "recognized" organization world-wide. I also like that they have a focus on preservation and history, an elected team of leaders and a distinct code of conduct. Yes, it has its "isms" - but any club for any hobby has them. By nature "clubs" tend to draw folks from the island of misfit toys - so ACE events (on occasion) draw some members who are odd birds. I first learned of ACE in 1978 when I was 8... and living in Virginia, 20 minutes away from Busch Gardens... it was in June of that year, when Loch Ness Monster opened, that they held their first official event. I distinctly recall it - it was covered in the local newspaper (Daily Press) and I knew I wanted to join that group. Took a few years before I did, but I did. Yes, I am that old, and yes my interest goes back that far. ;-)

RING RING... "Hello Don? This is Fox19, we cant get to the park until 3..." "Ok boys, lower it down again..." ;-)

That's awesome! LOL!

FYI - Not only is Dave fascinating to follow online - he is a really great guy too. He has had (and continues to have) an amazing career - I've been fortunate to have been friends with him for nearly two decades and I still marvel at his adventures! LOL!

That response is very much appreciated Ty. Piecing together KI's vast (and ongoing) history is the primary reason I visit these boards - and I've learned just as much (if not more) as I've shared over the years. You're absolutely right, we all share that passion for KI - otherwise none of us would be here! As a side note - In general, I do not feel burned by people's responses or take them personally. I always keep in mind on "message boards" there's facets to people's personalities we don't know - like personal life circumstances, experiences or young age and maturity level. Sometimes those things can project an unintended tone - and on occasion and intended one ;-) I'm here to have fun, and share fun stuff about KI with friends - I don't plan on changing that or going anywhere. :-)

Dave Focke left KI in 2002. I believe he left to start his own business - and - I believe - was a part of the “restructuring” that occurred. Anthony Esparza left KI and went to work for Herschend and Sea World... and has recently taken a job with Carnival Cruises.

Just to clarify - Nothing is, or has been, shared with me about initiatives or future projects by those at KI. I am an unaffiliated enthusiast peon - completely insignificant - and there would be no reason for me to be told anything related to the business. The stories I have heard, or shared in the past were told to me as historical anecdotes or “war” stories per say. A few probably have suffered from the “telephone” effect, or from embellishment over time - which is being pointed out to me quite clearly these days. But it’s important to be clear there’s never been any intent on my part to mislead. I, like others here, do “hear” things from others I know outside KI - some has ended up being truth - other things not. A few times I’ve shared those things here, but that can (and has) burned me when it turned out incorrect. I have said - and I’ll say again and again - I love KI and learning and sharing knowlege about it. Much of what I know I have learned from visiting the park, and researching it through old articles, published quotes and shared information on park-related boards such as this. Finally, I consider many past and current KI personnel friends - But I would never, ever pry them for information. The friendships mean more to me than any park information or stories could.

The North American Park division was based out of Charlotte for some time - and was treated as a completely separate division from the overall Parent Company - Viacom. However there was, simultaneously, a foreign division located in LA devoted to non-us licensing and themed attractions for Asian and European Parks. Something (of which I’m not privy - perhaps Esparzas departure) happened and Viacom made a decision to re-structure around 2002-2003. Ride concept, development and design fell to the LA group. It was during this time that Mr Cobb was named Sr Creative Director of Paramount Parks and attractions including Tomb Raider (at KD), IJST, Survivor (CGA) etc were proposed, conceived, developed and generated in LA. It remained as such until the chain was sold. Shaggy

I was told specifically by Jeff Siebert that it was... If he was mistaken, then so be it. Since I am not affiliated in any way with the inner workings of Kings Island, I can only go by what I was told - as you only can. You may consider that "making false claims" but in truth, its repeating what I was told - just as you have. As for PPD&E - when Dave Cobb designed IJST - it was my understanding the division was located in California - where he resides to this day.

Jumping in... I've found that the process most parks (and park officials) are vague about - is the one by which they "plan" a new attraction. Of course it differs on the chain/company. But in general its also seemed to me as though it was treated as the big "secret" they don't want to share to enthusiasts. (Specifically how far ahead they are planning additions.) But "planning" is a broad term and could cover anything from initial desires, or interest in new attractions that a park may have, to financial projections, to guest surveys, to topography/spacial surveys, to design/attraction solicitations, to signing of the agreement, to purchase, to construction start etc. So a blanket statement of "this is when the planning began" by various persons directly involved in the project may solicit different responses depending who is doing the answering. Ask the CFO they may tell you it was when they submitted a budget for it... ask the park's resident engineer they may indicate when they are first told to seek ride/coaster designs or land specs... ask the ride's designer and they may tell you it was when they first dreamed up the attraction... ask the park's GM and they may tell you it was when they first asked staff to compile information related to viability of a new attraction. There's also numerous things that can also affect the timeline of those "plans." For instance we know for a fact that Kings Island had planned for an Intamin Drop Tower to arrive in 1997 - to the point of advertising it in park. But ultimately, the ride was dropped (or, as I understood, sent to Canada) and (P)KI expanded the water park instead. The fact that a park may make the determination of a ride install - but ultimately push it up or back based on effecting variables - has always stood out in my brain. So many things could act as a catalyst for change in direction - and I expect parks face them more than we'll ever know. That having been said, if a park intially proposes a ride for a certain area of the park, but ultimately cancels it, then revisits it years later - how do you determine that actual "planning" period start time? I've heard murmurs that Six Flags gives parks the opportunity to "request" rides based on financial projections for the parks. But, the ultimate decisions are made later - in a sweeping effort by corporate - on whether to allow them or not. However when I questioned the GM of a larger SF park - he completely danced around the subject. (Rightfully so.) Judging by the later openings of new attractions (as a whole) I think its safe to assume the SF decision making process is much more 12th hour than what Cedar Fair's seems to be. If this is true, that tells me they "ask" for the rides they'd like to have, then corporate looks at feesibility of the project, then ultimately red-light or green-light it, then begin the hard-install and ride contract process - but none of this likely begins until AFTER financial projections are in for the current seasons. At KI specifically - the "planning" of things seems to have varied from time to time as well. In 1987, Vortex's install was the culmination of a 5-year financial projection that began around 1981-82. But fast forward to the Paramount Days, and in the years when "Wild Thornberries" flume was added - the park was reliant upon a team of "designers" located in California that "dreamed up" Paramount- themed attractions and "proposed" them to the GM's of the park - who then made their choice. At that very same time, last minute things could alter those "plans" - like the decision to not install the Vekoma Flying Dutchman in lieu of Scooby's Castle and Delirium. Could it be that enthusiasts have latched on to the "5 year planning" or "3 year development" terms based on different things we've heard from different park people at different times? Probably... maybe? . Ultimately - I think I've concluded in my own mind that the reason why officials often tend to be "vague" about the process by which an attraction is planned is because it is not an exact science. Some parks seem, from the outside, much more organized about the process - that's for sure. But when parks have made public statements like "this coaster took 5 years of planning and development" or "this project is the culmination of a 3-year investment" its not necessarily meant as a "this is how we do things", rather its meant to exemplify how complicated, time-consuming and important the process was. It would be fun to be a fly on the wall for development meetings - actually I think its something most of us enthusiasts dream of. For those of us vested in the history of a park, or an attraction, its a huge source of intrigue. I, for one, am most interested in the story "behind" and attraction - often moreso that riding the attraction itself... especially if there are plot twists. I doubt... as laypeople... we'll never know for sure. Finally - before you hounds and post critics start barking and accusing me of "making false claims" or "lying"- I cite the following persons as the basis for the things I've mentioned in this post.... The former Head of Paramount's Kings Island Marketing and PR - Jeffrey Seibert, the former Head of Maintenance and Construction at Kings Island - Dave Focke, and Former Creative Director for Paramount Parks - Dave Cobb. And no, that doesn't make me an expert - or a highly respected person - it just makes me a human that listens to what others have told me. Shaggy

I've always imagined that installing the last piece of a coaster would be a nail biter. They could have a tolerance of 1/4" or less. Of course B&M's are so expertly engineered, that its probably not as nerve wracking. But it is the moment in which it all (literally) comes together. Tight squeeze! Either way, I've really enjoyed watching Orion rise. Hats off to KI for sharing its construction on the Web.

By whole ride - probably meant track work?