Shaggy

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?

True story... Years ago, when they put in the "Roller Soaker" - they held a contest to name it. They had to toss out one of the most popular name suggestions - Hershey Squirts.

With all due respect to Mr Speigel, he was not working at KI at the time of Adventure Express' development and was, as far as I know, not involved with the project.

Adventure Express Trivia to be taken with a grain of salt... I recall during winter 1999 (when Action Zone was being built) a replacement section of Adventure Express track was located in the parking lot. I remember this because the short section of Arrow track was placed somewhat near where they were storing the track for Face/Off (Invertigo.) I saw it with my own eyes. I always assumed it was the zig zag section that used to have a mist effect right after you left the station. Seems like the track looked "different" the following season (newer) so I figured that section might have rusted. Especially since the mist effect disappeared in summer 1999. Never had it factually confirmed, but always assumed thats what happened.

Is the question literally asking if Adventure Express was not completed and there was supposed to be more after the final lift? If so.... No. Adventure Express was built as originally designed.

My question is... Do you pronounce it: "Ohhhhhrian" or Oarriiiion? LOL - I'm hearing it two different ways!

Great pic - this had my vote - congrats!

It’s their cam, their choice to have it up or down - and their choice to comment on it or not. I seriously doubt there’s any conspiracy here.

My personal perception is that the cameras may down by choice, not because someone cant fix them.

Here's some FOF trivia for you... KI's and KD's versions were built simultaneously. However they were constructed in 2 different ways. KI first built the building and then constructed the coaster inside - partially utilizing the crane built into the ceiling. KD first assembled the coaster, then built the building around it. KI won - they completed construction first.

Good grief - is someones life depending on it? I trust my source, enough to not betray it. If I (or they) am (are) wrong, then whats the big deal? Sheesh! But if it turns out I am right, will you worship me forever? LOL

Although I love the station - and hope they keep it in some capacity for historical sake - I forsee it meeting its maker or being completely overhauled. The portions of it housing the queue have been re-painted so many times that, frankly, it looks terrible. Also, its a "grandfathered" queue width and not handicap accessible - that probably wouldnt fly for a new coaster install. My hope is that, if they install another coaster, they will rebuild it using elements (specifically the turrets/belfies) to serve as a nod to its past. Much like how the station for the new Antique Autos incorporated a LOT of subtle nods to the original Les Taxis station - most probably havent even noticed them. But whomever oversaw the AA station is to be commended on the easter eggs they threw into the carpentry. (Here's one example - they matched the ceiling to the original ceiling design of the original buildings on Coney Mall... wooden panels who's seams are covered by 1x trim and painted white. Pay attention next time - it matches Racer's station ceiling exactly.)

It would be my prediction (and wish) that at least one of the lead cars - and possibly the sign - will be donated to the National Roller Coaster Museum in Texas.

It will be dismantled after Orion's assembly is complete. Its my understanding the company assembling Orion was awarded the bid to both assemble the new coaster, and to deconstruct Vortex.

Here's one taken by your's truly in January of 2002... Not sure where I got this next one - but its incredible... (Not taken by me)

Huh? I'm confused - are we talking Vortex or Beast? This picture is taken from The Beast's queue area - where there used to be another queue house when it opened. (That's the base of the first drop of Vortex - quite a ways away from The Vortex Station.) Vortex never had another queue house, or outside queue than what it has now - TMK. It DID, however, use the queues/switchbacks underneath the station for at least a few years - I recall waiting down there. The line for Vortex always "started" next to the short concrete wall beside SR&R. When it first opened, that line would would grow and extend down Coney Mall. BTW - like Beast's paw prints, Vortex originally had it's logo painted on the blacktop leading guests down Coney Mall to it.

There’s something about that Matarese guy that rubs me the wrong way. Well, several things actually. I don’t trust him.

Thank the dear Lord in Heaven. I hope all the grief shared by the general public, and park enthusiasts, over the thought of a Six Flags takeover cut them to the quick. Every post/article I read came with an ONSLAUGHT of negativity about SF park operations and overall bad management. Surely the overwhelming amount of criticism towards SF parks rings a bell. They need a strong wake-up call. They are raping the villagers - and the villagers are fighting back.