Decoding 2020

[jcovelli]

1 minute ago, Diamondback Splash said:

Wouldn't it be from the ground level at the station? Extreme example for illustrative purposes... pic related wouldn't be considered a 200 foot drop. The only way to have a standardized way to compare coaster lift hills would be from the station ground to lift hill peak.

lmao. To be fair, that does seem like something KI would try to pull...   

[Driver8rws]

Does the big slab of concrete behind The Racer (behind the Monster & Subway) have anything to do with the new coaster? 

Pics taken 5/21...

 

[jcovelli]

1 minute ago, Driver8rws said:

Does the big slab of concrete behind The Racer (behind the Monster & Subway) have anything to do with the new coaster? 

Pics taken 5/21...

Those are nice pics!  And no it doesn't, that's a pole barn of some sort for something or other..  That's as much as we know about that.

[Diamondback Splash]

Are there any recent examples (since the classifications of "hyper" and"giga" became common) of new coaster construction stopping just a few feet short of 300?

This is what I don't get... why wouldn't they add the extra 5 or 3 or whatever feet to reach 300? Especially since we already have a 200+ foot hyper in Diamondback? 

[SilentGloves]

35 minutes ago, JubJester said:

Keep in mind Red Force 367 feet tall. So I dont think they could claim the tallest giga if they went 350 as some people predicted.

It's strange to me that people reference Red Force.  Sure, it's technically the tallest giga I suppose, but it's certainly not the tallest coaster.  Having the tallest "giga" at that point becomes very arbitrary.  It's like saying "I'm the tallest person under 6', at 5' 11.99"."  Absolute records are much more interesting.  Show me a 470' B&M full-circuit coaster with over-banked turns, airtime hills, etc., and I'll be impressed.  I'm quite certain such a thing will be built at some point.  It wasn't that long ago that 200' was insane, and we already know a 470' drop is totally doable.

[Driver8rws]

4 minutes ago, Diamondback Splash said:

Are there any recent examples (since the classifications of "hyper" and"giga" became common) of new coaster construction stopping just a few feet short of 300?

This is what I don't get... why wouldn't they add the extra 5 or 3 or whatever feet to reach 300? Especially since we already have a 200+ foot hyper in Diamondback? 

Agreed.  Doesn't make any sense why they would "cut it short" by just a few feet...    Gotta be a (bigger) drop into a valley or something as others have said to make it "taller" on the drop height.

[ethancoaster]

I keep studying the turnaround by The Beast, and even though it’s not a reverse treble clef, I think it will be far better. So you enter the turn vertically, but given the speed of the transition and the placement of the apex towards the inside, the sideways airtime you get will far exceed what you get on Fury’s horseshoe turn. The train is going to be tossing you to the right. 

 

I will try to make a Planet Coaster recreation within the next few days of what I think the layout will be like.

[Driver8rws]

Boy, the end turnaround sure gets close to The Beast track!   Wonder if that part of The Beast won't seem as "back in the woods" as it does now? 

Also, I always thought this area shown in the satellite photo attached was where they shot the fireworks from...  I guess that will have to move??   Or will they shut this big new ride down before/during the fireworks like they do with The Beast at night?!

That area is shown in the blueprints but I can't read what they say on the scans on the imgur site...

[fryoj]

20 minutes ago, Driver8rws said:

Agreed.  Doesn't make any sense why they would "cut it short" by just a few feet...    Gotta be a (bigger) drop into a valley or something as others have said to make it "taller" on the drop height.

The drop is 301 ft. That much we are sure of. 

4 minutes ago, Driver8rws said:

Boy, the end turnaround sure gets close to The Beast track!   Wonder if that part of The Beast won't seem as "back in the woods" as it does now? 

Also, I always thought this area shown in the satellite photo attached was where they shot the fireworks from...  I guess that will have to move??   Or will they shut this big new ride down before/during the fireworks like they do with The Beast at night?!

That area is shown in the blueprints but I can't read what they say on the scans on the imgur site...

 

 

 

Says existing maze building. 

[Driver8rws]

Oh?!   Is that the "corn stalkers" maze?  I've never been back there...  

I thought the fireworks were set off in that clearing?? 

[homestar92]

3 hours ago, Logan said:

I consider it a giga if either the drop or height is above 300' and the other is within 10% of 300 feet. For example, Apollo's Chariot is a hyper but Lightning Rod is not becauase the drop is 165'.

I consider it a Giga automatically if it has a 300 foot drop, regardless of height since it is the drop and not the height that determines all of the characteristics of the ride. Same with a hyper but with a 200 foot drop. So Phantom's Revenge is a hyper despite the tallest point being 30% smaller than the biggest drop. If drop is less than 200 or 300, then I consider it a hyper or giga based on whether it is "within reason". I think 10% is a good benchmark. This way, things like Magnum are still a hypercoaster, but we don't have to count things like High Roller on the Stratosphere Tower, which obviously shouldn't count. as a 909 foot coaster.

[DustinTheNow]

6 minutes ago, homestar92 said:

I consider it a Giga automatically if it has a 300 foot drop, regardless of height since it is the drop and not the height that determines all of the characteristics of the ride. Same with a hyper but with a 200 foot drop. So Phantom's Revenge is a hyper despite the tallest point being 30% smaller than the biggest drop. If drop is less than 200 or 300, then I consider it a hyper or giga based on whether it is "within reason". I think 10% is a good benchmark. This way, things like Magnum are still a hypercoaster, but we don't have to count things like High Roller on the Stratosphere Tower, which obviously shouldn't count. as a 909 foot coaster.

Could not have said it better myself 

[JubJester]

14 minutes ago, Driver8rws said:

I thought the fireworks were set off in that clearing?? 

It is, but they don't shoot fireworks during Haunt.

[fryoj]

10 minutes ago, homestar92 said:

I consider it a Giga automatically if it has a 300 foot drop, regardless of height since it is the drop and not the height that determines all of the characteristics of the ride. Same with a hyper but with a 200 foot drop. So Phantom's Revenge is a hyper despite the tallest point being 30% smaller than the biggest drop. If drop is less than 200 or 300, then I consider it a hyper or giga based on whether it is "within reason". I think 10% is a good benchmark. This way, things like Magnum are still a hypercoaster, but we don't have to count things like High Roller on the Stratosphere Tower, which obviously shouldn't count. as a 909 foot coaster.

A coaster that's 273 ft tall would be considered a giga with a 10% tolerance. 

[Kenban]

Dollywood lists Lightning Rod as having a height of 206 feet.

Yet it is only 80 from the top of the hill to the top of the coaster.

No one here seems to be able to answer one fundamental question.  How is the height of a coaster typically calculated?

[DustinTheNow]

6 minutes ago, Kenban said:

Dollywood lists Lightning Rod as having a height of 206 feet.

Yet it is only 80 from the top of the hill to the top of the coaster.

No one here seems to be able to answer one fundamental question.  How is the height of a coaster typically calculated?

This is the 30 million dollar question, my friend!

 

[Logan]

49 minutes ago, fryoj said:

A coaster that's 273 ft tall would be considered a giga with a 10% tolerance. 

Only if it has a 300+ foot drop. So ours would be a giga.

[Jallie79]

1 hour ago, fryoj said:

750 is not the station track height. Thats the ground at the peak. The footer plans have the exact height from sea level of the top of the footers. That number was figured by surveyors before Firehawk was ever torn down. It's not a product of how much dirt they remove. 

That's where my confusion came from. I either misread or misunderstood how people came up with the numbers. I thought people were going from the station elevation to the crest of the lift.  

But which footer is everyone using for the measurements. There doesn't appear to be a footer directly under the crest.

[presto123]

Any chance this thing hits 100 MPH? Maybe that's the big thing they are going for?

[Logan]

It isn't possible for it to hit 100 mph with a drop of 301 feet.

[ldhudsonjr]

1 minute ago, presto123 said:

Any chance this thing hits 100 MPH? Maybe that's the big thing they are going for?

Wouldn't it either need to be taller or have a launch to do that?

[Logan Goddard]

I would say its pretty doubtful with a drop of 301. MF goes 92 for comparison with a drop of 300. I think its just going to be the Tallest,Fastest coaster in SW Ohio. Just saying the coaster has a 300ft drop will get the general public to show up. It might not be the enthusiast's wet dream coaster like people thought it would, but I would not be surprised to see it rank consistently in the top 10 of stuff like the Golden Tickets.

[BeastBabyDoll]

Im just saying... the simularities are there 

[presto123]

7 minutes ago, BeastBabyDoll said:

Im just saying... the simularities are there 

1 post? Welcome to the board. Watch for falling trees in this thread. LOL!

[Zdiddy]

1 hour ago, Kenban said:

Dollywood lists Lightning Rod as having a height of 206 feet.

Yet it is only 80 from the top of the hill to the top of the coaster.

No one here seems to be able to answer one fundamental question.  How is the height of a coaster typically calculated?

Lightning Rod is a great case study for this topic. To me, there is no definitive way to calculate height. If you measure the altitude displacement from:

1. base of lift hill to the apex then Lightning Rod would be shorter because you lose the 30ish feet of steps you climb to board the train.

2. station to the apex then Lightning Rod would be shorter for the same reason as above. Adventure Express would be about the same height as the pumpkin coaster using this method.

3. apex to ground directly underneath then Lightning Rod would be shorter because of the hill it sits on.

4. apex to bottom of drop then coasters with predrops wouldnt be fairly measured.

Height is subjective in this context. There isnt a standard way to measure that would fairly represent every ride. There are coasters in every category that are outliers where the height wouldnt tell you the full story. I think drop height is the most useful for all intents and purposes but it has limitations too. Besides, the best part about coasters (imo) are the speed, inversions, forces and other elements they enact on you. I've never seen anyone screaming or jubilant while flying on a plane or standing on the observation deck of the Eiffel Tower. 

[BeastBabyDoll]

I know all the evidence points elsewhere... but im still hoping for another part of The Beast franchise. maybe there's a reason there hasn't been spoilers or teasers. A spoiler or teaser would give it away so easily(and there WERE all those weird SOB hints being dropped last year). Maybe they want to give us the blueprints and they meant for this all to happen, all for the sake of hype. Maybe number 5 really is alive!

Orrrr it's just a space themed rather short in height and length giga (not that I'm complaining, still super excited!) If it was apart of The Beast franchise I would say it would probably be done by RMC and would more than likely be a hybrid. I sure as heck wouldn't complain about an all steel member of The Beast family though.

 

 I read the forums pretty often but never felt the need to respond so i never even made an account. This coaster speculation has me unable to resist the urge to respond though lol!

[presto123]

47 minutes ago, ldhudsonjr said:

Wouldn't it either need to be taller or have a launch to do that?

You right. MF supposedly hits 93. Hopefully this one in the 90's.

Must be sleepier than I thought. Ha! I was thinking with clever design or less braking that they could squeeze a few more MPH in, but the top speed obviously happens at bottom of lift hill. Maybe some extra grease on the wheels?

[Logan]

13 minutes ago, Zdiddy said:

Lightning Rod is a great case study for this topic. To me, there is no definitive way to calculate height. If you measure the altitude displacement from:

1. base of lift hill to the apex then Lightning Rod would be shorter because you lose the 30ish feet of steps you climb to board the train.

2. station to the apex then Lightning Rod would be shorter for the same reason as above. Adventure Express would be about the same height as the pumpkin coaster using this method.

3. apex to ground directly underneath then Lightning Rod would be shorter because of the hill it sits on.

4. apex to bottom of drop then coasters with predrops wouldnt be fairly measured.

Height is subjective in this context. There isnt a standard way to measure that would fairly represent every ride. There are coasters in every category that are outliers where the height wouldnt tell you the full story. I think drop height is the most useful for all intents and purposes but it has limitations too. Besides, the best part about coasters (imo) are the speed, inversions, forces and other elements they enact on you. I've never seen anyone screaming or jubilant while flying on a plane or standing on the observation deck of the Eiffel Tower. 

Yeah this is why I think Kings Island will say this is a 300 foot tall coaster despite what the blueprints say. No one will be able to stop them or prove them wrong because it's all subjective.

[FoF96"]

I mean without blueprints what guest would know? They could tell you it was taller than Fury and you wouldn’t be able to tell otherwise because of how tall this thing is and 30-40ft won’t be noticeable at that height with just your eyes.

[BSBMX]

6 hours ago, DustinTheNow said:

Would anyone know THIS distance between the L6 and the L8 supports?! This would help massively with something I’m trying to work on! Thanks guys! 

 

Per the footings coordinates in CAD, that distance is 97.96' (you can probably just round up to 98'). Note my number below is a factor of 12 off given my CAD cannot support such large numbers, so I have everything scaled down by 12.