Another long lost proposed Kings Island Wooden coaster!

[collin.klopfstein]

https://coasternation.com/long-lost-proposed-kings-island-wooden-coaster-rediscovered/

[gforce1994]

I guess they’ve wanted a wood coaster in Rivertown for quite some time.

[JubJester]

2 hours ago, gforce1994 said:

I guess they’ve wanted a wood coaster in Rivertown for quite some time.

You guess? You wrote the article!

[Captain Nemo]

I miss the charm of Rivertown before Diamondback was built. Whereas now it feels more industrial and modern (the exact opposite of Rivertowns humble beginnings). If this Coaster would have kept that charm I would have gladly preferred this over Diamondback.

[gforce1994]

9 minutes ago, Captain Nemo said:

I miss the charm of Rivertown before Diamondback was built. Whereas now it feels more industrial and modern (the exact opposite of Rivertowns humble beginnings). If this Coaster would have kept that charm I would have gladly preferred this over Diamondback.

It would have been interesting. I feel it would have carried the Rivertown theme quite well. Although the irony of an near Aeroplane clone in an area themed to the mid 1800s can not be missed.

[bjcolglazier]

39 minutes ago, Captain Nemo said:

I miss the charm of Rivertown before Diamondback was built. Whereas now it feels more industrial and modern (the exact opposite of Rivertowns humble beginnings). If this Coaster would have kept that charm I would have gladly preferred this over Diamondback.

Cedar Fair hates trees. That much is clear. Trees and foliage are just a nuisance to them. If I could change one and only thing about their business plans it would be this. I'm not even a tree-hugging-hippie, nor what many would consider an environmentalist. But, dang. They really need to fix this.

[SonofBaconator]

Their company is named after a tree too

[super7]

1 hour ago, bjcolglazier said:

Cedar Fair hates trees. That much is clear. Trees and foliage are just a nuisance to them. If I could change one and only thing about their business plans it would be this. I'm not even a tree-hugging-hippie, nor what many would consider an environmentalist. But, dang. They really need to fix this.

I agree.   They keep removing trees without replacement.       They also have a lot of unshaded queues.   It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that she makes for a pleasant day and a hot park.  They don’t get it.  

[McSalsa]

From the "concept" POV: this ride probably would have been a huge hit in the early to mid 90s when it was built. From the POV, it looks like a ride with some awesome laterals and airtime. The "drop into the lake" finale would IMO be one of the best finales on any coaster, rivaling things like Beast's helix and Magnum XL-200's ejector bunny hills (which are my current favorite coaster finales of rides I have ridden IRL).

However, I do also think based on the fact it would have run PTC Trains, and how forceful these turns looked, that the ride would probably have become pretty rough by the early to mid 2000s. Kings Island has some good wood coaster maintenance, but a twisty and intense looking woodie like this running PTCs would have probably still slowly tore itself up. The ride would probably have developed a bit of a "mixed" reaction by the 2000s, kind of like how people see a ride like The Boss at Six Flags St. Louis today: some would love it in spite of the roughness, others would hate it, and it would likely end up somewhere in the middle on the Mitch Hawker wood coaster polls of the era (though it possibly would have been at or near the top of the 90s polls!).

When RMC came into play around the early 2010s, this ride would have probably been a target of theirs. Cedar Fair might have bit the bullet on this before doing Steel Vengeance as a bit of a test, probably around 2015'ish. It probably would have become a pretty epic RMC, and I think they would have kept the epic tunnel finale BTW. (If the person who made this in NoLimits wants to make that concept- what if this was built, but then became a RMC later on- IMO it would be awesome)

 

 

[TombraiderTy]

I'm gonna paste my comment from the last one of these "long lost proposed coasters", as I think it still applies... only swapping the Cincinnati Enquirer reference for some basic statistics... 

Quote

Regarding the original post, I'm very curious where this supposed layout is coming from. Is CoasterNation taking the one line description of the proposed roller coaster from Cincinnati Enquirer, assuming the ride was comparable to the later Windjammer basic statistics, and then making a custom layout? Or is it based on any blueprints or old concept art? If not (and if it's just from the mind of the creator), it seems a little misleading in my opinion to say that a long lost coaster has been "rediscovered".

The way the whole article is skewed implies that this was the coaster Kings Island almost built. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't it just a fan's theory of what that coaster could have been like?

[KIghostguy]

23 minutes ago, TombraiderTy said:

I'm gonna paste my comment from the last one of these "long lost proposed coasters", as I think it still applies... only swapping the Cincinnati Enquirer reference for some basic statistics... 

The way the whole article is skewed implies that this was the coaster Kings Island almost built. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't it just a fan's theory of what that coaster could have been like?

I was about to say this. I don’t think Jeff Gramke has publicly released his blueprints, so where is this layout coming from? Also, GeForce writes with confidence that the 1991 Dinn coaster was a serious plan. Is there a source for that claim? Dave Focke and Mike Meadows don’t remember it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen—I’d love to see the conclusive evidence he apparently has that proves whether or not it was a serious plan.

But all he’s probably going to say is just his usual, “Trust me.”

[gforce1994]

13 minutes ago, KIghostguy said:

I was about to say this. I don’t think Jeff Gramke has publicly released his blueprints, so where is this layout coming from? Also, GeForce writes with confidence that the 1991 Dinn coaster was a serious plan. Is there a source for that claim? Dave Focke and Mike Meadows don’t remember it. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, but I’d love to see the conclusive evidence he apparently has that proves whether or not it was a serious plan.

But all he’s probably going to say is just his usual, “Trust me.”

The fact Dinn had the KI contract meant that they couldn't bid for Fiesta Texas' new coaster: the Rattler.

This comes from "RE: Rationale for Roller Coaster Corporation of America as Design Build Contractor for the Wooden Roller Coaster.", sent by John Hoover on October 19, 1990.

This document was extremely useful in determining other projects, such as Opryland's coaster, which was nearly/almost contracted to CCI in the mid 90s.

[KIghostguy]

7 minutes ago, gforce1994 said:

The fact Dinn had the KI contract meant that they couldn't bid for Fiesta Texas' new coaster: the Rattler.

This comes from "RE: Rationale for Roller Coaster Corporation of America as Design Build Contractor for the Wooden Roller Coaster.", sent by John Hoover on October 19, 1990.

This document was extremely useful in determining other projects, such as Opryland's coaster, which was nearly/almost contracted to CCI in the mid 90s.

I still really don’t think that’s really conclusive. There was supposedly an announcement...but nothing about it ever ran in any local newspaper. Again, the people who would have been responsible for that don’t remember it. Conclusive would be the contract, blueprints, etc., which I would love to see and be able to put this story to bed, so to speak. You could not convince a jury with that one line from documentation from a different park in a different chain.

Also, you didn’t address the question myself and @TombraiderTyhad.

[gforce1994]

4 minutes ago, KIghostguy said:

I still really don’t think that’s really conclusive. There was supposedly an announcement...but nothing about it ever ran in any local newspaper. Again, the people who would have been responsible for that don’t remember it. Conclusive would be the contract, blueprints, etc., which I would love to see and be able to put this story to bed, so to speak. You could not convince a jury with that one line from documentation from a different park in a different chain.

Also, you didn’t address the question myself and @TombraiderTyhad.

That is conclusive. If a competitor said they got a project because their rival was to busy with projects x,y, and z, that’s a confirmation.

[BeastForever]

But...

King's Island?

That right there discredits them entirely 

[disco2000]

Has every ride ever considered for Kings Island been written about in the newspaper?

Has every contract ever entered into with Kings Island that was mutually terminated and did not result in litigation been written about in the newspaper?

Maybe park employees do not talk about the Dinn proposed ride due to NDA in the contracts?  I have NDAs signed from that time period that I still cannot discuss...

Has every contract that Kings Island has ever entered into been written about in the newspaper?

Look how many times someone is questioned under oath about an incident that happened or did they know someone and they answer no, yet there is picture evidence and correspondence proving the answer is yes?

Plus memories fade after 30 years and at some point it may be just a job and people don't remember every specific detail...

And it's true that many enthusiasts will remember every aspect or history of a park (like years rides were installed) because that is their passion and could probably be more accurate than many park employees (not all as some of the employees it is a passion as well).

Have you ever gone into a retail place to buy something you have a passion for, like cameras or tablets or computers, and know more than the salesperson trying to sell you said equipment?  I have.

But if we were playing Kings Island Family Feud, I would pick Shaggy and Boddah on my team

[Captain Nemo]

3 hours ago, bjcolglazier said:

Cedar Fair hates trees. That much is clear. Trees and foliage are just a nuisance to them. If I could change one and only thing about their business plans it would be this. I'm not even a tree-hugging-hippie, nor what many would consider an environmentalist. But, dang. They really need to fix this.

Yeah, looking a Orion there was absolutely no need to cut down as many trees as they did. No wonder that Mystic Timbers tree is upset!

[gforce1994]

2 hours ago, KIghostguy said:

I still really don’t think that’s really conclusive. There was supposedly an announcement...but nothing about it ever ran in any local newspaper. Again, the people who would have been responsible for that don’t remember it. Conclusive would be the contract, blueprints, etc., which I would love to see and be able to put this story to bed, so to speak. You could not convince a jury with that one line from documentation from a different park in a different chain.

Also, you didn’t address the question myself and @TombraiderTyhad.

 

[KIghostguy]

8 hours ago, gforce1994 said:

That is conclusive. If a competitor said they got a project because their rival was to busy with projects x,y, and z, that’s a confirmation.

Your evidence is shaky at best. It’s from a company that wasn’t even directly involved in the alleged project. As a nonfiction writer, I deal with proven facts, not rumors or conjecture. Until I see concrete proof from people directly involved or contracts or blueprints, I’m still keeping that story filed away under, “Unknown.”

And again, where are you getting these layouts from? Is it just your fanboy ideas or are these based off the real blueprints you have?

[gforce1994]

49 minutes ago, KIghostguy said:

Your evidence is shaky at best. It’s from a company that wasn’t even directly involved in the alleged project. As a nonfiction writer, I deal with proven facts, not rumors or conjecture. Until I see concrete proof from people directly involved or contracts or blueprints, I’m still keeping that story filed away under, “Unknown.”

And again, where are you getting these layouts from? Is it just your fanboy ideas or are these based off the real blueprints you have?

In any industry, companies will know what their competitors are doing. Hence it is quite logical for a company to say we got project xyz because company A is working on said project.

[disco2000]

Wow you learn the coolest things doing a search feature here from a previous Coasterstock...

On 5/17/2015 at 3:16 PM, Oldschool75 said:

You also missed Jeff Gramke's talk. Leaned something new today. I did not know that KI had another in-house woodie designed and trains ordered to be built where Diamondback stands now.. The plan was backed out as Paramount purchased the park. But he still has the design. Apparently it was designed with the same John Allen inspiration The Beast was. So another black mark caused by Paramount.

 

 

[KIghostguy]

2 hours ago, disco2000 said:

Wow you learn the coolest things doing a search feature here from a previous Coasterstock...

 

The Dinn woodie is the one I don’t have solid proof on. Jeff Gramke’s Swan Lake wooden coaster will be in my book.

[gforce1994]

This would have been a cool sight for Rivertown honestly. Where do you think DBack would have been placed had this been built?

[PKIDelirium]

Honestly if they had built a Dinn twister with PTC trains like that it would probably have joined the RMC club by now.

Diamondback, if still a Rivertown location, would probably be where Mystic is now, at least the station area.

[gforce1994]

That would have been an interesting set-up for Rivertown.

[Waltny]

8 hours ago, KIghostguy said:

Your evidence is shaky at best. It’s from a company that wasn’t even directly involved in the alleged project. As a nonfiction writer, I deal with proven facts, not rumors or conjecture. Until I see concrete proof from people directly involved or contracts or blueprints, I’m still keeping that story filed away under, “Unknown.”

And again, where are you getting these layouts from? Is it just your fanboy ideas or are these based off the real blueprints you have?

It's for your entertainment only. 

[SonofBaconator]

I recall it was once speculated that Swan Lake was drained to accommodate a blitz coaster similar to Maverick. I believe those speculations ended when land started to be cleared on the other side of the path and into the canyon.

I think it would've been interesting to see a wooden coaster in that part of the park, I'd imagine it would almost be like Hurler in that plot of land with an RMC conversion decades later. That being said, I'm happy with how things are now. Mystic Timbers and Diamondback are in excellent spots they really help make it the best section in the park.

[disco2000]

3 hours ago, KIghostguy said:

The Dinn woodie is the one I don’t have solid proof on. Jeff Gramke’s Swan Lake wooden coaster will be in my book.

I guess you have never seen a design contract....many of which stipulate the Owner (in this case KI) becomes owner of such plans and can do as they wish.  And that transfer of ownership is even more recognized by case law when the designing firm goes out of business...

Standard contract language at the time would have been something like "Design-Builder acknowledges and agrees that all drawings, specifications and other documents furnished or required to be furnished by the Design-Builder (including its design professionals) to the Owner under this Contract in connection with the Project shall be deemed to be the property of the Owner (excluding any copyrights), and the Owner shall have the right to use any such documents (including but not limited to the Final Plans) with respect to construction of the Project, maintenance and use of the Project and any future improvements to the Project planned or constructed by the Owner, subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement with (design firm name here); provided, however, any independent use by the Owner of any such documents, including the Final Plans, will be at the Owner’s risk and without liability or legal exposure to the Design-Builder or anyone working by or through the Design-Builder, and Owner will indemnify and hold (name of design firm) harmless from any such independent use by Owner of such documents."

And when the designer goes out of business, the owner is given a "nonexclusive license . . . to authorize other similarly credentialed design professionals to reproduce, and where permitted by law, to make changes, corrections or additions to the documents as necessary to complete, use or maintain the project."

Plus who knows about any confidentiality or NDA's that may exist as part of said contract...

So legally, KI staff could potentially assume ownership of the Dinn design and Jeff Gramke's Swan Lake wooden coaster could very well be said coaster without ever needing to specifically reference the origins of the concept...

I am not saying that these plans exist or that the concept is accurate, I am simply pointing out from a contractual standpoint, the Swan Lake coaster could indeed be Dinn's, or anyone else's design for that matter, that KI took ownership of, and there appears to be enough anecdotal evidence to suggest Dinn involvement.  Whether one wishes to believe that will be based on ones own life experiences.  Those dealing with corporate world and understanding that in a small business sector like roller coasters, that these companies all know what their competitors are working on, will have a different life experience than say a teenage kid's life experiences to date...

Maybe it is completely Gramke's concept or maybe not, but since there is no copyright infringement or IP infringement litigation that happened regarding said coaster and by virtue of the KI purchase of said plans, KI is under zero legal obligation to make a reference to it in any shape or form talking about discussing some conceptual coaster that was never constructed.  They own it and legally can take full responsibility for the concept and deny any involvement of an outside firm, even if another firm actually developed it...They can even deny the concept ever existed.  They have lots of projects in their wish list planning that never saw the light of day...most have made their way out into the rumor mill, but some probably haven't...but because it never made a newspaper article, that means KI never considered a ride that made it's way into the rumor mill?

But at the end of the day, it is a coaster that KI does not have or ever had in their lineup, so it goes down as one of those what-if scenarios and after 30 years time has passed, contracts were probably tossed in the trash long ago, and people's recollection can also get fuzzy, but all we have to go by is anecdotal stories, even if they are not completely accurate,...

Either way makes for an interesting story...or a conspiracy theory according to some

[KIghostguy]

3 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

So legally, KI staff could assume ownership of the Dinn design and Jeff Gramke's Swan Lake wooden coaster could very well be said coaster without ever needing to specifically reference the origins of the concept...

I am not saying that these plans exist or that the concept is accurate, I am simply pointing out from a contractual standpoint, the Swan Lake coaster could indeed be Dinn's, or anyone else's design for that matter, that KI took ownership of, and there appears to be enough anecdotal evidence to suggest Dinn involvement.

It was totally designed by Jeff Gramke. There was no involvement from Dinn on that specific project.

[IndyGuy4KI]

8 hours ago, KIghostguy said:

And again, where are you getting these layouts from? Is it just your fanboy ideas or are these based off the real blueprints you have?

 

44 minutes ago, Waltny said:

It's for your entertainment only. 

I don't think asking @gforce1994 if the design was made by him or came from blueprints is unreasonable. Reading the CN article, I would assume the layout was the real proposed layout.

If it is not, the article is deceiving, and should be corrected to make sure the readers understand that the layout proposed is a CN idea of what could have been there, but not the real design.

Some members on KIC, admin, and past staff have spent months and years getting correct information on the park, to post on KIC, and to give KIC factual information for the historical pages on KICentral.com.  For the people who have done that work don't take to well seeing an article not being clear on the facts vs fiction in the story.