Members, Sign In. Not a member? Sign Up

Ultimate Rollercoaster

Ultimate Rollercoaster > Discussion Forums > Roller Coasters, Parks & Attractions > Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee

Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee

Link Link Profile

Posted:
6/1/14 at
2:44:11 AM

Howdy, coaster fans!

According to Roller Coaster Database, Alpengeist's stats are:

Length: 3,828 ft
Height: 195 ft
Drop: 170 ft
Inversions: 6
Speed: 67 mph
Duration: 3:10

And Banshee's are:

Length: 4,124 ft
Height: 167 ft
Drop: 150 ft
Inversions: 7
Speed: 68 mph
Duration: 2:40

I think it's interesting that Banshee is able to perform more elements with more speed and greater length than Alpengeist, even though the drop height of Banshee is 20 feet shorter. Seems a bit counterintuitive to me.

Could this be due to Alpengeist's terrain layout?

* This post was modified at 6/1/14 2:45:01 AM *

Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by coastinj coastinj Profile at 6/1/14 3:12:18 AM
There's 2 reasons why banshee is able to do that feat. 1. It has the down grade topography working in it's favor 2. It has no mid course like Alpengeist does.
Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by leroyk at 6/1/14 2:59:20 PM
I think that with the energy Alpengeist has at the end, it could pull off the same "inversion" that Banshee does. Banshee does not really have a lot of speed at that point when it rolls. I think both are excellent rides but IMHO Banshee could use one or two of the sharp decisive entry points the Alpengeist/Montu kids have. Banshee on the other hand just keeps going and going without the mid course brakes :)
Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by alpengeistno3 at 6/1/14 5:08:31 PM
It has already been mentioned that Alpengeist loses a lot of energy due to the block brake. Even if it was not used, the fact that it exists means that the layout had to be conceived so the train can make it back to the station in the event that it is used (Banshee does not have that constraint. With the majority of Alpengeist's layout after the cobra roll being uphill, the 7th inversion had to be sacrificed. (if the ride was on flat land like Montu, they still may have been able to get it in.)

It is also important to note the space limitations involved. Alpengeist is crammed into what amounts to a narrow ravine in the middle of the park. There are several obstacles: the covered bridge between France and Germany, the Skyride cable that travels directly between 2 of the inversions, Loch Ness's brake run at the far end of the course and the Le Scoot log flume sharing the same ravine on the return run. Considering that the park was able to build what is still the tallest full circuit inverted coaster in an area with so many obstacles (where Banshee pretty much has none due to the huge expanse of land the SOB occupied) is a feat in itself.

Paul

Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by MABrider MABrider Profile at 6/1/14 6:59:39 PM
alpengeistno3 said:

Considering that the park was able to build what is still the tallest full circuit inverted coaster in an area with so many obstacles.
Paul

I first encountered Alpengeist in 1998. The way it is situated in that ravine has always impressed me, and for the reasons you stated.
The extra things they did re theming (skis on the trains, diving through the shacks, the hapless skier that didn't make a jump, snow) have served to enhance my enjoyment of the ride experience over the years.
Not to mention whizzing through the trees.

I'll be at BGE once again June 17-18. I will be taking the Roller Coaster Insider tour, so I expect to be impressed yet again, and from another perspective, too.

Mike B.
Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by antikythera antikythera Profile at 6/1/14 9:36:11 PM
I remember when I used to visit the park in the early 2000's, I was too impressed by the height and presence of the beast. I didn't know it was the tallest invert as I wasn't a coaster junkie at that age, but it definitely made a lasting impression and it still does when I visit. My favorite invert next to Talon and Volcano.
Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by houstondavid houstondavid Profile at 6/2/14 8:48:33 PM
Hello,

This discussion raised an interesting question for me - why _doesn't_ Banshee have a mid-course brake run? It operates with three trains, and without a mid-course brake one train cannot top the lift (I assume they can stop the lift if necessary) before the prior train has hit the brake run. How much would it increase the throughput had they put a mid-course brake in?

Having asked that, I really like it without. Putting one in would really break up the flow of the ride.

Thanks,
David

Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by alpengeistno3 at 6/2/14 10:45:33 PM
I believe that B&M has been eliminating mid course brake runs ever since the inverted coaster wars ended with Alpengeist. No US inverted coaster since then has had one. (It may be important to note that Banshee is the 1st since then to utilize 3 train operation.)

From a operational standpoint, it isn't really needed. Most of the time, the actual cycle is long enough that the train will not crest the lift while the other trains are moving along the course. Especially since most parks do not use more than 4 operators on the platform. In Banshee's case, it seems the B block (the majority of the course post lift) is very much like Afterburn at Carowinds. It is a very quick, so the train is almost back to the station before the crew can get the next train out for dispatch. Even a good crew would struggle to load the train before it hits the 3rd inversion (I'm speculating here since I haven't been to KI this year.) At that point, the train will be in the safety brakes long before the dispatched train can reach the apex of the lift.

The question I need answered is whether Banshee is capable of dispatching as soon as A-block (the lift) is clear. I assume the cycle is long enough that even if the crew achieved a perfect cycle (dispatching the train as soon as the lift is clear), it will not set-up. However, I don't think the brake run is set up to pace the trains so it is possible to clear all 3 without one parking for at least some time. Alpengeist could just barely do it (within about 3-5 seconds with back to back perfect cycles). We were told for an ideal dispatch, the train would park on the brake run for a few seconds and to not break our necks trying to get trains out any faster. We used to have "power hours" where we would put our strongest crew members on the platform to see how close we could get to the theoretical capacity.

Paul

* This post was modified at 6/2/14 10:47:56 PM *

Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by frontrow frontrow Profile at 6/3/14 12:29:50 PM
On Banshee the train barely crawls up the lift hill until the other trains are clear of the first brake run. After both trains are clear of those first brakes, the chain lift then speeds up. I'm not a huge fan of Alpengeist. I do like the theming, but Alpengeist is almost too forceful and overpowering. When I saw Banshee's stats I thought the ride experience would be simular to Alpengeist, but its not. The layout looks similar to Afterburn at Carowinds, but the ride experience is quite different. Banshee's ride experience is quite unique and better than the other 2 coasters that I mentioned. It's on the same level as Montu. When I was riding Banshee I didn't feel like I was riding just any ordinary B&M invert. The ride experience is so much more than that. Banshee is a really great steel coaster when compared to all steel coasters. B&M did a great job and built a real winner. It's one of their finer masterpieces.
Re: Alpengeist Stats Compared to Banshee by alpengeistno3 at 6/3/14 9:29:39 PM
Thanks, Ken. Sounds like a similar set up to 3 train operation on Iron Dragon. They would dispatch the train as soon as the lift was clear (no seat belts and a good CP crew of 6 on platform could do it easily.) The train would engage the lift in idle mode (the slow speed the lift runs in when no train is present) then speed up once the previous train crests the 2nd lift.

Paul