PortAventura - Dragon Khan to get a retrack?

[oriolat2]

Right now, the Spanish Thoosie Twitter rumour mill is going crazy, with people claiming Universal is coming back to take over PA to this new rumour that Dragon Khan might be receiving a seriously needed TLC in the upcoming seasons.

The rumour has some potential truth to it since as of late Universal Studios has been trademarking patents and names in Spain. Among those patents, there is one that stands out because it shows a patent for a B&M sitdown train with headlights and light effects on its seats, like VelociCoaster or Hulk.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1727429182747992198

Given that Dragon Khan (as well as other similary-aged B&M are getting either scrapped or completely rebuilt) is reaching the end of its lifespan, it is starting to ride rougher and given the fact that 2025 will be PA's 30th anniversary, which would be Khan's 30th anniversary too, could we see a similar treatment like Hulk or Nemesis?

To be honest, Khan deserves a second life, just for its historical value. Preserving it for future generations to come would be a great way for PA to honour its historical significance. If Universal is behind any of this, all the better!

 

[Jamesss]

Well Dragon Khan is definitely one of the legendary B&Ms. Certainly deserving of a re-track.

Eagerly awaiting any news on a Universal takeover. Really hope it happens.

 

[Sandman]

I remember hearing the rumours about Universal a while back.

Ugh, I'd love it. Dunno how Ferrari Land would be affected but if there's even a faint chance of Universal being able to purge the terrible theme for the greater good then that would be excellent.

Surely they would put some decent new hardware in a park of PA's calibre, particularly with it being their only operation in Europe (if this all comes to fruition).

 

[RevolutionRuleZ]

Dragon Khan simply can't be allowed to die, its far too good for that, this would be a brilliant result.

 

[Tonkso]

It also has a noticeable jolt or two these days which would be smoothed off. Perhaps they could consider a floorless conversion too to sweeten the investment?

This would be be Universal's first rebuild though and that wasn't floorless. Unless the whole Universal thing is BS.

 

[Lofty]

It also has a noticeable jolt or two these days which would be smoothed off. Perhaps they could consider a floorless conversion too to sweeten the investment?

This would be be Universal's first rebuild though and that wasn't floorless. Unless the whole Universal thing is BS.

Why floorless? It adds absolutely nothing to the ride experience and the patents only show the same train as Hulk...

This is so exciting. I've been hoping that Universal come and take back control of PA. The park deserves so much more than the current state that it's in. Khan also definitely should get the retract treatment - it's not only iconic, but a brilliant coaster at that.

 

[Tonkso]

Marketability.

 

[Lofty]

You're competing against Europe's tallest coaster in the same vicinity. It's like Shambhala promoting it's staggered seating - it holds no grounds anymore.

 

[Tonkso]

That's why you find a niche, an actual new for 2025. Irrelevant anyway as the patent is for a sit-down, but I think it's a missed opportunity.

I also disagree that it adds nothing to the experience, it differentiates Kraken from Kumba on the Florida scene quite well.

 

[RevolutionRuleZ]

That's why you find a niche, an actual new for 2025. Irrelevant anyway as the patent is for a sit-down, but I think it's a missed opportunity.

I also disagree that it adds nothing to the experience, it differentiates Kraken from Kumba on the Florida scene quite well.

Maybe he should have said it adds nothing to the ride experience unless you are in the front row, and even then it really isn't significant.

I think to the vast majority of the public if you were to say something is floorless they'd picture an invert, as that has genuinely no floor. If they turned up and found Khan with a floor less train they'd probably feel mis-sold.

 

[Lofty]

Honestly? I feel it adds nothing. Arguably, I feel the only time it works well is on Dive Machines on the front row where it makes you feel vulnerable.

Haven't ridden a floorless coaster where I thought 'oh, floorless really added to the experience'... ever.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Honestly? I feel it adds nothing. Arguably, I feel the only time it works well is on Dive Machines on the front row where it makes you feel vulnerable.

Haven't ridden a floorless coaster where I thought 'oh, floorless really added to the experience'... ever.

Apart from a dive, the only other time I could see it having any real effect is on a hyper or giga, where you can look down and have time to appreciate the height. Sadly I don't think this has been done yet. Otherwise I agree with you. I couldn't even tell you now which out of Kraken and Kumba is floorless, I genuinely didn't take much notice of the difference.

I'm not a fan of B&M sit down / loopers. I find them pretty boring and uninspiring, so they're generally a one and done, floor or no floor.

 

[Changa]

That's why you find a niche, an actual new for 2025.

The only sensible option would therefore be a sit-down to stand-up conversion. No one has dared to do it for 40 years!

 

[oriolat2]

Honestly? I feel it adds nothing. Arguably, I feel the only time it works well is on Dive Machines on the front row where it makes you feel vulnerable.

Haven't ridden a floorless coaster where I thought 'oh, floorless really added to the experience'... ever.

This.

Besides, Spain has two distinct sitdown B&M coasters: Superman at Parque Warner (floorless) and Khan at PA. Why would you want to convert an already amazing sitdown into a floorless, when Superman is already good? Keeping Khan a traditional sitdown is good, both from a maintenance and operational standpoint.

Operationally, floorless coasters are more difficult to manage with the retracting floors, which add idle time to dispatches. A park as big and poorly managed as PA need a coaster that's fast and easy to operate.

From a mechanical point of view, Khan's station is a bit weird in the sense that it was built when floorless coasters had not even been invented. Under Khan's plataform there is the maintenance shed. The platform itself is now a bit of a cluster in the unload side, as it sits directly beside the transfer track. Transforming that station would be very costly for a gimmick. What I don't know if a floorless train would shorten the already short trains for a big B&M (Khan is the only B&M in the world with three 7-car trains) to even shorter 6-car floorless trains (due to the floor mechanism and bigger gauge between cars)?

 

[Nitefly]

Given the choice, I would much prefer the park to have a new-style Intamin than spend similar money retracking DK. I guess it’s unique for Europe but otherwise I think it’s unremarkable.

The best thing about it is how it looks on the skyline with Shambhala and that would be sad to lose, sure.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

(Khan is the only B&M in the world with three 7-car trains)

"The only B&M 'Sitdown' coaster with 7-car trains" is, I'm guessing, what you meant? There's a lot of inverts with 7.

Anyway, I thought it looked like the trains in that design / patent were the Decepticoaster trains Universal have in Beijing, but with OTSRs. The ones in Beijing already have headlights, and look much better than the old style trains. Although it's vests on Decipticoaster rather than traditional OTSRs shown in this patent.

Then I noticed the zero car, or lack of one. What's going on there then?

 

[Dar]

Then I noticed the zero car, or lack of one. What's going on there then?

Because I'm sad, I looked up the patent. It says the image is an "embodiment" of the ride system described. I guess it doesn't need to be 100% accurate because the train isn't part of the patent proper?

Here it is!
The claims seem to talk more in detail about the lighting system, and glosses over the train with statements that cover as many use cases as possible in as broad terms as possible. For example:

FIG. 2 depicts a side perspective view of an embodiment of a ride vehicle of the ride system of FIG. 1, in accordance with aspects of the present disclosure. The passenger may sit inside the ride vehicle and be secured via the restraining system, while the ride vehicle travels along path oriented substantially parallel with a longitudinal axis (e.g., direction of travel). In an embodiment, the restraining system may exert a force on the passenger along the longitudinal axis, a lateral axis, a vertical axis, or any combination thereof. As such, the restraining system may supply a force that secures the passenger to the seat and the back rest. For example, the passenger may sit in the ride vehicle such that the back of the passenger is pressed up against the back rest via the restraining system. In an embodiment, the back rest and the seat may be made of a padded material such as (e.g., polyurethane) foam, cotton, rubber, and the like.

Which could cover a carboard box with wheels and zip ties to hold you in

It does say that any type of restraint can be used with the tech in the patent, so it could still be vests!

I wonder if this is an "aftermarket" add-on Universal are developing to retrofit on other coasters as needed, rather than coming fitted direct from B&M? How common is it for parks to get the patent on tech versus the manufacturer?

 

[oriolat2]

"The only B&M 'Sitdown' coaster with 7-car trains" is, I'm guessing, what you meant? There's a lot of inverts with 7.

Anyway, I thought it looked like the trains in that design / patent were the Decepticoaster trains Universal have in Beijing, but with OTSRs. The ones in Beijing already have headlights, and look much better than the old style trains. Although it's vests on Decipticoaster rather than traditional OTSRs shown in this patent.

Then I noticed the zero car, or lack of one. What's going on there then?

No, I really meant the only big B&M operating with THREE trains that is only 7-cars long.

Typically, medium or small-sized B&M can run 7-car trains (Batman clones, Dæemonen, Nemesis Inferno, some stand-ups) but all big B&M (with 3 trains and MCBR) feature 8-car long trains EXCEPT FOR Khan. I am not making it up: look it up.

This was due to the placement of the cobra roll, which sits above the brake run. The supports on the cobra roll limit the space to build the transfer track, which was shoehorned and proved long enough to only guarantee 7-car trains.

 

[Matt N]

No, I really meant the only big B&M operating with THREE trains that is only 7-cars long.

Typically, medium or small-sized B&M can run 7-car trains (Batman clones, Dæemonen, Nemesis Inferno, some stand-ups) but all big B&M (with 3 trains and MCBR) feature 8-car long trains EXCEPT FOR Khan. I am not making it up: look it up.

This was due to the placement of the cobra roll, which sits above the brake run. The supports on the cobra roll limit the space to build the transfer track, which was shoehorned and proved long enough to only guarantee 7-car trains.

If we’re being pedantic, you do also have Mako and Candymonium with 3 7-car trains, but they are admittedly hypers rather than traditional sit-downs.

As far as traditional sit-downs go, I think you may be right about Khan being the only one with 7 car trains.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

No, I really meant the only big B&M operating with THREE trains that is only 7-cars long.

Typically, medium or small-sized B&M can run 7-car trains (Batman clones, Dæemonen, Nemesis Inferno, some stand-ups) but all big B&M (with 3 trains and MCBR) feature 8-car long trains EXCEPT FOR Khan. I am not making it up: look it up.

This was due to the placement of the cobra roll, which sits above the brake run. The supports on the cobra roll limit the space to build the transfer track, which was shoehorned and proved long enough to only guarantee 7-car trains.

ah, ok, I didn't read the number of trains as relevant. It is the only classic sit down coaster, with any number of trains, that has 7 cars per train. There are other three train 7 car B&Ms out there though.

Because I'm sad, I looked up the patent. It says the image is an "embodiment" of the ride system described. I guess it doesn't need to be 100% accurate because the train isn't part of the patent proper?

Here it is!
The claims seem to talk more in detail about the lighting system, and glosses over the train with statements that cover as many use cases as possible in as broad terms as possible. For example:

Which could cover a carboard box with wheels and zip ties to hold you in

It does say that any type of restraint can be used with the tech in the patent, so it could still be vests!

I wonder if this is an "aftermarket" add-on Universal are developing to retrofit on other coasters as needed, rather than coming fitted direct from B&M? How common is it for parks to get the patent on tech versus the manufacturer?

That's interesting, so the invention claimed by the patent being filed is that the light system is built into the restraints and can indicate the locking status of the restraint, rather than the trains themselves?