Zumanjaro: Drop of Doom - NOW OPEN!

[GAFanatic]

While I agree that some changes are inevitable at parks, and it was time for RT's removal, I do not agree that everything that has been removed has been done for good reason; such as the Conestoga Wagon, Teepee, trees, etc..

 

I also fail to see how a 415 drop tower appeals to a "broader demographic". While I'm excited about riding it, I believe a new thrill ride is the last thing the park needs right now. The park is jam packed with thrill rides. In order to really appeal to a broader demographic, they need to spend some money repairing the crumbling infrastructure and adding shows, decent restaurants, and coherent theming.

 

The park pays too much attention to the desires of it's "current visitors". They are already customers. They need to focus on attracting the people who are not current visitors and a drop tower is not going to do that.

[29yrswithaGApass]

The park is jam packed with thrill rides.

 

Outside of the coasters, the park has hardly any thrill rides except maybe Twister and Sky Screamer. There are people who don't like roller coasters.

[sfgalocal]

 

Outside of the coasters, the park has hardly any thrill rides except maybe Twister and Sky Screamer. There are people who don't like roller coasters.

According to the sfga website there are 12 rides at max thrill - what definition are you using?

[Daved Thomson]

 

Outside of the coasters, the park has hardly any thrill rides except maybe Twister and Sky Screamer. There are people who don't like roller coasters.

Yes, there are plenty of people who don't like rollercoasters, but more often than not, a rollercoaster is indeed a thrill ride. It's also somewhat scary to think that management considers Sky Screamer to be a family ride. The Flying Wave was a family ride, Sky Screamer most definitely is not. What the park is, most definitely, is way out out of balance (in favor of thrill rides/coaster and kiddie rides and lacking in family attractions (rides/shows/other). I hope you are right that they have a long term strategic plan for the park, because any plan is only good if it's been well thought out AND actually implemented. Six Flags is not known for doing either very well.

[29yrswithaGApass]

According to the sfga website there are 12 rides at max thrill - what definition are you using?

 

Like I said, they are almost all coasters and only two thrill rides. The MAX rides are:

 

- 8 coasters listed (Batman, Bizarro, El Toro, Green Lantern, Kingda Ka, Nitro, Superman, Rolling Thunder)

- 2 upcharge rides which I don't count (Dare Devil Dive, Slingshot)

 

leaving only two thrill rides (Sky Screamer, Twister).

[Daved Thomson]

 

Like I said, they are almost all coasters and only two thrill rides. The MAX rides are:

 

- 8 coasters listed (Batman, Bizarro, El Toro, Green Lantern, Kingda Ka, Nitro, Superman, Rolling Thunder)

- 2 upcharge rides which I don't count (Dare Devil Dive, Slingshot)

 

leaving only two thrill rides (Sky Screamer, Twister).

Just out of curiosity, why would you NOT count up charge attractions in your count? These rides ate a certain amount of capital expenditures when they were installed (at the expense of non-upcharge attractions) and I would have to believe that (at least the two you mentioned) they're not going to be removed anytime soon.

[29yrswithaGApass]

Just out of curiosity, why would you NOT count up charge attractions in your count? These rides ate a certain amount of capital expenditures when they were installed (at the expense of non-upcharge attractions) and I would have to believe that (at least the two you mentioned) they're not going to be removed anytime soon.

 

That is just my personal take on upcharge rides. They are excluded from the pay-one-price lineup so I view them differently than the rest of the rides. These rides have never been promoted as new attractions or included in commercials. That is also why we have them listed separately on our home page.

[SFGadv123]

Just out of curiosity, why would you NOT count up charge attractions in your count? These rides ate a certain amount of capital expenditures when they were installed (at the expense of non-upcharge attractions) and I would have to believe that (at least the two you mentioned) they're not going to be removed anytime soon.

I would not count them either. Most of the people that go probably don't want to spend more money than they already did to park and get in.

[Daved Thomson]

I would not count them either. Most of the people that go probably don't want to spend more money than they already did to park and get in.

I definitely can understand why someone might not count them. Unfortunately, however, they are just one more example of the completely misguided spending on new attractions, especially ones that require an additional fee to ride and, yes, have a very limited appeal. Again, spending on things like this also impacts what you can budget for preventive maintenance, clearly something that has been sorely lacking.

[GAFanatic]

However you may classify the rides, the simple fact is that Six Flags caters to a limited demographic, and this will never work. The idea that they think the most important thing the park needs right now is another thrill ride is a clear example that they have no idea what they are doing.

[The Master]

I think a good or great! Coaster will take rolling thunders place in 2015

 

They can't build a coaster there since it would either block the walkway to the new droptower, or render the walkway unsafe (like with KK's abandoned queue house). I don't see a coaster (at least not one the size of RT) going into RT's old spot for a very long time. They might squeeze some flats or kidde coasters along the walkway but I doubt it.

[SFGadv123]

 

They can't build a coaster there since it would either block the walkway to the new droptower, or render the walkway unsafe (like with KK's abandoned queue house). I don't see a coaster (at least not one the size of RT) going into RT's old spot for a very long time. They might squeeze some flats or kidde coasters along the walkway but I doubt it.

Why not? How can it be unsafe when there are other coasters built over walkways? What about Green Lantern. The corkscrew goes right over the path.

[sixflagsdude101]

yes all they have to do is have the walkway go through at tunnel, etc.

[DiveMachine]

They tried that. Ka's queue of today is not te same queue it opened with. The state condemned it after a 2005 accident. They'd need to expand the current closed tunnel(used for some of the park's maintenance now a days) BIG time in order for the state to approve. Ka isn't the same as other coasters when it comes to that.

[29yrswithaGApass]

Nice piece on the new ride:

 

[Daved Thomson]

However you may classify the rides, the simple fact is that Six Flags caters to a limited demographic, and this will never work. The idea that they think the most important thing the park needs right now is another thrill ride is a clear example that they have no idea what they are doing.

I agree with you all the way! Now their Facebook page is asking what show we would like to see in the Showcase Theater... While I appreciate being asked for input, they really do come across as just having no idea what it takes to run a theme park successfully. My level of confidence that GA has the right people in management that know the industry, understand and appreciate the park's heritage, and really care about the guests and their overall experience, is non-existent. It's like they're simply throwing darts at a dart board, not bothering to aim first, and then not caring that they missed in the end anyway.

[29yrswithaGApass]

Can we please get this topic on track and talk about the future ride? If anyone still wants to continue saying what the park is doing wrong, I would instead suggest going to the My Ideas For the Park area of the forums and make your solutions to these issues known.

[sfgalocal]

It is kind of strange being able to talk about Zumanjaro after being "in" on the secret for quite some time.

 

While I am not surprised to hear of the disappointment around Rolling Thunder's removal, I am that it has consumed so much of this topic. Anyone who is familiar with the history of the park knows that rides and attractions are constantly added and removed from Great Adventure. Only six rides have had a longer run than Rolling Thunder's 35 years at the park and with the average coaster staying for only 12 years, Thunder had a pretty long life. As a Great Adventure history nut, I hate to see things removed from the park. If it were possible I wish we would still have every ride since 1974, but obviously that isn't realistic. Time marches on.

 

The decision to remove Rolling Thunder was not a random idea but instead a well thought out part of a multi-year plan for Great Adventure's future. I have known about its planned removal for over a year. Since 2011 the park has been putting in attractions that have filled voids in its ride line-up based upon feedback from its current visitors and the public who have complained that the park lacked certain attractions that lessened their chances of visiting or returning. For those that can recall not too long ago when the park was almost exclusively roller coasters and kiddie rides with numerous flat and family rides removed and not replaced, the park has come a long way in a short time to address those missings. We have seen a family oriented package of flat rides in 2012, an outstanding Safari experience in 2013, and now a world record setting thrill ride for 2014. Year after year they have listened to what people have wanted and their future plans will continue to enhance the park's offerings while appealing to a broader demographic.

 

Don't think of Rolling Thunder's removal as a simple swap out for another ride but as a key step in planning and building a better Great Adventure. We will get over Rolling Thunder's demolition just as we did with Lightnin' Loops, Scream Machine, and so many other rides. In the mean time we will just have to settle with our 415 foot drop tower. Poor us!

 

I was a good citizen and kept my rolling thunder comments on the other thread, but since you brought it up...

I find your comparison of Rolling Thunder to other defunct rides and attraction a bit disingenuous. Rolling Thunder was much more than that. The ride was an icon, and a darn good thrill ride that can be experienced by the family (it caters to a much larger ride base than Zumanjaro).

Rolling thunder was in a unique category, not sure why Six Flags let it rot and not market the hell out of it. It was a wooden twin track roller coaster. According to the roller coaster db (rcdb.com) there are currently over 3400 roller coasters in the world. Do you know how many wooden twin track roller coaster now exist? 12. There are only 8 in the US. Before Rolling Thunder, when was the last time a twin track wooden rollercoaster closed? 1968. Rolling Thunder is a fairly unique attraction I would think.

I really don't think SFGA will ever build another twin track roller coaster. I assume it is more expensive to build a twin track wooden rollercoaster than to maintain one it has. I think it would have been a better investment to maintain & market it, heck maybe ride it backwards to give it that unique experience. But of course I don't have inside info like you so maybe you can explain how this is bad idea.

The other thing you mentioned that didn't make sense - if getting rid of roller thunder was part of a multi year plan, why give 10 days notice? Why not tell the public earlier in the summer, let people get in their last ride? I think this is really a slap in the face to the loyal (probably older) fan base, short term thinking.

There is article on Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wooden_roller_coaster) on wooden rollercoasters has has a relevant quote:

"Wooden coasters are also becoming less marketable in today's media-driven advertising world. Superlative advertising in which the "biggest", "tallest", or "fastest" ride is what brings in crowds often cannot apply to new wooden roller coasters, especially since a large majority of record-holding rides are steel. Amusement parks are always looking to add attractions that can be presented in commercials and ads as incredibly tall, fast, or extreme, which eliminates many wooden roller coasters."

I am not trying to spoil the party for Zumanjaro (I call it Zum-of-Doom), I think it is great addition. I looked forward to it. I plan to ride it. GA has a notable history with Freefall, which was a widely popular ride that closed after 2006 season (I think). Zumanjaro fills that void that has been left open for 7 seasons, although again I think it is targeting a much narrower demographic.

For me, dumping Rolling Thunder just changed things on so many levels. Your characterization of Rolling Thunder in a 'wind of change' spin is disingenuous. The ride was the heart of the GA experience, yes it aged, but it (and the loyal fans) deserved better.

[The Master]

yes all they have to do is have the walkway go through at tunnel, etc.

 

For coasters like GL and ET, there it is only a short section of pathway going under a short section of the track. The new drop tower is going to have a very long walkway probably going right through the middle of RT's former footprint. To put another coaster there would require a very long tunnel for the walkway which could run into zoning and safety regulations. In other words the walkway would go under the full length and though the middle of a roller coaster (like Dorney's Thunderhawk) if built in that area as opposed to just going under a small section of track and would require a huge tunnel. If you notice GADV does try to avoid having long walkways going under alot of coaster track.

 

Getting back on topic. Will the new drop tower really have that much of a difference of a ride experience from KK itself? It is mounted to KK afterall and KK pretty much acts like a drop tower itself going straight up and down.

 

I agree with most of sfgalocal's points. Most of what GADV has put out for the reasons for RT's removal is just PR spin.

 

[jonlee]

when will we be able to see the plans for this new path and area? Maybe a coaster cant go in the same footprint as rolling thunder, but a new coaster means that they can build it around the new path. the coaster could head right towards el toro while the path heads left towards kingda ka. the path would only have to cross the track once

[truepolak90]

Can we please get this topic on track and talk about the future ride? If anyone still wants to continue saying what the park is doing wrong, I would instead suggest going to the My Ideas For the Park area of the forums and make your solutions to these issues known.

 

THANK YOU! I'm sure that whats going on now seems "wrong", but people forget this is a CORPORATE BUSINESS, not ROLLER COASTER TYCOON. I have a feeling that something really nice is planned for the future of the park and Zumanjaro is just the beginning. Rolling Thunder is leaving and quite honestly I only rode it once every 7 visits to the park. Its time to move on and the baboons in the Golden Kingdom will be more entertaining and a different type of experience that will give FAMILIES something to do and check out while strolling through the park which in my opinion, i'd love to see more animal attractions inside the theme park. We all need to look at this with an open mind, the unused part of the safari including Thunders vacant footprint can fit Hurricane Harbor PLUS a coaster... If any hotel projects break through, then most likely the water park can be relocated into this area. This is only speculation on my part. Just saying.

[SFGadv123]

 

Getting back on topic. Will the new drop tower really have that much of a difference of a ride experience from KK itself? It is mounted to KK afterall and KK pretty much acts like a drop tower itself going straight up and down.

 

 

The only thing I am looking forward to is being able to actually stay up there for a while rather than going right down in 2 seconds.

[The Master]

 

THANK YOU! I'm sure that whats going on now seems "wrong", but people forget this is a CORPORATE BUSINESS, not ROLLER COASTER TYCOON. I have a feeling that something really nice is planned for the future of the park and Zumanjaro is just the beginning. Rolling Thunder is leaving and quite honestly I only rode it once every 7 visits to the park. Its time to move on and the baboons in the Golden Kingdom will be more entertaining and a different type of experience that will give FAMILIES something to do and check out while strolling through the park which in my opinion, i'd love to see more animal attractions inside the theme park. We all need to look at this with an open mind, the unused part of the safari including Thunders vacant footprint can fit Hurricane Harbor PLUS a coaster... If any hotel projects break through, then most likely the water park can be relocated into this area. This is only speculation on my part. Just saying.

 

Your first sentence is just a strawman argument. Claiming that people who object to RT's removal must think the parks work like the video game is quite rude and condescending. You are pretty much saying that all the people who hold a different opinion than you must be naive or stupid as a blanket statement for their reasoning is in itself false reasoning.

 

Alot of people felt the same way about the closure of Old Country, that SF would put something really nice, really cool, really neat in there which has yet to happen. Poor old Musik Express is still rotting away and a large section of the park just sits there not being used for much of anything.

 

Most of the inpark animal attractions are not executed well. The otter show lasted 2 minutes, they were cute but it was a pretty lame show. The former tiger exhibit that they use for birds displays isn't that good. The Philly Zoo or Hershey's Zoo America are far superior to GADV's small exhibits. I still have not made it on the off road safari tour yet, but I would go to the Philly Zoo before waiting 5 hours in line.

 

 

Why would they move HH? They could put a few water slides in that part of GADV but I doubt they could put in a new wave pool and river that are the same size as the current ones besides the current number of slides there. It would be an undersized, overcrowded mess like Hershey's Boardwalk. There are plenty of other places to put in a hotel which I really don't want to see built.

 

SFGadv123, hopefully the droptower would stay up longer, but that would reduce it's hourly capacity which isn't going to be that great.

[RideOfSteel]

I'm hoping this tower has stronger airtime then on S&S and some Intamin towers. Imagine the intensity of a Larson/ARM tower 400 feet high... That would be amazing!

[Daved Thomson]

when will we be able to see the plans for this new path and area? Maybe a coaster cant go in the same footprint as rolling thunder, but a new coaster means that they can build it around the new path. the coaster could head right towards el toro while the path heads left towards kingda ka. the path would only have to cross the track once

Plans? What plans? Look at the video and pictures of the new ride that the park has released. There is no path or other means of accessing the ride in either of them. As usual, not something that has been given any real thought.