westcoaster Posted October 3, 2007 Posted October 3, 2007 Really timberwolf when used to its purpose brings in crowds crowds that buy merchandise drinks and food, Could one day really top gun go Yes make way for a bigger project. COngo never goes maybe themed or something but its staying maybe not exactly where it is but somewhere in park???? Also what about A 2nd gate to Kings Island now that GWL is the official hotel for the park maybe near top gun?????
The Interpreter Posted October 3, 2007 Posted October 3, 2007 Being as one of the first things Cedar Fair did at Carowinds is to virtually stop using the south gate except on the busiest of weekends, I wouldn't be expecting the park to open another gate any time soon. This is particularly so in that Cedar Fair has no financial interest in Great Wolf Lodge, and is in fact in competition with that company elsewhere in the country. It would not surprise me greatly to see Cedar Fair enter that business in Mason at some time in the future.
coaster_junky Posted October 4, 2007 Posted October 4, 2007 Something else to nibble on, there's a natural spring where Congo sits. If anyone remembers Screamin' Demon (which was in Congo's spot) there was a lake under it due to the spring. It would be a bit of a pain to put a non-water ride there. first off i know this wasn't a natural spring but they did build The Beast over the run off water from the old water ride that was replaced by tomb raider and if it is a steel coaster all they would have to do is design the ride to not have a support going into it and is there really a natural spring there? i seriously thought they built the pond with the ride but i guess i think it would be bigger than what is in the pictures of screamin' demon and before i forget isn't millinnium force built partly on and island? and if so wouldn't they have had to build over water?
DeLorean Rider Posted October 4, 2007 Posted October 4, 2007 If its that much of a pain, how were they able to put Screamin' Demon there? I dont remember it being a water ride.
The Interpreter Posted October 4, 2007 Posted October 4, 2007 If its that much of a pain, how were they able to put Screamin' Demon there? I dont remember it being a water ride. The rules for building things in wetlands changed drastically during George H. W. Bush's administration. It was he who declared "No net loss of wetlands." Screamin' Demon was built before then.
WooferBearATL Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 Something else to nibble on, there's a natural spring where Congo sits. If anyone remembers Screamin' Demon (which was in Congo's spot) there was a lake under it due to the spring. It would be a bit of a pain to put a non-water ride there. That is a man made lake. Was put in for the monkey's when WAH was in the area. And Congo is a little in front of where Demon used to be.
WooferBearATL Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 If its that much of a pain, how were they able to put Screamin' Demon there? I dont remember it being a water ride. The rules for building things in wetlands changed drastically during George H. W. Bush's administration. It was he who declared "No net loss of wetlands." Screamin' Demon was built before then. And in fact, it was all a field until the "wet land" was made wet by construction of Wild Animal Safari/WAH.
Guest TombraiderTy Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 A sleek launch roller coaster like Maverick or Stormrunner... start around the area near Top Gun, and a section would splash into the water, like SheiKra at Busch Gardens... and of course, Congo Falls be moved or a newer, ever bigger, flume added into Boomerang Bay.
Browntggrr Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 Moving Congo is not a good idea from a business standpoint. The costs associated with the removal and relocation/ re-pouring of the cement for the lake & channel for the boats would be astronomical. It's a popular enough ride to keep where it is, but not popular enough to accept the cost of relocation.
welchce Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 If I can remember correctly, there was a random topic over the summer on these forums about this very thing. It was someone speculating and giving their two cents about an idea they had. So yes, I agree with this being taken with a grain of salt. I could possibly see Congo being removed because it's getting old and because of the entire Water Ride Dispersion Property according to westcoaster.
Guest rcfreak339 Posted October 28, 2007 Posted October 28, 2007 In my opinion Congo Falls looks like its in great shape. I do see them moving it closer to the waterpark. See its in good shape: http://www.KICentral.com/photos/displayima...m=56&pos=20
Braves0511 Posted October 28, 2007 Posted October 28, 2007 it'd be nice if they put all the water rides in one spot...I rarely ride WWC or Congo, sheerly because i hate walking around wet, especially wet shoes. But if it was all in one area I could easily change clothes, ride the wet stuff, and then change back...
Guest rcfreak339 Posted October 28, 2007 Posted October 28, 2007 it'd be nice if they put all the water rides in one spot...I rarely ride WWC or Congo, sheerly because i hate walking around wet, especially wet shoes. But if it was all in one area I could easily change clothes, ride the wet stuff, and then change back... I also hate walking around wet...i really hope they do put it with the water stuff What i think would be a good idea with WWC would be to revesrse the entrance.
Aves Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 Congo Falls is in an Oddball location. It would be tons better at BB.
PKIVortex Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 How would Congo Falls be better in BB? It's a ride designed to ride in your street clothes, not your bathing suit. It's not a water slide type of ride.
Outdoor Man Posted November 1, 2007 Posted November 1, 2007 I can't see Congo Falls being removed for anything other than old age/maintenance. It's really in a spot that won't fit anything else... it sort of "fits" its location. Some retheming could add to the experience, but beyond that I can't see much happening to it. I not sure that removing would add much to their bottom line, as it probably doesn't take much to operate it or maintain it. My 2-cents are that it will out-live Top Gun....
Aves Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 Top Gun gets scarier and scarier every time I ride it. And I don't meen thrills, I meen the chain lifts creaks, the air brakes wear, and the track rusts. TG should get refurbished over the offseason.
Browntggrr Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 ^ Don't ever buy a car. AT least TG goes through a daily inspection.
Aves Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 ^ It sure needs it. I don't think, and I'm just spittballn', but I don't think air brakes were made to stop a 7 car trainload of 28 140 pound people going 45 mph.
The Interpreter Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 First of all, rides are based on 170 pound males being the average riders. There is also a LARGE measure of safety built in. And if airbrakes can and do stop greatly overloaded coal trucks barreling down the highway at 70 miles per hour plus with over 100 tons of coal on board, I doubt a coaster train weighing much, much less than that and doing less speed is any challenge.
Aves Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 Well, they could at least add another 1000 feet of track so when you hit the airbakes it doesn't seem like someone just punched your chest!
The Interpreter Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 That has nothing to do with the space available, and the ride is correctly engineered by all accounts.
Aves Posted November 2, 2007 Posted November 2, 2007 ^ o.k. At least give Top Gun a new pain job! It's current one is Butt Ugly!
Avatar Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 How would Congo Falls be better in BB? It's a ride designed to ride in your street clothes, not your bathing suit. It's not a water slide type of ride. First of all I doubt they move Congo Falls to BB. But I wish they would because I too do not ride Congo Falls because I do not like walking around in wet clothes. I also suggested a while back that I thought Congo Falls should be relocated to BB and that a path leading to WWC from BB would be great for those of us who would love to ride in our swim suits and for those who go to BB (to wait on family/friends) but will not put on swim suits would have something to do while waiting. I have been many times and worried about guests looking overheated while standing around in regular street clothes in that area. Also it would give another reason for park guests to go over to BB. Side Note; I really do enjoy Water Parks and I am super excited about planning a trip to see Sea Worlds new Water Park in Orlando called Aquatica http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/seaworld/27262/ , which is suppose to open sometime in March 2008.
Aves Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 Yea, I mean it really doesn't make sense. Who wants to walk around in wet clothes all day?
WooferBearATL Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 Yea, I mean it really doesn't make sense. Who wants to walk around in wet clothes all day? Well, at least a portion of the thousands that ride the water rides every day.
Rustbucket Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 Why do people continuously insist moving a ride like this? It will cost the company millions to move these types of rides. I can see now: the new improvement for KI in 2008 - Relocation of Congo Falls to BB instead of adding a new attraction. I am sure everyone will be happy with this investment.
The Interpreter Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 ...and there would be many who wouldn't even notice, and would even argue: Matilda, I tell you, that thing has ALWAYS been there! And what are you smoking? That coaster did NOT have a loop. I've been coming here since 1972, I tell you....
Aves Posted November 3, 2007 Posted November 3, 2007 ^ I've been coming here since 1923! What a rookie!
Recommended Posts