Orlando Thrill Park proposes ride lineup

Posted Thursday, December 2, 2010 2:01 PM | Contributed by Jeff

With 14 rides, including eight roller coasters, the proposed Orlando Thrill Park hopes to cater to enthusiasts underserved by Florida's theme parks. Scheduled to open in summer 2013, the proposed amusement park would include rides from several manufacturers, including Intamin, Vekoma, Chance Morgan, Mack, S&S Power, U.S. ThrillRides and Mondial, according to Chuck Bell, spokesman for the Orlando Thrill Park.

Read more from The LA Times.

Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:00 PM

Over 15 years ago I pitched an idea to Disney through their "I Have an Idea Program" that was a Disney thrill ride park. I think the success of the coasters at Sea World and IoA show that there is a demand. I'm skeptical if this Thrill Park gets built or not but if it does then Disney will be playing catch up...yet again.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:18 PM

The idea of a new high-intensity thrill park in Orlando is intriguing, but something about this sounds a bit too much like that other proposed thrill park in Orlando that never happened. I know there hasn't been concept art released but I envision some kind of Go-Kart fun center-esque park with rides just slapped down and no themeing or landscaping. If this comes to fruition I really hope that's not the case. And I'm sure the comments from the spokesman are more about assuring the big-thrill nature of the park, but I hope they don't just put rides in and discard them after a few years.

As for the proposed rides, they're a bit of a mixed bag and capacity seems like it could become an issue. The flat rides look great, especially the S&S tower, and the Intamin super splash flumes are a lot of fun. The coasters aren't as promising.

I like the idea of the Mack launched coaster the best, that should be fantastic. The Vekoma moto coaster should also be fun, as should the Zac Spin. The Vekoma dive coaster concept looks ridiculous and I'm not sure of the point. And why an SLC? This is such an outdated concept in terms of parks having these all over the world.

I'm all for the flyer, as I've heard the Stingray that opened is actually good. An inverted accelerator sounds great, but does it need to go 128 mph? And an S&S 4D will be interesting. Guess we'll see what happens...

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:23 PM

Still smells like someone trying to play real-life RCT to me.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:39 PM

I'm intrigued but skeptical at the same time. I love the idea of a thrill ride park for adreneline junkies in the Orlando area but I'm not sure putting a bunch of those rides together in one spot will work, especially if it feels like an oversized FEC and/or lacks rides and attractions for other members of the family. After all, most Orlando visitors are families and if a family is going to justify spending money at this park, there will need to be something for everyone. I doubt mom and dad are going to give the teenagers and pile of money and allow them to take the rental car to I-Drive while they remain in the Magic Kingdom, especially after having spent hundreds on those 7-day Park Hoppers.

The idea of a lot of "cloned" rides is strange- I'm guessing it's cheaper to build something that's already been built rather than invest in something completely new? I'm going to assume the SLC is used- why else buy one when Vekoma has come up with better inverted coaster designs? The Dive Coaster looks as though it has potential- almost seems like an extension of what Schwarzkopf was doing with his traveling coasters in the 80's.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:50 PM

Won't some of the moms and dads want to join their teen kids at a park with thrill rides? Having such a park in the Orlando area would make me more inclined to return.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:59 PM

There's a lot here that appeals to me, especially the 4D, Sky Quest, the Dive coaster, and the wet Top Spin. Will this even be built? Who knows? But based on first impressions ("I'm sorry, I don't do impressions." RIP Leslie) I think it would get me back to Orlando...haven't been since March '04 (or maybe '05, but it was definitely March!) It's going to be fascinating to watch this develop..BUT PLEASE CHANGE THE NAME!!!!...

And if it DOES come to fruition, we'll hope it meets a better fate than HRP.

Last edited by Mike Gallagher, Friday, December 3, 2010 9:43 AM
+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 4:39 PM

There may be clauses in place that prevent certain manufacturers from building within a certain area of another ride they already built.

Last edited by Fun, Thursday, December 2, 2010 4:39 PM
+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 7:57 PM

"Sell the rides and add new prototypes!". That always works.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:48 PM

I would hate to be the head of the maintenance dept. at that park. How may rides have no track record, let alone a previous track record of bad reliability or even death?

It really does feel like someone trying to play real life RCT. 8 out of 14 rides are coasters? Even Magic Mountain and CP have kids areas (multiple, in fact).

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:50 PM

This project sounds interesting. I wish the photos of the rides would work for me. I can't skip to the second photo. :(

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:57 PM

They are just photos of other rides at other parks- no layout shots or anything, just a car with riders in each shot. You aren't missing anything - and I doubt this pipe dream will get built.

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:18 PM

Should it ever get built...no complaints from me. I don't think it's entirely unthinkable, it IS Orlando after all. It is unlikely. But the ride lineup suits me nicely - and a lack of kids rides means few if any strollers! :)

+0
Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:43 PM

Rob Ascough said:
I'm intrigued but skeptical at the same time. I love the idea of a thrill ride park for adreneline junkies in the Orlando area but I'm not sure putting a bunch of those rides together in one spot will work, especially if it feels like an oversized FEC and/or lacks rides and attractions for other members of the family. After all, most Orlando visitors are families and if a family is going to justify spending money at this park, there will need to be something for everyone. I doubt mom and dad are going to give the teenagers and pile of money and allow them to take the rental car to I-Drive while they remain in the Magic Kingdom, especially after having spent hundreds on those 7-day Park Hoppers.

I don't think the idea is to appeal to families, it is to appeal to thrill seekers only thats the point 8 out of 14 rides are coasters and the other 6 are all big thrills for that reason. The park is intended to bring what disney and universal don't by bringing all thrills with no family, kiddy rides or theming. The Vekoma SLC is a dumb idea there are better inverts available and the idea of an inverted TTD is just plain scary to me anyways. This park won't be for the faint of heart nor is it intended if it is built

+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 12:04 AM

ApolloAndy said:
8 out of 14 rides are coasters? Even Magic Mountain and CP have kids areas (multiple, in fact).

But I think that's exactly the point and exactly why this idea could exist in Orlando.

When you're finally sick of Princesses, Harry Potter and Shamu - come on by and have some real fun.

Hell, 'after hours' business alone could be significant.

---

EDIT - Helps if I read the article, they even say as much:

Orlando Thrill Park hopes to fill a void created by the absence of any Six Flags or Cedar Fair amusement parks in Florida. Indeed, the Orlando-area parks -- Disney, Universal, SeaWorld and Busch Gardens -- are dominated by theme rather than thrills.

"We're not trying to out-Disney Disney," Bell said. "We know we can't do that."

Last edited by Lord Gonchar, Friday, December 3, 2010 12:12 AM
+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 12:08 AM

I finally figured out why my browser wasn't allowing me to vids the photos. Stupid Firefox add-ons. ;)

Last edited by LostKause, Friday, December 3, 2010 12:24 AM
+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 12:22 AM

Lord Gonchar said:
But I think that's exactly the point and exactly why this idea could exist in Orlando.

Yep, that's it - maybe even "only in Orlando", really.

Hell, 'after hours' business alone could be significant.

Celebration City in a (much!) better location for such an idea.

People who haven't been down here in the offseason may not realize our parks are closing as early as 5-6pm for the duration...

+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 12:31 AM

1. Yup.

and

2. Exactly! Good way to put it.

+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 7:47 AM

A few of the proposals bother me -- why aim to beat out Top Thrill Dragster but NOT Kingda Ka? Why an SLC at all?

Only 14 rides, and 8 of them coasters? Even for a thrill-only park that's too top-heavy. For such a tiny park they'd need a rather large maintenance staff and budget. With so few attractions, if it does draw a crowd how do you distribute them and keep them entertained? Maybe there ARE enough people who only hop from coaster to coaster, but even the most diehard enthusiast I know likes the occasional darkride.

I think tigellinus got it right...


(Edit -- cleanup)

Last edited by GregLeg, Friday, December 3, 2010 8:17 AM
+0
Friday, December 3, 2010 8:45 AM

Sounds really cool in concept, but I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes Hard Rock Park: The Sequel. Assuming it actually gets built.

+0

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2018, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...