Parachute Tower

Wednesday, November 3, 2004 5:59 PM
Who makes the parachute tower rides.

Thanks,

Jacob

+0
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 6:04 PM
I know Intamin made many of them and if I remember correctly, they're currently restoring the parachute drop at Coney Island. I'm not sure though if they're the only company to have ever made them.
+0
Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:55 AM
There was a company that made little parachute towers... I'm not sure what it was though. Knoebels and Morey's Piers both have examples of the ride. They look like miniature Intamin towers but I don't think Intamin made them.
+0
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:03 PM
I sincerely HOPE that I'm wrong, but I could swear I read somewhere *quasi-official* that Coney's had been determined to be too far gone...

Or am I confusing it with Morey's Golden Nugget?

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:06 PM
I am fairly certain that the structure was "stabilized"... meaning that it was dismantled, sandblasted, repainted and reassembled. I think the problem now is the fact that the mechanical bits will need to be replaced and that will be costly. I heard that a few companies were contacted but I'm not sure if anything came of those discussions.

As for the Golden Nugget, cost is the major factor... seems the moving of the ride will cost twice as much as Morey's was willing to pay. I hear they're still committed to it so it's probably just a case of them waiting a little while longer until they can figure out how to raise the money or take some of the cost out of the project.

+0
Thursday, November 4, 2004 9:55 PM
Yeah, I thought they at the very least designated it an historic landmark, and that, even if it dosen't operate, it will remain there. I just saw something a couple weeks ago on Travel Channel about it I'm sure...
+0
Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:43 PM
I heard some discussion that making Coney's tower operational again would require some major changes that could disrupt the historic integrity of it. Consequently, many people were/are opposed to it.
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 9:10 AM
I'm pretty sure a lot of the issue had to do with how the tower operated vs. how towers operate nowadays. The Coney Parachute Tower allowed the seats to "freefall" (with the actual parachute slowing the descent somewhat) while modern-day parachute rides are a controlled descent that keeps gravity from taking over. If Intamin had been called in to replace the mechanicals, I'm sure it would have been one of their "controlled descent" towers and maybe people objected to that?
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:30 AM
"Disrupt the historic integrity"....PLEASE!

I am one of the biggest *nostlagia freaks* around here...and yet I'd gladly give up some "less than significant details" about that Tower to get it running again. If it's operational, it's REMINDING people of Coney's glorious history (as well as providing a FUN ride and *breathtaking* views over the city and the Ocean)....

I'd WAY prefer that the ride be restored to it's ORIGINAL operating condition no doubt....but if that's not feasible, for safety reasons or otherwise, then make the *minimal modifications required* to keep it as close as reasonably possible, and GET IT RUNNING!

This isn't Clementon's JackRabbit, this CAN (and should) be saved...

+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:36 AM
I agree... considering its location, the Coney Parachute Drop would make for an excellent attraction. "The Island" could certainly use another noteworthy attraction as people seem intent on improving the place.
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 11:15 AM
I just came across this page dedicated to the Parachute Tower. A little outdated but informative nonetheless.
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 11:39 AM
The thing is, I do not think it can be built with an Intamin-style system as a lot of landmark status requires that if a building, structure, etc., it is to be rehabilitated it must be done in the original manner. However, someone better versed in the things that go along with landmark issues could answer that. From what I gather Intamin was called in in the late 70's to look at the ride and the rehab costs (even ignoring the whole landmark issue) were too much for NYC to fund at that time.

Around 2001/2002 Marty Markowitz, Brooklyn Borough President, secured funding to sandblast and paint the ride (http://history.amusement-parks.com/paracon.htm). They have looked at several options for getting it running, but it the procurement of money for running rehab, the contracting of someone to run the ride and other issues make it a difficult task.

Adam

+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 11:41 AM
Who owns the ride? The city of NY? The Borough of Brooklyn? An independent landowner? I guess what I'm asking is: Who would pay for the refurbishment of the ride if the money was there- Brooklyn Borough or some other entity?
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:48 PM
I beleive the city. This article (http://www.nationaltrust.org/magazine/archives/arch_story/111502.htm) has a lot of info. on the issues.

Adam

+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 1:19 PM
I don't know about you guys, but these parachute towers seem like a frightening ride to me. It would not stop me from riding :) , but the thought of being pulled that high up, only on cables, scares me just thinking about it.

I have never ridden one, or seen one in person for that matter. Whats the parachute ride like at SFOG?

I think, but don't know, it would be scarier than the drop towers as we know today (intamin, s&s, etc)

+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 1:28 PM
^^ its not scary at all.......
+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 6:38 PM
It's more fun than scary. They have a more open feeling than drop towers, but are obviously more gentle and glide down rather than freefall.

The one at SFOG had four stand-up cages that you could ride in, but they were removed at some point and replaced with regular chairs.

*** Edited 11/5/2004 11:40:25 PM UTC by Dukeis#1***

+0
Friday, November 5, 2004 7:13 PM
If I recall correctly, the Coney Island Parachute drop was a mechanical nightmare. I rode it once just before it closed and it was a fantastic ride. But at the time, I believe there were only two chutes operating, the rest having some kind of mechanical problems. I assume that since the machinery was originally designed for use in the military, perhaps it was not up to the task of hundreds or perhaps thousands of drops a day, every day during the summer. I am certain that while Intamin's system might not be as original or as much of a blast, it would probably be more reliable. In addition, as stated before, the view from up there is worth more than the thrill of the ride anyway!
+0

You must be logged in to post

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