Viking’s Revenge Flume Ride Removal

[themagician]

After years of SBNO, the day has finally arrived

[Smol bean]

This is great to see, should we expect the castle to be demolished to free up room for future expansion.

[Coasterjoe]

Its about time! 
The real estate it frees up is not huge, but hopefully room enough for some sort of new attraction. Would love to see some sort of immersive dark ride experience. 

[Rivals]

I feel like they were waiting until they knew what they were doing with the area, which makes sense as to why they waited so long to randomly start demolishing. If this is the case, i wonder what is coming and when… hopefully whatever it is the delay isn’t as long as the New Atlantis 

[CR4ZE]

Agree they must now have a clear picture of what will become of the site. Although we'll have to wait and see, I'd be surprised if they just leveled the entire area and will assume they'll incorporate at least some of the structure already there. I'd say an announcement is imminent, but that surely won't be coming until Leviathan/Trident open just in time for the Olympics very soon.

[jjuttp]

I remember when they were like "yeah, don't worry, it's coming back at some point". Next minute, they pull a Dreamworld and leave it there for a few years.

[Rivals]

23 minutes ago, jjuttp said:

I remember when they were like "yeah, don't worry, it's coming back at some point". Next minute, they pull a Dreamworld and leave it there for a few years.

I don’t remember them saying that? they permanently closed it then we heard of some replacement talk in 2019 which we haven’t heard of again since the start of the pandemic.

[bladex]

took them long enough

[Naazon]

I think a raptor would fit there perfectly and could wind around Storm quite easily.

But realistically 2 flats, one where the castle is and another where the station is.

[Rivals]

A Raptor in this location or next to Jet Rescue would fit perfectly, they don’t have a coaster that goes upside down.

If I was running it (scary thought) I’d put a Raptor in Sea Viper area and reopen the bridge as well as a connecting pathway from the JR pathway and then 2 flat rides or a family ride in the space of VR.

[Ogre]

About time. The station looked like it was literally falling apart last week (multiple holes in the celling and water everywhere from the rain).

 

6 hours ago, Smol bean said:

This is great to see, should we expect the castle to be demolished to free up room for future expansion.

I hope not. I think they should keep it (along with the 4d theatre).

 

5 hours ago, Rivals said:

I feel like they were waiting until they knew what they were doing with the area, which makes sense as to why they waited so long to randomly start demolishing.

I wonder if one could say the same for Dreamworld's

[Noll_57]

I also agree that the castle should not be removed, it’s a classic Sea World icon and it’d be sad to see it go (especially since we’ve already lost the lighthouse). While I’d love to see it used for a new attraction, I’m hoping they can renovate the interior while keeping the external facade intact. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

17 hours ago, Coasterjoe said:

Its about time! 
The real estate it frees up is not huge, but hopefully room enough for some sort of new attraction. Would love to see some sort of immersive dark ride experience. 

They could fit Surfrider in there pretty easily. They clearly have no interest in operating it at WnW.

10 hours ago, Noll_57 said:

I also agree that the castle should not be removed, it’s a classic Sea World icon and it’d be sad to see it go (especially since we’ve already lost the lighthouse). While I’d love to see it used for a new attraction, I’m hoping they can renovate the interior while keeping the external facade intact. 

The castle is iconic, sure. But we've seen numerous examples of new attractions being neutered by trying to make them fit into existing buildings -

• SkyVoyager - I believe planned for 4 modules, the six modules is 'too full' for the screen size
• Storm Coaster - I believe during construction they had big issues with the relatively high water table adding much to the cost
• Justice League - To fit into the existing BA:TR footprint, we got the 'poor cousin' of the Justice League attractions

Scooby and JDS are examples of reusing existing space without compromise, although I dislike the JDS use.

In short, If they came up with an attraction well suited to the castle space without compromising the experience, sure. But if we're keeping it because "OMG it's so iconic!!!" isn't a good enough reason. Sea World's biggest issue with new attractions is finding the space, and the castle takes up an enormous amount of prime real estate leading to choke points and traffic management nightmares through the mid-station area of the park.

There is a massive amount of space that could be freed up if this was levelled. The castle and flume area occupies about half a hectare \ 1.3 acres of land. 

 

[Naazon]

35 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

Sea World's biggest issue with new attractions is finding the space.

Pretty much every park in QLD now.

[CR4ZE]

15 hours ago, Naazon said:

I think a raptor would fit there perfectly and could wind around Storm quite easily.

But realistically 2 flats, one where the castle is and another where the station is.

 

15 hours ago, Rivals said:

A Raptor in this location or next to Jet Rescue would fit perfectly, they don’t have a coaster that goes upside down.

If I was running it (scary thought) I’d put a Raptor in Sea Viper area and reopen the bridge as well as a connecting pathway from the JR pathway and then 2 flat rides or a family ride in the space of VR.

Seriously? How on Earth would a Raptor ever be the right fit for the park? If VR went ahead with something like that, it'd be a complete misread of their target demographic. SW has always positioned itself as a family park and they've endured for more than 50 years because of it. Obviously, they had the Sea Viper there for a long time (tame and antiquated by modern standards), but I think the addition of Leviathan plus two decent flats more than fills that niche.

I'll say it time and time again, as an enthusiast, I'd love to see more cutting-edge, extreme rides to come to Australia, but they need to be positioned in the right place at the right time. Would MW benefit from another big coaster in the not-too-distant future? Absolutely, build your Raptor there, minding they'd probably benefit more from another show, dark ride or water ride first. DW? Same story, build a new water ride as a matter of urgency and then go for another coaster.

If I had the big golden key to SW, on the Vikings' site I'd probably do some kind of walk-through attraction, a smaller themed area with a couple of good flats, or even a modern flume ride a la Phantasialand.

[Naazon]

Just because international raptors are extreme thrills doesn't mean a custom SW one has to be. The benefit of a custom layout is you make it what you want. The benefit of a raptor is its small footprint, and narrow tolerances allowing it to operate in tight spaces.

 

But as I said, realistically a flat would work better for the areas.

[GoGoBoy]

4 hours ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

Scooby and JDS are examples of reusing existing space without compromise, although I dislike the JDS use.

 

Totally agree with your post, although I believe the old Gremlins show building was modified in terms of a significant lift to the ceiling height to accomodate the wild mouse section of Scooby. It's a real shame they didn't also expand the JL building - that ride is clearly limited by space

Edited August 19, 2022 by GoGoBoy

[joz]

Word on the street is that the castle isn't in the best of condition, which makes sense given it was built on a budget in the late 70s. As much as I'm nostalgic for it, I think it's ok to let it go.

 

The room the castle and Flume station (and south of the Flume station too) is pretty big, but not absurdly so. It's also an awkward space. Even so, one thing I liked about that area as a kid, and something I like in general, is rides that go through each other. Skyway's station was built in the middle of the Flume, which itself went over the 3D theatre and under Bermuda. Was rather interconnected which for my taste made things more interesting. I'd like if they could tightly squeeze a couple of coasters in that area, including going through storm; something high end thrill and smaller like a mouse.

 

I think the argument that SW is a family park and shouldn't have high end thrill rides is pretty silly. The thing about parks specialising and only doing one thing well is pretty new all things considered, and I think treating SW as a park only for families with small kids has been a big misstep. In the old days, these parks were for everyone, which means stuff the family can do together, but also a few proper thrill rides as well. If you balance out the attraction mix at SW with some more thrill rides, you would massively improve attendance. Don't neglect the families with small kids obviously, but don't ignore the older kids/adults too.

 

FWIW though, Surfrider and Vortex are both not good fits for SW. The only rides at SW with 140cm height restrictions should be one or two super headliners. In the context of a dry park like SW, both those rides are filler. Adding them limits what your next rides can be, while also not gaining you anything in terms of drawcards. In the context of a park like WnW however, both those rides would be 'big' thrill rides and a point of difference between WnW, and all the other water parks out there. Not only should surfrider not go to SW, Vortex should go to WnW. Vortex should then be replaced with a super low impact, quiet, family ride to give an aerial view of the dolphin pools/ski lake. Observation Tower, floating Island or Ferris wheel, take your pick of which it should be.

[Rivals]

I couldn’t agree more, i’ve never understand the “Sea World is a family park, so they should only get family rides” type of arguments, you need to mix it up to bring in new crowds.

An example of this is The New Atlantis, 1 of the 3 rides is strict thrill (Vortex), another one is family thrill (Leviathan) and the last is family (Trident). For the park to continue expanding in growth and attendance, they can’t just keep building family attractions (Nickelodeon Land, Followed by Jelly Fish Exhibit and The Reef) as they attract the same crowd the last new addition did. So when you mix it up with more thrill based attractions being added every now and then, new groups are attracted to the park. Hence why you see 2 new family friendly rides (Trident & Leviathan) as well as 2 new Thrill Fulfilling rides (Leviathan & Vortex.) Still agree Vortex isn’t the best fit for the park height requirement wise but does fill a tiny gap.

Sure, they should be more “family based” then thrill based, but that doesent mean they shouldn’t add thrill rides. That’s like saying because Movie World is thrill based, they shouldn’t add family rides🤷‍♀️

[Gazza]

The only reasons (IMO) to be a strictly family park is if you're so small its too expensive to try and cater to thrill riders (But you can afford to do kiddie rides, play areas etc)

The other reason is if the park had an IP that doesn't lend itself to thrill rides (Eg Peppa Pig World Florida)

Personally I think having all parks offer a mix of attractions keeps it interesting for a wider variety of visitors.

SW is in the heart of a major tourist destination, so could easily be a broad audience drawcard, it shouldn't be a place you go check out only once because it happens to be on your 3 park pass.

 

[Tim Dasco]

So for the next attraction do what do we all want to see?

A thrilling inverting coaster to cover that thrill coaster market, a family water ride of sorts, a new flat ride (Ferris wheel or Pirate Ship?) Or some sort of indoor dark ride? 

Or all above 

[Jobe]

21 hours ago, joz said:

FWIW though, Surfrider and Vortex are both not good fits for SW. The only rides at SW with 140cm height restrictions should be one or two super headliners. In the context of a dry park like SW, both those rides are filler. Adding them limits what your next rides can be, while also not gaining you anything in terms of drawcards. In the context of a park like WnW however, both those rides would be 'big' thrill rides and a point of difference between WnW, and all the other water parks out there. Not only should surfrider not go to SW, Vortex should go to WnW. Vortex should then be replaced with a super low impact, quiet, family ride to give an aerial view of the dolphin pools/ski lake. Observation Tower, floating Island or Ferris wheel, take your pick of which it should be.

Sorry I disagree entirely with this opinion. Adding in Surfrider would only round out SeaWorld's ride offering, NOT limit it. This park is a broad based family destination but this does not mean that adding in thrill rides would limit or blunt its attractiveness as a family destination. The park has an excellent kid section that is hand on heart, a better offering than what is down the road at MW for the same demographic currently.

Leviathan is being marketed as being a family thrill coaster and it should be accessible to the majority of the families its being appointed to, with the excpetion of the under 8 age bracket.

Vortex , I will admit , was an interesting choice of a flat ride for Seaworld, however, its installation should not be questioned just because of its thrill factor. The ride is definitely more intense than what Leviathan will be. Adding Surfrider in to the mix adds another compact coaster which most family demographics can and will ride. It would give Seaworld a boost to the attractiveness of visitation to the park for families who may only be wanting to visit one park and are having to choose between either Dreamworld or Movieworld. Seaworld offers excellent animal attractions, newere thrill attractions and also great kiddie attractions. Its inclusion would be for a far more alluring and compelling offer for families. Finally, Surfrider at Seaworld makes far more sense than having the ride at WNW. Having a coaster like this as a token dry ( essentially) ride in a park that is entirely populated by slides and wet attractions did not and still doesnt make sense to me. I think we can all agree that the experiment of having it in WNW has been overall, a failed concept.  Moving it to Seaworld now has so many pros attached to it, to not do it now that with the removal of Vikings, and the land that this frees up, would be another epic fail, for mine.

17 hours ago, Tim Dasco said:

So for the next attraction do what do we all want to see?

A thrilling inverting coaster to cover that thrill coaster market, a family water ride of sorts, a new flat ride (Ferris wheel or Pirate Ship?) Or some sort of indoor dark ride? 

Or all above 

All of the above.

 

And Surfrider reimagined. 🙂👍

[Park Addict 93]

Wasn’t the original plan for SurfRider to be a Pirate Ship replacement?

 

I don’t think it’s a bad idea at all for it to be a filler attraction at SW, last I heard they intend to take it to MW however.

[Rivals]

4 minutes ago, Park Addict 93 said:

Wasn’t the original plan for SurfRider to be a Pirate Ship replacement?

 

I don’t think it’s a bad idea at all for it to be a filler attraction at SW, last I heard they intend to take it to MW however.

I believe that was the original plan but where’d you hear they were planning it send it off to MW?

 

I think Surfrider would be a good filler attraction to hold them off until the next “big” coaster, but i think the height restriction (140cm) is too high for what it is. I don’t see why it’s that high unless it’s to do with the restraints?

Besides this, they need a big stand out coaster (Leviathan could be but we don’t know how it rides yet). I think a Launch Coaster or Raptor is what the park needs, they have a low to the ground “twisty” coaster (JR), kids coaster (SpongeBob), Water Coaster (Storm) and now an airtime filled coaster (Leviathan). adding SR would fill the “unique” gap by having the spinning aspect so by also adding a looping coaster they would be set.

[themagician]

2 hours ago, Jobe said:

Vortex…. The ride is definitely more intense than what Leviathan will be. 👍

Really? I didn’t find vortex intense at all, it was just jolty, uncomfortable and made you want to get off because it’s not enjoyable. Leviathan is going to be one of, if not the most intense ride in the park (Jet Rescue being the current winner)