Future of Dragon Challenge?
- Thread starter Scott W.
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
- Status
Sure, but that's not gonna happen. It's going to be a single ride, and all I've ever heard is the land will still be a coaster.
Even if they don't build a dark ride straight away, it could give them the option to do so at a later date. Adding an expansion pad at IOA would be a wise move for the future.
I don't think it's going to add an expansion pad. Whatever replaces Dragons will probably still take up the entirety.
That is a lot of space to fill. Even as stands now with 2 coasters, it's pretty bare.
I mean, it's bare in that the space under the coaster is empty. But you can't really put anything there
The options are coaster or coasters. I'd rather have 2 instead of 1...better capacity.
Right now DC runs with only 1-2 trains on either track. If you run 2-3 trains on another coaster, you make up for the lost capacity. Not to mention, when I go in September/October, most trains run empty. Capacity doesn't mean much if it isn't being maximized.
Even some greenery would suffice.
I think Kong could offset any capacity issues in that general area.
But why lose capacity? If they are going to replace them both with another coaster, I'd assume it's to add a great hall restaurant or at least something else they see value in. To just remove it to just add something with half the capacity makes no sense to me. As they move forward, capacity in the parks is going to become an issue.
The only kind of coaster id want to see replace Dragon Challenge would be a bigger invert thats highly themed. I don't see that happening.
- Jan 30, 2013
- 1,984
- 4,849
From what I've gathered from Skip, capacity isn't the issue. Jo is the issue. She allowed it because of the limited initial budget, but now wants its gone. Could be misreading the situation.
I took that post as speculation, but it could very well be the case. There may not be enough room between the coasters to theme them enough for her to be pleased. If so, I'd still think they'd want to be judicious with a new coaster layout and make room for something else.
ie - if they tear out DD and don't build a Great hall restaurant, I'll be pissed. lol
If they think it's time to replace it, then the lose of capacity won't be as big of an issue. Putting a new Harry Potter attraction in will get people through the turnstiles.
- Sep 18, 2015
- 1,706
- 1,335
The coasters capacity is limited by the metal detectors so right now having two feels like a waste of space.
Actually, that emphasizes my point. It's not about drawing more people in. It's about what you do with them once they are there. A new Harry Potter ride will draw additional people in, but they'll have less capacity to deal with them. By capacity, I'm referring to total riders per hour in the entire resort. This can also be Restaurants or areas like Diagon that tie people up. But those coasters are people eaters and getting rid of one of them when you are attracting additional people to the parks just doesn't seem like the best idea to me.
Last edited:
- Dec 2, 2015
- 142
- 171
If they're building one coaster, they ought to base it on an actual Triwizard Tournament.
Castle ruins, some elaborate rockwork, lagoon, some fog, lots of trees/shrubs (Forbidden Forest), a maze w/ close encounters and a big graveyard show scene (indoors).
It gives Universal a chance to build their own equivalent of Disney's "Mountains" and vastly improve WWOHP.
Castle ruins, some elaborate rockwork, lagoon, some fog, lots of trees/shrubs (Forbidden Forest), a maze w/ close encounters and a big graveyard show scene (indoors).
It gives Universal a chance to build their own equivalent of Disney's "Mountains" and vastly improve WWOHP.
- Jul 18, 2008
- 6,811
- 5,669
Honestly, I was thinking about this recently.. If Disney and other parks don't care about capacity, why does Universal? Universal keeps adding capacity-conscious attractions while all of Disney's latest minus Mermaid have been built to handle way less people then parks earning 8-20 million visitors should. They're finally remedying Soarin' and Toy Story Mania by adding a third theater and track (8-10 years later but alas..), but they still get millions more visitors than a Universal park.
Universal is the one that actually sells Express, either with the hotels or charging per visitor. They actually have more to gain financially by making attractions less accessible to guests, even forcing them to add days onto their tickets. Why should Universal make it so easy to be the park that's added onto a Disney vacation and get so much bang for your buck in 1 or 2 days?
More capacity also means more people meandering from ride to ride instead of staying in line increasing sales of merchandise etc. When you stand in line for an hour, you spend more time rushing to your next thing so you feel you accomplished something in a day. When you feel that all lines are reasonable, people are more willing to take their time and when people slow down, they spend more money because they notice more things like the butterbeer cart or the candy shop etc.
If they're not going to build another coaster in its place, I would truly hope for a dark ride with animatronics or a water based(boat) ride. Potter already has 3 screen based attractions and any more would be too much to me.
- Status
Book with our Travel Partners
Latest posts
-
This Just In - Current USH Happenings- Latest: AlexanderMBush
-
-
-
