2nd USH Gate? | Inside Universal Forums
  • 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.

2nd USH Gate?

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
18,792
Arizona
45 acres only means...more simulators!
Not necessarily. Universal Singapore is 40 acres. That park isn't full of simulators.
I would assume that while Screen-based attractions will be expected, I could see a lot more of practical attractions coming along the way for the park, as well as Screen-based ones.

I do think, though; that they should do an IMG for the second gate, for multiple reasons more than one in the terms of having an indoor park in SoCal.

It'd allow them to do a lot more, like controlled environments, indoor rollercoasters/water attractions, and bringing in more unique effects for multiple aspects of the park.

Hell, thinking about it; it could be a perfect opportunity to bring Seuss to a full-scale level in a sense too.
 

Chris

Veteran Member
Jun 23, 2009
2,746
Southern California
If this were to become a reality, I could see the park embrace the indoor aspect heavily. But I would also be interested to see if the Hollywood Sign Gondola would be included as an upcharge attraction within the theme park footprint. Tourist $$$$
 

k_peek_2000

Veteran Member
Jul 2, 2013
2,336
Orange County, CA
If this were to become a reality, I could see the park embrace the indoor aspect heavily. But I would also be interested to see if the Hollywood Sign Gondola would be included as an upcharge attraction within the theme park footprint. Tourist $$$$
Something like Mermaid Lagoon from TDS or IMG could work well. There is also the issue of parking structure sight lines that would be blocked by having a portion of the park indoors.

I would not see them charging for parking, then charging for theme park admission, then charging for admission to the gondola system. That would just be wrong.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
18,792
Arizona
They have a 5 year plan or something?
Since 2010, they've brought multiple attractions; including Transformers, an expanded Despicable Me attraction/play area based on the IP, Springfield getting a proper area, Supercharged on the Studio Tour, Potter, and a TWD-Based walkthrough attraction.
 

GadgetGuru

Premium Member
Dec 2, 2011
2,462
Seattle, WA
On the topic of USH, I've always been curious where they would build this park.

Land is far too expensive for them to buy up a theme park's worth of land. Unless there's some large chunk of relatively undeveloped land they could scoop up at once.

That would leave the backlot. Which is a ton of land they could develop on. But, it seems like Universal has been cutting into the backlot a lot to expand USH. That backlot makes Universal a lot of money and is important towards their movie / television business. They have to leave the majority of it as-is.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
18,792
Arizona
On the topic of USH, I've always been curious where they would build this park.

Land is far too expensive for them to buy up a theme park's worth of land. Unless there's some large chunk of relatively undeveloped land they could scoop up at once.

That would leave the backlot. Which is a ton of land they could develop on. But, it seems like Universal has been cutting into the backlot a lot to expand USH. That backlot makes Universal a lot of money and is important towards their movie / television business. They have to leave the majority of it as-is.
As it is said, if you take out Supercharged, move Falls Lake and the Psycho House, tear down the WoTW/Whoville/Lost World/ other sets; you could theoretically do a theme park on the east side of the property.
 

bob albert

BANNED
Sep 18, 2015
1,710
As it is said, if you take out Supercharged, move Falls Lake and the Psycho House, tear down the WoTW/Whoville/Lost World/ other sets; you could theoretically do a theme park on the east side of the property.
If you cannibalize part of your already small park to add a "second park" you better have a pretty good plan to justify that. Disneyland although small, has a lot of attractions while making a big expansion and still has more land to work with overall although they are close to maxing out. Universal has worse terrain, already relies majorly on parking garages with one park, and would absolutely handicap Both parks by cramming in a second one. You just can only maintain guest satisfaction and capacity with a limited space to a point.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
18,792
Arizona
If you cannibalize part of your already small park to add a "second park" you better have a pretty good plan to justify that. Disneyland although small, has a lot of attractions while making a big expansion and still has more land to work with overall although they are close to maxing out. Universal has worse terrain, already relies majorly on parking garages with one park, and would absolutely handicap Both parks by cramming in a second one. You just can only maintain guest satisfaction and capacity with a limited space to a point.
The backlot, in a sense; isn't fully apart of the main theme park.

Yes, it is through the Studio Tour, but most of the stuff can be moved. Psycho House/Bates was moved.
 

bob albert

BANNED
Sep 18, 2015
1,710
The backlot, in a sense; isn't fully apart of the main theme park.

Yes, it is through the Studio Tour, but most of the stuff can be moved. Psycho House/Bates was moved.
There is a limited amount of land in general. Even if you move around the back lot tour there becomes a point where you don't have enough land to move things and you Have to pick between park/backlot/soundstages. They are already cannibalizing soundstages for park expansion. Maybe additions mean you are forced to get rid of the tram tour even after the recent additions, but that would seem silly given the investment.
 

AlexanderMBush

Legendary Member
Nov 23, 2013
18,792
Arizona
There is a limited amount of land in general. Even if you move around the back lot tour there becomes a point where you don't have enough land to move things and you Have to pick between park/backlot/soundstages. They are already cannibalizing soundstages for park expansion. Maybe additions mean you are forced to get rid of the tram tour even after the recent additions, but that would seem silly given the investment.
There have been rumors for a relocation of the Studio Tour to proceed; in specifics, to the Lower Lot. It's a staple of the park, and it won't be leaving anytime soon.

But, there are way's they can rework the attraction while keeping it at a similar length. It just depends on what they do to ensure it being as long as it is now.

Plus, they are expanding the amount of soundstages on the Red Sea, with more coming if the 2024 Olympics goes to LA (which, it probably will).

Just because they are taking away parts at one location, it doesn't mean it will be completely gone. As said with the Psycho House, it was moved from it's original location to where it was today, and that there is plot for a relocation of Falls Lake. They can move the more important aspects, and keep the tour as it is.
 

k_peek_2000

Veteran Member
Jul 2, 2013
2,336
Orange County, CA
If you cannibalize part of your already small park to add a "second park" you better have a pretty good plan to justify that.
The land in question is not accessible from the current park. So they're not cannibalizing anything except the tail end of the Studio Tour.

Disneyland although small, has a lot of attractions while making a big expansion and still has more land to work with overall although they are close to maxing out.
Disneyland is not small, it's just got a lot of stuff packed in tight and has smaller scaled buildings, so people automatically think its small when they see pictures. The reality is when Star Wars Land opens Disneyland will surpass Magic Kingdom in size by 3 acres.

I'd argue that Disneyland (Park) is more landlocked than USH.

Universal has worse terrain, already relies majorly on parking garages with one park, and would absolutely handicap Both parks by cramming in a second one. You just can only maintain guest satisfaction and capacity with a limited space to a point.
Even on peak days the new ET parking structure doesn't even come close to filling up.

They are already cannibalizing soundstages for park expansion.
They're building 10 (12 if we get the Olympics) new state of the art soundstages on a previously unused part of the lot...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AlexanderMBush

Cheezbat

Veteran Member
Jan 18, 2013
1,455
Orlando Florida
Disneyland is not small, it's just got a lot of stuff packed in tight and has smaller scaled buildings, so people automatically think its small when they see pictures. The reality is when Star Wars Land opens Disneyland will surpass Magic Kingdom in size by 3 acres...
Disneyland is 87 acres. The Magic Kingdom is 107 acres. Even if you include 12 acres for Star Wars land(which doesn't take up all new land...some is old property being repurposed: Rivers of America), that only brings it to 99 acres.
There is way more packed into that park though than MK.