Dano46610

Was Storm Coaster worth the money?

26 posts in this topic

I'm pretty sure the answer from most people will be no. I enjoy it with my nieces but that's about it, its not thrilling, its short, the only thing I like about it is how smooth it is on the coaster track, if it was longer perhaps it would of been worth while, the one in europa park known as "Poseidon" is a much better example of what the ride should be like. Storm is a ride that tries to fit a log ride with a coaster but ultimately fails for the price tag it was imo, the ride would be allot better if it was longer and had a lower height requirement so that a smaller audience can enjoy it rather than older ones who haven't really got much appeal to such a ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Brad2912 said:

? And where was the carpark going? Under the Bermuda volcano? 

It was supposed to go where the new helicopter centre and the penguin encounter is 

I think it’s a good attraction for the park. It was not a good replacement for what was there beforehand. They classify it as a family coaster, which is definitely is. The track section is fine. The most disappointing part for me is the river part after the splash down. It just ends, when it should have snaked a little and built up suspension. And the load and unload should not be right next to each other because that ruins the point of the story they build. The ship is supposed to be flipped, but the sign and other theming is the right way up.

Edited by themagician
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the attraction was a decent choice (Once upon a time, everyone wanted a water coaster at SW remember), but the theming concept is just so weird. Like a collection of nautical stuff outside because a cyclone has hit a port, fair enough, bit inside, is it meant to be a ships interior, or inside a warehouse or what?

Also, it seemed like they were so intent to re-use the bermuda building that they basically lost what should have been a major social media selling point.

Everyone who goes to MW takes a photo of WWF splashing down, or at Universal of Jurassic Park splashing down.

These are very popular rides, and storm should have had the same impact.

But instead the Splashdown is hidden inside, so it looks like a generic roller coaster, and it's quite difficult to sell the idea of the water coaster.

 

If i may pose a second question @Dano46610 , would people like it more if it was just done like the one at Djurs

https://rcdb.com/9377.htm#p=35031

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, djrappa said:

But for a 20 million investment they ultimately ended up with a worse attraction than it replaced which fatal story/theming flaws, less capacity and not as family friendly. 
 

So I say it’s not worth the money. 
You could plonk that same ride on an open pad and it would be just as good. 

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTfiF_G4jf5IQuO_KxHh43

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, A.H said:

This might sound stupid, but the coaster would be much longer if Jet rescue wasn't built. Jet rescue took space and money away from from the rides footprint. (Yes I'm aware Jet rescue was built after storm.)

Jet rescue opened in 2008 and storm opened in 2013, so the ride didn’t take away from its footprint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, A.H said:

This might sound stupid, but the coaster would be much longer if Jet rescue wasn't built. Jet rescue took space and money away from from the rides footprint. (Yes I'm aware Jet rescue was built after storm.)

And I would much rather JR over Storm. JR is one of the best coasters on the GC

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 13/01/2020 at 10:20 AM, Gazza said:

No it wasn't.

Whooops (that was embarrasing).

Anyway I should have elaborated. What I meant was that Jet rescue could/should have been built in the Corkscrew/Sea viper space so that Storm could have taken up the Jet Rescue footprint. While this would have meant that Corkscrew/Sea Viper would have retired a bit earlier and that the new Leviathan would have less space, Storm would have a longer ride time/experience. (Of course this would mean more money required by VRTP which at the time was not an option.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/01/2020 at 1:21 AM, A.H said:

Whooops (that was embarrasing).

Anyway I should have elaborated. What I meant was that Jet rescue could/should have been built in the Corkscrew/Sea viper space so that Storm could have taken up the Jet Rescue footprint. While this would have meant that Corkscrew/Sea Viper would have retired a bit earlier and that the new Leviathan would have less space, Storm would have a longer ride time/experience. (Of course this would mean more money required by VRTP which at the time was not an option.)

So if they had the money, and if they retired a coaster which at that point they had no intention of retiring, and if they installed jet rescue elsewhere, and if they built

So IF they build Jet Rescue on vipers space, IF they retired Viper - which at that point they had no intention of retiring, and IF they built storm over the current JR footprint, IF they had enough money for it, IF they were ok with taking up space now earmarked for Leviathan which at that point they'd have had no clue about building, we could have had a bigger water coaster? is that it?

If your Aunty had balls she'd be your uncle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Parkz Crew

    Support Parkz... join the Crew for:

    • Ad-banner free viewing
    • Parkz Crew profile badge
    • Extended editing
    • See who's liked your posts
    • Purchase discounts

    Join Now from $20/yr

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.