General Carowinds discussion
By Cameron
#104799
RRR use to have a waterfall at the end of the cave so every pretty much got drenched. Wasn't always working but I remember it well lol.

That waterfall as you go around the curve use to get half the boat drenched if not most until the path was moved like 4ft over so now it's just decorative.

I'm in between on the attraction. I'd be more than happy if it was taken out but I'd welcome a re configuration and maybe have space for something else. Flat ride or even a station for a coaster.
User avatar
By yawetag
#104800
Glitch99 wrote:the lazy river in the waterpark used to have that water curtain coming off the one walkway towards the end. Now, nothing. Has there been a big outrage over such things lately, that I missed?


For a lazy river, I don't expect anything other than the water below me to get me wet. I ride a lazy river to relax (ya know, to be lazy), not to get soaked from a waterfall from above. I wouldn't call it an outrage, but I wouldn't go on the lazy river if I saw the waterfall.
User avatar
By coasterbruh
#104801
Pretty much all lazy and action rivers have some type of water element to them. Be it sprays of waterfalls, I can't think of one that's just a cut and dry lazy river.
By RollerBee
#104802
coasterbruh wrote:Pretty much all lazy and action rivers have some type of water element to them. Be it sprays of waterfalls, I can't think of one that's just a cut and dry lazy river.

Emerald Pointe in Greensboro unless they have changed it has no spray or waterfalls.
User avatar
By fishels
#104805
Cameron wrote:RRR use to have a waterfall at the end of the cave so every pretty much got drenched. Wasn't always working but I remember it well lol.

That waterfall as you go around the curve use to get half the boat drenched if not most until the path was moved like 4ft over so now it's just decorative.

I'm in between on the attraction. I'd be more than happy if it was taken out but I'd welcome a re configuration and maybe have space for something else. Flat ride or even a station for a coaster.

Sorry to be annoying but does anyone have pictures or videos of how it used to be? Very interesting
By uscbandfan
#104807
Glitch99 wrote:
uscbandfan wrote:Anyway, the point here is the fact that some people want to come to the waterpark for a wet day with all the changing of clothes and stuff that goes with it. Other times, some people want to come to the dry park for a dry day and leave the swimwear, towels and pool-gear at home. During the dry visit, it's nice to be able to ride a flume or something similar just to get a splash. People LOVE that. Especially when you can combine it with a ride experience. That's why the water rides are so popular. That's why RRR and WWF and other rides were put in there in the first place.

My point regards the unnecessary bias rooted in your comment. There is no reason to equate "in the waterpark" with "need to change clothes". There is no maximum dress code in the waterpark, where they make you strip down before allowing you thru the gate. Anything appropriate in the dry park can be worn anywhere in the water park as well.

RRR is tucked away in one corner of the park as it is; from a lot of the park it'd actually be closer to walk to a "wet" ride in the waterpark than to RRR. The whole point of wanting waterpark access is to allow swimwear, not require it. Swimwear is appropriate, and preferred by a lot of people, on more than just the rides that result in being submerged in a pool of water.

As I said, they obviously arent going to relocate RRR. And as it sits, RRR couldnt handle any increased demand anyways. But if they were to build a new wet ride, it should be located within the waterpark with the other water.


... and missing my point entirely. I never said it was NECESSARY to strip down in the water park. I've waked through the water park many times in street clothes. To your point about waking to a wet ride in the waterpark, I've never chosen to ride the drop slide in tennis shoes and a pullover though. (Actually don't even think they will let you wear tennis shoes on ANY of the waterpark attractions.) Anyway, my point is that when I go for water rides (whether I also visit the dry park or not), I bring my swimsuit and plan for a wet day and a clothes change. When I go for a dry park only visit, it's nice and quite fun to ride a flume or some other ride to get splashed on. SPLASHED... not full-on submerged. There is not a single attraction in the waterpark that is not 100% submersion. 100% wet attractions belong in the water park... ones that just splash you are quite fun and refreshing to have in the dry park.
By Glitch99
#104808
uscbandfan wrote: Anyway, my point is that when I go for water rides (whether I also visit the dry park or not), I bring my swimsuit and plan for a wet day and a clothes change. When I go for a dry park only visit, it's nice and quite fun to ride a flume or some other ride to get splashed on. SPLASHED... not full-on submerged. There is not a single attraction in the waterpark that is not 100% submersion. 100% wet attractions belong in the water park... ones that just splash you are quite fun and refreshing to have in the dry park.

I know that's your point, and you're missing my own - it doesnt take full submersion to be stuck walking around in wet shoes the rest of the day. A waterpark location gives everyone the option of changing or not changing. A dry park location forces you to take the risk of being soggy all afternoon. The point is, if you want to ride such a wet ride without changing, a waterpark location in no way, shape, or form prevents you from doing so. The only tangible reason for it being in the dry park is to generate additional revenue from that big blow dryer at the exit.
User avatar
By coasterbruh
#104809
But . . . Those dryers just showed up a few years ago.
By Christopher Mallis
#104813
For anybody who is saying they’ll rebuild the rapids-they won’t, most rides like RRR were built back in the day and are sort of well I wouldn’t call them icons, but they just aren’t something that is built as much nowadays. I think the park should just stick with RRR. I do understand that they need space for future attractions and rapids only operates roughly 15 weeks, but say they put a coaster in the RRR spot, what gonna go in the Dino’s plot? At the end of this season (if there is still no announcement about RRR, but there probably will be) there is going to be 2 nicely sized plots of land sitting vacant. While RRR is bigger unlike Dino’s which a portion will be saved for a future camp snoopy expansion, is RRR the best place to put a coaster or is it the Dino’s plot? Who knows...
Oh, all of what I said above is pure speculation based off of what we know/what is almost likely.
By Cameron
#104814
Rapids area can easily be transformed into a new themed area with a few flat rides a restaurant and maybe even a dark ride.

I still would love to see a old like wild west themed area. That troubodours roost show was the best back in the day.

That area could easily hold a restaurant, some shops from local craftsman Iike the glass blowing and leather making shops we once had. A ride or two and the station for a coaster.
By RollerBee
#104815
[quote="Cameron”]That area could easily hold a restaurant, some shops from local craftsman Iike the glass blowing and leather making shops we once had. A ride or two and the station for a coaster.[/quote]

I dare think that Paramount Parks felt like those weren’t profitable anymore, Artisans Alley at Winterfest seemed smaller this season.
User avatar
By coasterbruh
#104818
Christopher Mallis wrote:For anybody who is saying they’ll rebuild the rapids-they won’t


Are you sure about that . . . :wave:

Christopher Mallis wrote:At the end of this season (if there is still no announcement about RRR, but there probably will be)


I am almost pretty sure the park knows exactly what they are doing next year and it won't involve the rapids. From my understanding the park is still brainstorming what to do with the rapids but removing them is not one of the options, as of now. I personally feel they are waiting to see what the reaction will be to Knotts plusing their rapids before making the final judgement calls but I don't see it going the way of white waterfalls.

Let's say they do decide to get rid of it. What could possibly fit on the site? the site the rapids sits on is virtually an Island surrounded by service roads. not to mention the area is basically 3 acres. for comparisons, Copperhead sits on about 5 of the 7 acres sanction for Blue Ridge Junction and we are already complaining about the size of that land.

So yeah, I don't think we will get an announcement on what will happen to the rapids until, at the earliest, the end of 2020 or during the middle of 2020 we may see some teasers like with copperhead.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 23

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests