Missing Coaster: Have you seen Turbulence at Hersheypark?

GIANT WHEEL's Last Revolution

One of Hersheypark's most beloved rides in its history was the GIANT WHEEL. By the sound of its name, most people would expect a grand Ferris Wheel, however this is only part of the story. GIANT WHEEL was composed of a cantilevered beam, with two wheels on either side. While one wheel was loading each cabin at ground level, the other wheel was up in the air and rotating around. Each cabin also had the ability to spin through a center wheel, much like a teacup ride. This attraction commenced operation in 1973, and was a fan favorite for over 30 years. GIANT WHEEL had a high capacity, amazing appearance, and could be enjoyed by the whole family (at least those not bothered by heights). Manufactured by Waagner-Biro and sold by Intamin, this attraction was one of four of its type, a rare specialty.

However, the year 2004 marked the end of an era. Hersheypark has decided to retire the GIANT WHEEL in favor of a new attraction. Not only were some critical, expensive components in severe need of replacement, but a lack of parts due to the discontinuation of the model made them what we call in the industry "unobtanium." A 100-foot tall Chance Rides Gondola Wheel was added to the Midway America area of the park in 1997, which also made the GIANT WHEEL essentially a redundant attraction, despite being the more beloved of the two. To honor Milton Hershey, the Carousel Circle area would be revamped for the 2005 attraction, also featuring a world's first.

A New Concept

In the name of innovation, Hersheypark announced "Turbulence," a never-before-seen "freefall tower coaster" on September 27, 2004. Featuring a slim, vertically stacked track design, the coaster did not require a long, sprawling space. It could fit in the space formerly taken up by GIANT WHEEL. Interactive Rides would be responsible for delivering the ride to Hershey, best known for their one-of-a-kind attractions atop the Stratosphere Tower in Las Vegas. Turbulence would be the first ever "Frequent Faller" model ever seen in the industry.

Riders would board one of seven individual four-passenger vehicles. The coaster would ascend a 150-foot tall lift hill before careening down a set of curved drops in a zig-zag motion. Despite the ride's relatively tall height, it would be marketed as a family-friendly attraction, as the cars would not invert riders or travel at a high rate of speed.

Turbulence featured several atypical features from traditional roller coasters, making it a very unique addition to Hersheypark. Some of these include a vertical lift hill, forwards and backwards motion, and vehicles with freely rotating seats. After the announcement of the attraction, it came with mixed reviews; mostly due to skepticism of it being the right choice for the park and whether it was a proper replacement for the popular GIANT WHEEL.

Below is a description of the "Frequent Faller" coaster and some specs from Interactive Rides:

A Turbulent Offseason

Oftentimes a park will post updates and construction pictures of large projects to garner interest and publicity in hopes of intriguing guests to visit the park. However, any talks of Turbulence or its construction quickly cooled off, with no report of its progress from Hersheypark.

Approximately 3 months after the announcement of Turbulence, a news article from the Associated Press came out that Hersheypark was suing Interactive Rides for a breach of contract. Interactive Rides had requested an additional $1.2 million above the original ride purchase price ($2 million), due to a rise in the cost of steel production. It wasn't until recently that I have come across the actual court case detailing the suit and countersuit over the breach of contract, and it actually goes much more in-depth on some of the underlying issues at play between Hershey and Interactive Rides.

Upon initial conversations about the sale of the ride, Interactive Rides informed Hersheypark that they should finalize their order soon, as prices of steel were anticipated to rise almost three times the cost by Fall of that year. However, Interactive Rides waited until October to actually quote and order the steel for fabrication, leading to a rise in price. Interactive Rides falsely told Hershey that an early agreement to start production would "lock in" the steel price with their provider. It came out in the judicial proceedings that the steel provider would not "hold" pricing, and only provide a final value once a quote and order were submitted, which Interactive Rides failed to do in a timely manner.

Despite their claims of holding true to the original sale price, even though they expected to lose money on the prototype, Interactive Rides asked to negotiate the rise in cost. Several options were considered, including contracting the steel fabrication overseas or removing a ride vehicle from the coaster to keep the costs to a minimum. Hershey refused to pay the first production payments for the ride due to a lack of progress from Interactive Rides. They were unable to supply finalized drawings, attempted to negotiate alterations to the ride and a rise in price, and were running far behind on the project.

The US District Court holding the proceedings decided in favor of Hershey on the matter, as they felt that Interactive Rides falsely made claims about the pricing and steel production as an attempt to simply lure Hershey to sign the contract. It is likely (although not confirmed) that Interactive Rides possibly were unlikely able to --or knowingly able to-- meet the agreed pricing or time schedule originally agreed upon. They simply wanted to sign with a well-known park to build their first-ever roller coaster, and get the model running so that it could be more marketable to other customers. From another perspective, Interactive Rides may have been a little bit over their heads, not familiar with the true costs of producing such a large attraction.

Interactive Rides had offered the Frequent Faller model with a ladder for maintenance and evacuation purposes, but quite obviously a ladder is an insufficient means of evacuating riders from a 150-foot tall attraction. Hershey requested a safer means of access, and Interactive Rides offered that in the form of a man-lift or movable platform for these purposes. Catwalks and spiral staircases were also considered, however Hershey decided to front the bill for the upcharge safety measures. Interactive Rides said that one of the reasons that they could not supply finalized drawings was due to Hershey's request for this system. Hershey did not provide technical information or drawings of the man-lift system for Interactive Rides to complete the final schematics. This issue also created uncertainty over the ride for Hershey.

Aftermath

Hersheypark quickly cut ties with Interactive Rides over the breach of contract, and decided to cancel the installation of Turbulence. Left with a hole in the plans for the replacement of GIANT WHEEL and the renovation of the Carousel Circle area, Hershey decided to bring two rides out of retirement. Starship America and Balloon Flite were in storage, both recently removed from Hersheypark. They were quickly rehabbed, and reinstalled in the space meant for Turbulence. Although not a major coaster, the two beloved rides would certainly fill the shoes of being family-friendly. The plans for Turbulence were never to be revisited by the park.

As for Interactive Rides, the controversy with Hershey was certainly a dose of bad PR, and nobody decided to ever buy a Frequent Faller coaster. In fact, the manufacturer did not see much success, finally closing in 2022. They will remain relevant to some for their additions to the Las Vegas Stratosphere, but other than that they are only responsible for a few one-off rides here and there.

Frequent Faller may have been an inspiration for a couple of future coaster models that would not debut until at least 10 years after Turbulence's cancellation. The S&S 4D Free Spin model is a much more thrilling version of the stacked track design. With these vehicles, hourly capacity was increased as were the thrills as the seats could flip around 360 degrees. At the time of this writing, 12 have been produced worldwide.

Ride Engineers Switzerland has released a model called the Roller Ball, which appears very similar to the original Frequent Faller. Since 2018, 5 models have been produced for parks, with more currently operating on the fair circuit. Watching some POVs of the operating models, it seems as though the drop sections are heavily braked, not only to restrict rotation of the ride vehicle, but also to keep the ride family attractions. It is possible, though not confirmed, that Interactive Rides sold off the rights and design of the Frequent Faller to Ride Engineers, who clearly have had more success with the sale of the model.

Thoughts

In my mind, it is a good thing that Turbulence did not come to fruition at Hersheypark. While not a costly addition, it certainly would not have been a success for the park. It would have been very aesthetically unpleasing right in the front of the park in a very classic area. In addition, it would have likely become unpopular very quickly. The 150-foot tall structure would appear too tall for many families to dare riding, yet its slow speed would not be exciting enough for thrill-seekers. Hersheypark was in a similar situation when they installed the prototype Roller Soaker, which had only lasted 10 years. With a low hourly capacity, Turbulece would likely have had long waits for a disappointing experience. Turbulence just never really fit in with Hershey's formula for large additions.

As far as the dispute with Interactive Rides goes, it's quite clear the issues at play had just piled up too much for Hershey to continue to deal with. It seems like Hershey tried everything in their power to keep the project moving forward with the goal of installing the park's 11th coaster. Pricing concerns aside, it is quite possible that the straw that broke the camel's back for the park was the lack of credibility from Interactive Rides over if they could actually produce the ride. The lack of finalized drawings and a working prototype is troubling for parks, who need very clear and concise information to build attractions properly.

During my tenure in the industry, I have dealt with a few cancelled attractions myself. Lack of credibility was the cause of one. One season, our park decided to update an older tracked ride with new theming, vehicles, etc. We had contacted a company overseas who had promised to deliver larger-than-life animatronics for this project. As time went on, the scope of the project had begun to shrink. They could only promise to deliver a certain amount of these props by the park's opening day, with several of the most spectacular ones delayed. After talking to some of the properties that worked with the same company, they revealed some technical issues as well as underwhelming performance from the upgrade.

Between broken communication, failure to meet deadlines, and a general feeling of skepticism whether or not the company would come through for us, we decided not to move forward with the project. This is possibly the same feeling that Hershey had to ultimately decide to break ties with Interactive Rides. You would be surprised how often this happens in the amusement industry.

External Links:

- Court case between Hershey and Interactive Rides

- Wayback Machine link to Interactive Rides