Which ‘worst’ era of Alton Towers do you think is better than the other?

[Fammy]

Ok who’s **** is worse, Merlin’s or DIC’s?

 

[Trooper Looper]

I'll pick DIC over Merlin any day. At least ot still had decent food offering and not everything was horror themed. The lesser of the two evils. Not great, but not terrible.

That and I don't recall them firing most of their actors and other departments on such a scale. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

[Dave]

I'll pick DIC over Merlin any day. At least ot still had decent food offering and not everything was horror themed. The lesser of the two evils. Not great, but not terrible.

That and I don't recall them firing most of their actors and other departments on such a scale. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

DIC didn’t install much and one of the things they did install was horror themed (and the other themed to poo), they didn’t really have any ents either, fairly sure Scarefest was outsourced at that time.

Food wasn’t that great, there was actually a boost in food quality when Merlin took over that then dropped like a stone.

It’s hard to see Merlin as one phase of ownership as it’s really had three distinct phases with very differing benefits/ negatives, I would argue up to now the worst Merlin era was when it was publicly owned, but I am nervous about the coming season.

 

[Trooper Looper]

DIC didn’t install much and one of the things they did install was horror themed (and the other themed to poo), they didn’t really have any ents either, fairly sure Scarefest was outsourced at that time.

Food wasn’t that great, there was actually a boost in food quality when Merlin took over that then dropped like a stone.

It’s hard to see Merlin as one phase of ownership as it’s really had three distinct phases with very differing benefits/ negatives, I would argue up to now the worst Merlin era was when it was publicly owned, but I am nervous about the coming season.

Okay, I take back what I've said above. Had no idea that DIC had reputation like this. I knew they weren't exactly well liked by many, but with how you've described it, they sound no better than Merlin now. I have heard that in the first couple of years, Merlin was quite an improvement over them, and looking back, it's quite evident that they did try and put effort into the park then. Shame it didn't last that long.

It could be just me, but I actually (controversially) just about prefer Merlin when it was publicly owned over where they're currently at. They did give us Wicker Man, which I will forever be thankful of, and they did that Towers TLC program, which I always liked what they did with Oblivion, Nemesis, and Duel aside from lighting. My only real gripe with Public Merlin was the removal of Ripsaw and redoing air to Galactica, and Closing Charlie And The Chocolate Factory. I did like the addition of The Roller Coaster restaurant though. That was a highlight for me when I was younger haha.

 

[Zeock]

I don't imagine that modern Merlin would have destroyed Ug Land in the way that DIC did in 2005. We have also recently had the Nemesis retrack, which was a substantial investment on an old ride that I don't think DIC would have done.

 

[East Coast Mariner]

The DIC era just reminds me of a certain lack of ambition, and a sharp fall from peak Tussauds, which had been there not too long beforehand. I remember being really disappointed at how the rides weren't so carefully done any more. Rightly or wrongly, I feel their different approach robbed us of a really good SW6 in 2006, which may well have been another B&M.

Merlin, on the other hand, whilst there are things I'm not keen on, I'll always regard them quite highly for the addition of Wicker Man. If we're talking post-2020, I don't think it's always appreciated how challenging the socio-economic situation is in general. In other words, Merlin are not bad custodians of the park considering the times we're in.

 

[Ash]

They were both bad?

DIC additions of Rita, Spinball and literal rubbish. Haunted hollow etc. Unthemed awfulness. There’s no comparison to Wickerman, TCAAM, Nemesis: Reborn.

But Alton (along with most of the UK) died in 1998 when Charterhouse bought Tussauds. Venture capital has destroyed this country over time it can’t run anything. It’s when the shitification began with the bean counters.

How we get out of the malaise is for another day

 

[Hid]

One factor that if The Smiler hadn't had the accident Merlin probably would of continued to invest heavily into other things if that didn't muck things up. After 2015 the filler lineup was decimated with so many rides closing at once only 1992 had more removals in one year than 2015

DIC also removed Toyland Tours, Black Hole (Area left dormant), And Hall of the Mountain King was not used during those years to

 

[Alfredo]

DIC also removed Toyland Tours, Black Hole (Area left dormant), And Hall of the Mountain King was not used during those years to

I thought black hole closed because it didn't meet modern safety standards or something like that?

 

[rob666]

I think it was the lack of accessibility on the escape platform for breakdowns.

 

[Jb85]

I think it was the lack of accessibility on the escape platform for breakdowns.

Correct - the remedial works were deemed unjustifiable so they closed the ride

 

[evilcod]

2005-2007 were in my opinion the worst seasons Alton Towers have ever had and will take some beating as cost cutting decisions made in those years ruined parts of the park that are still awful to this day, granted Merlin should have fixed them by now but the DICs are to blame.

 

[Secret Weapon]

I think it was the lack of accessibility on the escape platform for breakdowns

I might be wrong, but I think the issues were at least partly because The Black Hole was indoor ride, and thus AT needed to provide fire escape routes, et cetera?

In which case: I always wondered why Alton Towers didn't just remove the tent, so that they could continue operating The Black Hole outdoors (similar to The New Beast) ?

Instead, they took the opposite approach (remove the ride, but not the tent!).

I realise that the ride was becoming dated anyway, but - given that the site remained unused for another 8 years - surely they could have at least continued operating it in the meantime?

 

[rob666]

I don't think the tent mattered one jot.
What mattered was getting people down from the emergency stop platform mid ride if there was an incident...only steep stair access.
And I don't think it was a matter of "just" removing the tent, you had to remove the ride to drop the tent I think.

 

[Jb85]

I might be wrong, but I think the issues were at least partly because The Black Hole was indoor ride, and thus AT needed to provide fire escape routes, et cetera?

In which case: I always wondered why Alton Towers didn't just remove the tent, so that they could continue operating The Black Hole outdoors (similar to The New Beast) ?

Instead, they took the opposite approach (remove the ride, but not the tent!).

I realise that the ride was becoming dated anyway, but - given that the site remained unused for another 8 years - surely they could have at least continued operating it in the meantime?

I’m pretty sure based on many rumours at the time - but have no evidence - the plan was not to leave the tent unused for 8 years

 

[Squiggs]

I’m pretty sure based on many rumours at the time - but have no evidence - the plan was not to leave the tent unused for 8 years

Here's the evidence you're looking for these are all concepts produced for the Blackhole tent between its closure and demolition:

• Area 51
• Duelling Deadstars
• Robocoaster

I don't think the tent mattered one jot.

As I recall, the tent was actually key to the whole situation. It meant that the evacuation policy for the Blackhole was that of a building rather than the ride, which I believe made the requirements more stringent due to a change in legislation.

 

[DistortAMG]

Going back and jogging my memory, I am sure they needed to provide evacuation platforms at points on the lift which did not revolve round the guests walking down the spiral stairs as they had done for many years. The original escape method was deemed too long of an escape to walk down the spiral lift in case of a fire, so something quicker was required, especially considering how quickly smoke fills indoor spaces.

With the relatively recent (a decade or so before) Jules Verne / Steampunk style station theming and other props that were added, it could have made the smoke aspect worse in the event of a fire. This is conjecture and speculation on my part, but I am sure this is part of the specifics of what work was needed. I do remember getting some details on it back in the mid 2000's.

This work would have needed to install steel bridges, steel platforms, walk ways and supporting equipment, from different points on the lift, going out of the dome walls part of the tent, onto the earth embankments which surrounded that part of the tent, as we know, Tussauds deemed this too expensive.

But the idea of the works was to get people off the lift and away from the building as quickly as possible, not down the lift and then through the building and out of escape routes which was the method used since the rides creation. Times change, the ride changed and legislation changed however, all contributing to making this work essential for the ride to be allowed to operate any longer.

 

[Secret Weapon]

And I don't think it was a matter of "just" removing the tent, you had to remove the ride to drop the tent I think.

That’s interesting; I did not know that the ride had to be removed before the tent; if anything, I’d have assumed the opposite, as there is a photograph from the 1980s of the ride sitting outdoors in the winter, with no tent around it at all !

I wonder why this was; was it the case that the tent was welded together (rather than bolted together), and thus the tent had to be cut to pieces (rather than unscrewed), which could cause swarf debris to contaminate the ride hardware? Were they just worried that pieces might accidentally fall onto the track? Were parts of the ride (e.g. the electronics) not water-proof?

I initially thought that perhaps it was due to access (e.g. needing space for scaffolding inside the tent), but this doesn’t explain how the tent was installed around the ride in the first place?

I’m pretty sure based on many rumours at the time - but have no evidence - the plan was not to leave the tent unused for 8 years

I think you are right; according to a discussion that I had on this forum a few months ago (link: https://towersstreet.com/talk/threads/future-flat-ride-speculation.7437/page-9#post-515573 ), there were apparently a few other plans for the tent (besides scare mazes), such as a series or flat rides, or a dark ride similar to Nemesis Sub Terra.

(UPDATE: I've just seen that Squiggs has already posted the links!).

As I recall, the tent was actually key to the whole situation. It meant that the evacuation policy for the Blackhole was that of a building rather than the ride, which I believe made the requirements more stringent due to a change in legislation.

I wonder if that's why it was kept outdoors after its relocation to Sweden?

 

[DistortAMG]

The tent and ride were separate. They were not structurally linked at all. This is why there are photos of the ride without the tent and then at the end, the tent without the ride.

I *think* they may have had some sort of plans to re use the tent after Black Hole, so the ride was removed within the tent, the plans never fully came to be however, with only minor uses for the tent afterwards. It is possible they had no idea at all, but it was better to keep the tent in case they were going to find a use for it, such as the excellent photos @Squiggs has posted. I do not think we will ever know if the plans were significant or just blue sky thinking. But once the tent was removed, it would be much harder / nearly impossible to bring it back in it's original form, than just keeping in situ just in case they were going to use it. But that in itself was probably not an indication of significant plans, more than the fact it was cheaper in the short term to keep it in place while they decided it's future.

IIRC the tent was bolted together, like any large steel based structure, bolting is usually the preferred method for many reasons, this was no exception. Especially in those days, when welding technology was not what it is today.

Some good photos here of the deconstruction of the ride inside the tent on TT.
Also some better photos here on the old ATA.

 

[jon81uk]

Going back and jogging my memory, I am sure they needed to provide evacuation platforms at points on the lift which did not revolve round the guests walking down the spiral stairs as they had done for many years. The original escape method was deemed too long of an escape to walk down the spiral lift in case of a fire, so something quicker was required, especially considering how quickly smoke fills indoor spaces.

My memory is the same, the issue was the ride operators would need to walk up the spiral lift hill to release the restraint and then walk all the guests off the ride safely and out the building and it was seen that would take too long and the building (tent) will be full of smoke if there is a fire.

The other Black Hole fact I remember from going to the finale event is that is originally didn’t have restraints but they were added because if the lift hill stopped then guests could exit the car on the left unsupervised in the dark and when the evacuation platform was on the right, obviously exit to the left could be an issue.