• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Toxicator: General Discussion

JAperson said:
Is it bad that we are at the point where I'm impressed they themed the sheets, as opposed to just throwing a black sheet down and being done with it? 😂
Click to expand...
I heard John Burton had them lying around his garden covering his garden furniture. Luckily with the recent hot weather he didn’t need them anymore.

It’s laughable about these fountains - again another instance of an issue that should’ve been sorted over the closed season. It’s whether they actually bother to get the fountains working again or whether they become an ornament.
 
Jb85 said:
I’m no expert but it cannot be difficult to get fountains working and keep water clean.

Another sign of ‘can’t be arsed’ by management.

Was aiming in going to the towers next week for the first time this season. Tempted to go to Paultons instead
Click to expand...

Again we seem to be making assumptions, the place is bad enough without us making stuff up.

I suspect the reasoning is less technical/ water cleanliness and more they just want no water elements running until May. Why I don’t know 🤷‍♂️
 
It is a strange one. I don't like the fountains being used to soak you (and those unfortunate enough to be stood beneath the ride) as I just think that is unnecessary. But there's no obvious reason why they couldn't be on for decorative effect at all times. I guess whatever the reason they think it looks better to have them covered up than to have them showing but off.
 
The poor design and the way the water couldn't stay in the pit probably meant it was getting into the walls and stuff underneath the pit. It was probably causing damage. I'm going to be the pessimist here and think it's likely they won't return. I want to be wrong and hope I am!
 
The whole inception of Toxicator was over designed in my opinion, from the raised concrete position to the water. I get that it all adds to the experience, both on and off ride, and that if you’re going to bring new things in that you want them to a high standard rather than half baked. But it’s a park that is struggling to get the basics right at the moment, and a park that is struggling to keep on top of maintenance, so it’s just another issue to add to a long list.
 
I have to admit the decision and cost to raise the ride on these concrete pillars did confuse me when the area Ripsaw one occupied was probably big enough to host the ride. I guess towers wanted it to have more of a visual impact given half the riders would board facing the trees at the rear. Though I suppose some facia/teeming could have been put there.
 
GaryH said:
I have to admit the decision and cost to raise the ride on these concrete pillars did confuse me when the area Ripsaw one occupied was probably big enough to host the ride. I guess towers wanted it to have more of a visual impact given half the riders would board facing the trees at the rear. Though I suppose some facia/teeming could have been put there.
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that this model of Topspin was too large to fit exactly where Ripsaw was, hence it was rotated and raised (I guess not raising it would have compromised that pathway too much).
 
Rob said:
It is my understanding that this model of Topspin was too large to fit exactly where Ripsaw was, hence it was rotated and raised (I guess not raising it would have compromised that pathway too much).
Click to expand...

I am not so sure that was the reason, I am sure the floorless version is more compact than the non floorless model.

A quick look on the Huss website indeed confirms this is the case.

It states that the classic model, aka Ripsaw, has a footprint of 22 x 11.5m. Whilst the suspended model, aka Toxicator, has a footprint of 22 x 9m. I always thought Toxicator looks less 'beefy' than Ripsaw, this data confirms it.

The classic model is also taller, 16.5m vs the current 13.2m for Toxicator.

With that in mind, I would say that Toxicator would have comfortably fit into Ripsaws old location with room to spare.

My guess is they put it where it was to differentiate it from Ripsaw, more distinctly than just putting a floorless model in it's place would have done. Which in fairness you can objectively quantify that it is more distinct from Ripsaw, placed where it is now rather than if it took Ripsaws old footprint.
 
Last edited:
I might be wrong, but I thought that one of the main differences between Toxicator and Ripsaw was the fact that the rows on Toxicator face in opposite directions, and thus the decision was made to rotate it by 90 degrees in order to provide better views for the 'back' row - but, for some reason, the ground wasn't strong enough and thus it had to be elevated?

(Attraction Source went into detail with the project manager regarding the plinth construction, but - unfortunately - I don't think the presentation is online)

I might be completely wrong, though, and perhaps the elevation was simply so that AT would have a cheap way of increasing the height of the ride, without asking Huss to design a custom length.

Regarding the water potentially damaging Toxicator: if this is the case then it speaks very poorly of AT and Huss, as this was one of the problems with the fountains on Ripsaw, and so they surely should have learned their lesson from this.
 
I would much rather they were in use in decorative mode too, but if for whatever reason they can’t be, I am glad they are now covered. They looked awful the other week! So dirty and full of leaves etc. Such a shame as it really did add to the ride experience last year, even if they didn’t get us wet.

Does anyone else much prefer one side to the other? Galactica facing is definitely my preference, but only have had the other side so far this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top