• 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.

2017/18: SW8 Speculation

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
MaxPower said:
Some of my friends who have visited assume that the new ride will be called SW8, pronouncing it SWAIT. I think the SW tag is completely lost on most guests.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with this. I said to my Mum that Towers' next major investment is nicknamed SW8 and she thought it meant South West 8, which the postcode for Vauxhall in London.
 
The path that runs under the lift hill and alongside the coaster is usually opened for Scarefest and Fireworks - could we see this being made a permanent route to Gloomy Wood? I can easily imagine seeing the train launch over and then dive under the path as a great photo opportunity. Plus, it would give great views of the coaster, and would work as a genuine shortcut if indeed this does lead to the closure of Haunted Hollow in favor of a queue line. Could even be room for a flat up by the turnaround (that part may be wishful thinking).
 
"New ride" could mean anything. "SW8" makes it seem like something more, something important, maybe something big. It's a talking point, whether you're an enthusiast or a passer by it does get you wondering what will be new at Alton Towers soon.

Obviously it's more aimed at us lot, although it is a project title and I find it's more useful to tease new rides with project titles to gauge more interest.

As for this ride using the SW title. I don't see the problem really. It's a big project, and I like the big projects using the SW title personally. At the end of the day does it really matter?
 
BarryZola said:
Yeah, I get the need for the banner pointing out that there is a new ride coming, but that could have been achieved without also having SW8 in large writing on the banner. But you have also pointed out that this may be aimed at enthusiasts only. I am being very picky, but if they did make a point of putting SW8 on the banner for geeks only, then most geeks would instantly associate that with some mega new thing coming, which may or may not be the case. I don't really know if I'm actually trying to make any point at all to be honest, I just think they could have completely left SW8 off the banner altogether, especially if the ride turns out to not be very good. I don't really know what I'm going on about, but it would probably go back to an argument about what SW's are supposed to represent. And I really can't be bothered :confused:
Click to expand...

BarryZola said:
Yeah, but my point was partly that a banner saying there was a new ride coming would have sufficed, and we would have got the message. I was merely pondering the need for the massive SW8 on the banner also, when most visitors don't really know or care what SW is. Like I said, I'm not even bothered enough to go into it any further, but I feel that you're slightly missing the pointless point that I was mentioning :)
Click to expand...

I think that was my point.... I have no problem with this behind an SW really it's just not, or doesn't appear to be, in the same vein as the SW's were originally meant to be. What will be will be I guess. We may yet get our killer woodie but some how I think we will be disappointed. The layout suggested looks tame, but it could be saved by an inversion or two and a launch
 
Hasn't an LSM/LIM launch like Dollywood's coaster been ruled before due to the park's lacklustre electricity supply?
 
TedTheHuman said:
I said to my Mum that Towers' next major investment is nicknamed SW8 and she thought it meant South West 8, which the postcode for Vauxhall in London.
Click to expand...

Vauxhall, its a clue. It going to be a vehicle themed ride :D



Sent from my SM-T210 using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
The SW tag carries a huge amount of weight. Misuse it too often and it loses that.

I don't think a family woody could be seen as groundbreaking, or SW calibre.

Even if the layout looks disappointingly small, there has to be something new, unique or spectacular about this.

Just hope the new guys know what they are doing...

Oh sod it.. I'll just say what we're all thinking.

We want Wardley!
We want Wardley!
We want Wardley!

Just do or pay whatever it takes to get him back, give him full creative control, like in 1994, light the blue touchpaper and stand back.
 
Last edited:
Altonadvocate1 said:
The SW tag carries a huge amount of weight. Misuse it too often and it loses that.

I don't think a family woody could be seen as groundbreaking, or SW calibre.

Even if the layout looks disappointingly small, there has to be something new, unique or spectacular about this.

Just hope the new guys know what they are doing...

Oh sod it.. I'll just say what we're all thinking.

We want Wardley!
We want Wardley!
We want Wardley!

Just do or pay whatever it takes to get him back, give him full creative control, like in 1994, light the blue touchpaper and stand back.
Click to expand...
Actually, I'm sure wardley has designed some woodies for towers that never materialized. Surely it would still count as his input if they were to borrow some of the old shelved ideas or themes.
 
I would be quite happy if this is a family attraction, but the theming needs to be seriously good.

The park should focus on getting families back, but the last thing they need is ride which over promises and under delivers.
 
Leah said:
Actually, I'm sure wardley has designed some woodies for towers that never materialized. Surely it would still count as his input if they were to borrow some of the old shelved ideas or themes.
Click to expand...
His cross valley woody design was absolutely epic, but would never get planning permission.

I'm sure I've seen a transcript where JW said he had designed over a dozen wooden for AT, but I can't remember where.

Maybe this is a JW design, but I can't help thinking it doesn't look like JW.

Of course this is me making a quick judgement from very limited information.

Here's hoping that when we see the full plans we will all be won over.

Even Nemesis may not look amazing from an brief, simply drawn, overhead perspective.
 
Altonadvocate1 said:
His cross valley woody design was absolutely epic, but would never get planning permission.

I'm sure I've seen a transcript where JW said he had designed over a dozen wooden for AT, but I can't remember where.

Maybe this is a JW design, but I can't help thinking it doesn't look like JW.

Of course this is me making a quick judgement from very limited information.

Here's hoping that when we see the full plans we will all be won over.

Even Nemesis may not look amazing from an brief, simply drawn, overhead perspective.
Click to expand...
This might not be the final layout, so I wouldn't completely rule out a coaster at least based on a wardley layout. Even if it's not though, one of his themes or concepts could still be used if he came up with any.
 
DaveWWFC said:
Sure Wardley mentioned a 'spooky circus woodie' at one of his talks - not sure if it was intended for Towers or not. Would love to have seen plans/concepts for that!
Click to expand...

Yeah that was for Towers. I'm not sure where in the park it was planned, although Candy Holland created the concept. It sounded pretty interesting.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top