• 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.

Blackpool Pleasure Beach: 2023 Discussion

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
There could always be an i̶n̶s̶u̶r̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ j̶o̶b̶ accidental big fire, that destroys the ride beyond any economical repair.
 
Sadly I'd imagine the park could point to the fact they spent money on the upkeep of the ride over closed seasons and despite this they are still getting numerous complaints about it and due to the listing they can't do anymore for the ride.
 
DistortAMG said:
There could always be an i̶n̶s̶u̶r̶a̶n̶c̶e̶ j̶o̶b̶ accidental big fire, that destroys the ride beyond any economical repair.
Click to expand...
Surely Blackpool wouldn’t set their own ride alight just for the sake of not having to operate it? Amanda cares about these rides just as much as we do, and any removal would only happen because it wasn’t feasible to operate the ride anymore.
 
The point of wanting it listed in the first place is so that it would still be able to be ridden. If it is becoming uneconomical to be able to maintain and actually keep open then there is no point in it being listed. Baring in mind you can only actually see the station, lifts and final straight into the brakes there would be no point even keeping it to just look at.
The recent partial re-track was likely a last try to see if it was feasible, like with the final efforts with the mouse.
I may be wrong but I think, Unfortunately, an RMC conversion is probably not possible, so eventually it would have to be removed.
 
I don't think they could argue that they've spent money and they are still getting complaints. Towers have to keep spending money on the towers, they can't just go 'well we've spent loads and we keep having to do it'. I know that's not a completely fair comparison but it demonstrates my point. It's the companies job to upkeep it whether it costs a fortune or not.
 
DistortAMG said:
Guys....it was a joke. Emphasised by the fact I used strikethrough text to cross out that insurance job bit :)

Apologies if it never come through that way.
Click to expand...
Ah, sorry… never noticed that.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but; is it only me who feels that listing roller coasters is slightly counterintuitive? I get that rides like Grand National, Big Dipper et al are special to people, and pieces of history, but a roller coaster is rather different to your usual listed structure, like some ruins or something.

Roller coasters are mechanical things that come under intense strain from the g-forces they exert, so likely need far more frequent and costly maintenance than a palace or ruin or whatever. Not to mention that theme parks thrive on innovation and new things; listing a roller coaster works against that ethos of innovation.

If a ride does come to the end of its life for whatever reason, the park cannot remove it and replace it with something new if it’s listed. Surely it’s better to remove a ride at the end of its life than to just leave it to crumble?
 
As someone who has really not enjoyed Nash this season (I must be getting old). This is very interesting. Could some more modern revamp be realistic? GCI Titan Track or RMC perhaps? I imagine either would be a huge investment, new trains would be nice I really hate those long boi PTC things too.

Not sure how common this is but I also witnessed it get stuck on the lift hill earlier this month, with both trains having to evac.
 
Pawkins said:
As someone who has really not enjoyed Nash this season (I must be getting old). This is very interesting. Could some more modern revamp be realistic? GCI Titan Track or RMC perhaps? I imagine either would be a huge investment, new trains would be nice I really hate those long boi PTC things too.

Not sure how common this is but I also witnessed it get stuck on the lift hill earlier this month, with both trains having to evac.
Click to expand...
Whether they could get GCI or RMC would depend on the listing and exactly what is listing. I imagine they could put some titan track on as a way of maintaining it but I doubt an RMC conversion would be possible. I think new trains and titan track from GCI could make the ride really good but I'm not exactly sure if it would be possible or not,
 
JAperson said:
I don't think they could argue that they've spent money and they are still getting complaints. Towers have to keep spending money on the towers, they can't just go 'well we've spent loads and we keep having to do it'. I know that's not a completely fair comparison but it demonstrates my point. It's the companies job to upkeep it whether it costs a fortune or not.
Click to expand...
Towers have to set aside so much per investment to the towers though when applying for a new attraction or installing one. It’s part of the agreement with council/planning to keep them sweet.

I rode Grand National this year and didn’t feel any difference in the retrack. Just too rough for me I’m afraid!
 
Pawkins said:
As someone who has really not enjoyed Nash this season (I must be getting old). This is very interesting. Could some more modern revamp be realistic? GCI Titan Track or RMC perhaps? I imagine either would be a huge investment, new trains would be nice I really hate those long boi PTC things too.

Not sure how common this is but I also witnessed it get stuck on the lift hill earlier this month, with both trains having to evac.
Click to expand...
Our old gits club all approved, but it was your recent comments, and thus...
Excalibur said:
Towers have to set aside so much per investment to the towers though when applying for a new attraction or installing one. It’s part of the agreement with council/planning to keep them sweet.

I rode Grand National this year and didn’t feel any difference in the retrack. Just too rough for me I’m afraid!
Click to expand...
...that means they have economic justification for dialogue about changes.
we have done what we can, but people hate it still...
And the fact it takes half a dozen staff to run, and double the usual morning checks, and has a crap load system, and breaks down every time the operator farts.
 
Listed buildings can still be demolished if the local council agrees. I am pretty sure that if Nash became untenable as a ride then the council would let them demolish it (especially if it was to be replaced by another coaster).

Having said that , I doubt Nash is going anywhere.



Sent from my Pixel 6 Pro using Tapatalk
 
I don’t think the ride is bad in every seat, but there are some seats which are just intolerably rough, Row 3 for instance. I think when a ride is that bad, even if only in certain seats, something really does need to be done with it.

I’d be surprised by a total demolition but I think there’s a reasonable case for planning/English Heritage to approve adjustments. Especially since you could sell that on the basis of extending the ride’s viability. You’d only have to take the planners on a row 3 ride to prove your point.

I’ll take a Gravity Group retrack with Timberliners please.
 
I’ve always felt that getting rides listed is a pretty pointless exercise.

They’re not like buildings in the sense that people enjoy looking at them. Some enthusiasts may enjoy looking at Nash, but the reality is that most punters just want to ride it, and won’t be at all happy if it’s SBNO.

Dipper should stay, it’s still viable and still popular. Nash is uncomfortable and seems unreliable. Much as I’d like to see it’s life continue, in its current form it just doesn’t make sense to keep pumping money into it when they could be installing a new coaster which the public would enjoy more. Even RMCing it would be out of the question with this listing, and I’d argue that, if it’s staying, an RMC job would be the best option.
 
I very much doubt they can afford a new coaster, they've spent a fortune on Valhalla that still isn't open and they keep throwing money into a black hole with hot ice. I wouldn't be surprised if they are still paying off Icon as that was so much of a flop. Removing grand national is pointless for them, it's a classic and should be preserved.
 
I haven't been a fan of Nash for years but I can honestly say that my one ride I have had on it this year was very enjoyable. Definitely an improvement since the retrack, although it was a non wheel seat (row 8).

I think this is the issue with Nash, Dipper and to some degree the Big One. Non wheel seats offer a much better ride. Surely there has to be a way to get trains that offer a similar ride no matter which seat you are sat in ?

JAperson said:
Removing grand national is pointless for them, it's a classic and should be preserved.
Click to expand...
It's not pointless if the costs to maintain it are too high or it is simply at a stage where it can no longer be maintained.
 
Last edited:
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top