James Watkins
TS Member
Project Genesis at Chessington, Exodus at Thorpe Park - Leviticus at Alton Towers anyone?
-
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.
Project Genesis at Chessington, Exodus at Thorpe Park - Leviticus at Alton Towers anyone?
dazza4783
TS Member
I've been thinking that from since we first found out about the coaster. I mentioned at the time the possibility of rotating seats. axis style. Mainly because of how the spike around the Jaguar shrine stays at 90 degrees, that is probably going to be fairly uncomfortable unless the seats rotate.
The price tag being mentioned for the area also suggests there is some R&D costs gone into developing it, given that there isn't much actual track to warrant the price tag.
I'm still thinking there will be something they are keeping secret about it, and rotating seats seems the most likely for this type of coaster.
Last edited:
Jb85
TS Member
You make a good point.
Merlin are building a fair few of these. I was joking in my last post but thinking about it this would make sense. Otherwise this is likely to be a very tame boring coaster
Dave
TS Founding Member
If this has rotating seats then the outcome is:
1) The ride becomes FAR more interesting to us
2) The ride becomes FAR less interesting to Chessington target audience.
Skyscraper
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis
That's a really good point; although rotating seats would please us enthusiasts, they could put kids off from riding.
John
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Steel Vengeance
The throughput of Rattlesnake is practically nil yet it rarely gets long queues, presumably as a huge proportion of guests aren't allowed to ride.
I wouldn't rule out a height restriction of less than 1.4m though - Wild Eagle at Dollywood has a 50" min height, which is about 127cm
I wouldn't rule out a height restriction of less than 1.4m though - Wild Eagle at Dollywood has a 50" min height, which is about 127cm
Shaggy_Dog_
TS Member
But then again though if they wanted a ride to be interesting to their target audience then you’d have thought they wouldn’t have made it a 1.4m ride.
Interestingly enough though, Fenix at Toverland is a 1.32m ride. That height restriction would have been ideal here given the family nature of the park.
Last edited:
pluk
TS Member
Thats exactly what I predicted for Swarm when the plans showed something so small and lacklustre. I was wrong, but would be very happy if it was right this time.
It would have to be arrow/s&s controlled type spinning though, the track doesn't do enough to let free spinning achieve anything. If it was that why wouldn't you just go with the proven and cheaper existing manufacturer technology though?
So my expectation is the ride is as basic as it appears.
dazza4783
TS Member
Not necessarily, rotating seats could mean the inversion isn't actually an inversion. Going upside down is what might put some off wanting to ride.
Thameslink Rail
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- The Smiler
Of course it's all about the Numbers
The speed, height, length, throughput and guest numbers.
Skyscraper
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis
Remember that all B&M wing coasters have the same train style. It's interesting that some are less than 1.4, as I always thought they were universally 1.4. Does anyone know what the manufacturer-stated minimum height restriction is?
Is a 1.4 ride such a bad thing? I’d imagine they’ve done their marketing research to suggest that the park lacks attractions for the older families, and this is the ride to bridge that gap.
If you start to go down a very small, niche, sub-set of customers to target, you begin to alienate a large proportion of other potential leads who might do business with you.
Fairly smart business-led decision in my eyes. You’re opening up to potentially a new cluster of customers who might not have given Chessington a second look-in, whilst satisfying the requests of families seeking attractions for their older kids (and when I talk older, I mean the 10-13 ball park, where Thorpe might not be totally relevant to them just yet, and Towers is arguably too far away from Chessington’s main catchment area).
I think it’s a risk, for sure. But if the data, feedback and the figures point towards needing a 1.4m ride, I’m sure the marketing department have it fully thought out.
If you start to go down a very small, niche, sub-set of customers to target, you begin to alienate a large proportion of other potential leads who might do business with you.
Fairly smart business-led decision in my eyes. You’re opening up to potentially a new cluster of customers who might not have given Chessington a second look-in, whilst satisfying the requests of families seeking attractions for their older kids (and when I talk older, I mean the 10-13 ball park, where Thorpe might not be totally relevant to them just yet, and Towers is arguably too far away from Chessington’s main catchment area).
I think it’s a risk, for sure. But if the data, feedback and the figures point towards needing a 1.4m ride, I’m sure the marketing department have it fully thought out.
Skyscraper
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Nemesis
Doesn't help that they removed a 1.4 a while back (Rameses Revenge).
Probably doesn’t, no. But feedback is ever-evolving, long-term strategies and visions change. They may not have anticipated adding in a 1.4 again 4+years ago, but business needs are constantly changing.
That ride was probably near the end of its operational life anyway so-to-speak. This feels like a good replacement for the target audience it’s probably going after.
Don’t get me wrong, my personal opinion is that the ride is short and (probably) a bit boring on first glance of the plans, but I’m way out of the target audience of this, so if it satisfies them, then it’s a good investment.
Matt N
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Mako (SeaWorld Orlando)
From what I can tell, this is exactly how Project Amazon came about; market research said that Chessington lacked things to do for older children, so Jumanji World and the coaster is their way of improving this.
I agree that it could be a very good decision for the park to appeal to older children. Diversifying your market can never be a bad thing, surely?
It can if it confuses the customer. If people aren't sure who chessington if for or they don't get the marketing out to the right people because of people's perceptions of Chessington then this could be a real flop. They're going to have to pull off a really good marketing job to be able to get people to understand what audience this is for, especially with Chessington's reputation as a family park, mainly for a sort of middle gap of kids older than toddler, with little to do for the adult adrenaline seekers.
James Watkins
TS Member
Whether you like Chessington Buzz or not, it's clear they do indeed have insider knowledge.
In a now deleted post, they showed some concept art of the round flat ride, which clearly resembles a scene from the 2019 Jumanji film.
It's also worth looking at their 'speculation' articles. After 'speculating' they'd be a Pirates Cove retheme months in advance, they've since posted about Vampire being retrackted and a potential Zufari retheme to Jumanji. They're always hinting at these things being in the works on their twitter, so to be honest I'm inclined to believe them.
In a now deleted post, they showed some concept art of the round flat ride, which clearly resembles a scene from the 2019 Jumanji film.
It's also worth looking at their 'speculation' articles. After 'speculating' they'd be a Pirates Cove retheme months in advance, they've since posted about Vampire being retrackted and a potential Zufari retheme to Jumanji. They're always hinting at these things being in the works on their twitter, so to be honest I'm inclined to believe them.
Hyperia Super Stan
TS Member
There appears to be a multi-coaster deal between B&M and Merlin, because Legoland Deustchland and Legoland Sichuan are getting B&M's.