• 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.

Legoland Windsor

siralgenon said:

From: https://www.instagram.com/reel/CwnDu1BNj6q/?igshid=MTc4MmM1YmI2Ng==


Strange move that Lego are bringing out a new Vikings set a few days after Legoland announce they're removing their only Vikings themed ride...

Seems a slightly missed marketing opportunity.
Click to expand...

I also heard this announcement hours after LEGOLAND made there's. I was going to post it, but this isn't a new theme, it's a one off LEGO ideas set. LEGO ideas being a range of fan submitted creations that get developed into stand alone releases.

It's also very reasonably priced compared to other sets in the Ideas range at a similar piece count. Supposedly this is because their last Viking based set (a LEGO Creators set) underperformed.
Knowing this it could actually support why the ride is closing.
 
Rob F said:
Have we any concrete evidence the rapids are being demolished
Click to expand...
I'm afraid all the concrete was used up as theming for '1960's Brutalist Underpass: The Ride' (which the park seem to call "Ninjago"?). Ninjago is as ugly inside as Vikings is outside so I'd happily see them take the wrecking ball to the whole site.

If the rapids is Indeed being bulldozed, Rumba and Congo are on borrowed time. Merlin hate accessable, inclusive rides that cost money to staff and run where someone is at risk of breaking a finger nail. Besides, they take up room that could be used to build short, headline grabbing, black/grey tracked IP coasters themed around horror.

Merlin have been busy binning off flats and flumes. Rapids are now in the headlights. Rumba is in an embarrassing state and Congo is so neutered it's basically pointless these days. I'd be surprised if either last the decade.
 
Matt.GC said:
If the rapids is Indeed being bulldozed, Rumba and Congo are on borrowed time. Merlin hate accessable, inclusive rides that cost money to staff and run where someone is at risk of breaking a finger nail. Besides, they take up room that could be used to build short, headline grabbing, black/grey tracked IP coasters themed around horror.
Click to expand...

Quite possibly, but by having a ride with as much downtime as these rapids have had, is going to damage your brand. There is more than likely a clause somewhere in the contracts that this cannot be. Not only has it shocking reliability, it is also the worst looking river rapids in the UK and possibly Europe, by a country mile.

With Lego also having a majority stake in Merlin, it is very likely that portfolio evaluations went on. This monstrosity of a river rapids would not have been that hard to strike off, especially in what is your brand leading park.

Pretty certain this removal has absolutely nothing to do with H&S legislation, therefor it is unlikely to impact or influence what happens at Thorpe or Alton Towers.
But going back to legislation again, H&S relaxed the legislation once the court case with Drayton was concluded. Massively relaxed it in fact, if they wanted rid of these attractions they would not have done that. This fact and it is a fact, seems to be forgotten every time this argument is brought up. Although your argument about it being Merlin is slightly different I cannot comment on it too much, apart from the fact that the operational decisions for the attractions probably come from a park level and not a top level.

If you had the chance to ride it (very rare due to it's downtime) you would be presented with an experience that is very sub Lego, not only was the fact is was always down brand damaging, the overall crap, concrete experience was brand damaging too.
 
Although I’ll admit I don’t know the ins and outs of the prosecution brought due to the Drayton Manor incident, I do know the HSE do not legislate, they just seek to enforce legislation. I’m a bit confused in how they would relax the legislation themselves.

Agree with the general point though - whilst safety may have been one the factors influencing the decision to close the ride, I can’t imagine it was the biggest one.
 
Legislation is a slightly misleading term in this context. Following the accident at Drayton, the HSE issued guidance describing the steps parks should take to reduce the risk on rapids rides, this guidance was subsequently amended.

As with most things regarding safety on rides, none of it was technically a legal requirement however if an incident were to occur the park could find themselves in trouble if they were found to have not followed the guidance.
 
It’s weird the ride is closing in September and not at the end of the season. If there’s no plans in place to replace it for a new ride/area for the 2026 season for the parks 30th anniversary.
 
Rob F said:
How many staff does river splash have? Pretty sure the whole team now needs to be qualified in water rescue and first aid trained … not enough qualified staff = ride stays closed
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it's around 10 staff minimum - Operator, 1x batcher, 2x loader, 1x offloader, 1x CCTV watcher, 4x spotters (3 spotting, one enabling rotations between spotter positions).

If they do all have to be water rescue trained, that's a very large number of specifically qualified staff... must've been a nightmare to staff, and that's probably the more likely cause of its exorbitant downtime.
 
HSE do not, and never have had legislative powers, so therefore cannot relax any kind of legislation. They are an executive body who have powers to prosecute under guidance they set, but the laws and legislation granting them these powers remains the same and has changed very little in decades. But I get where the confusion comes from due to the nature of having an executive body with such powers.

Regardless, this still would have had an impact on the decision to close Vikings. Yes of course the poor reliability, ugliness and land mass of this ride would have been a major and balance tipping factor in the decision to close them, but the decision would still have been made balancing a number of factors.

Let's say for a minute that the HSE say "go nuts, do what you like", there's no way post Smiler and and post Splash Canyon that a company who plaster their parks with 'Danger of Death' signs, fence off innocent piles of rocks and don't let you wait on a platform for a train are going to do so.

So that means turning effects off, turning off wave machines and more doom warning signs, all of which make these rides less popular with guests. It means spotters, making these rides labour heavy and therefore costly to staff. These rides also have low patronage when weather is poor as often as it is in the UK and are extremely energy intensive to operate in a time when energy costs are high.

Although Vikings never worked and was ugly, it is more likely these factors sealed the deal in the decision making process on top of an already long list of reasons to bin it off. Rumba has most of these factors, it's just more reliable and is hidden more from view. Congo has most of these factors as well, also being more reliable, less ugly but takes up a significant amount of space.

Although I would personally love to see both rides with new, safer boats, soaking and interactive water effects, rethemes etc, we all know this is very unlikely. Commercially, these attractions will continue to eat into company coffers, take up room and offer poor guest experiences. The fact they're not as ugly and unreliable as Vikings only gives them short reprieves as far as I can see.
 
Matt.GC said:
HSE do not, and never have had legislative powers, so therefore cannot relax any kind of legislation. They are an executive body who have powers to prosecute under guidance they set, but the laws and legislation granting them these powers remains the same and has changed very little in decades. But I get where the confusion comes from due to the nature of having an executive body with such powers.

Regardless, this still would have had an impact on the decision to close Vikings. Yes of course the poor reliability, ugliness and land mass of this ride would have been a major and balance tipping factor in the decision to close them, but the decision would still have been made balancing a number of factors.

Let's say for a minute that the HSE say "go nuts, do what you like", there's no way post Smiler and and post Splash Canyon that a company who plaster their parks with 'Danger of Death' signs, fence off innocent piles of rocks and don't let you wait on a platform for a train are going to do so.

So that means turning effects off, turning off wave machines and more doom warning signs, all of which make these rides less popular with guests. It means spotters, making these rides labour heavy and therefore costly to staff. These rides also have low patronage when weather is poor as often as it is in the UK and are extremely energy intensive to operate in a time when energy costs are high.

Although Vikings never worked and was ugly, it is more likely these factors sealed the deal in the decision making process on top of an already long list of reasons to bin it off. Rumba has most of these factors, it's just more reliable and is hidden more from view. Congo has most of these factors as well, also being more reliable, less ugly but takes up a significant amount of space.

Although I would personally love to see both rides with new, safer boats, soaking and interactive water effects, rethemes etc, we all know this is very unlikely. Commercially, these attractions will continue to eat into company coffers, take up room and offer poor guest experiences. The fact they're not as ugly and unreliable as Vikings only gives them short reprieves as far as I can see.
Click to expand...
One counter point I would raise is; if it was H&S that caused the closure of Vikings and allegedly puts Congo River Rapids and Rumba Rapids on the imminent chopping block, then why did Alton Towers recently reinstate the waterfalls on Congo River Rapids after a number of years of absence?

The Splash Canyon incident has been out of the public conscious for a number of years now, so given that the park hadn’t reinstated the waterfalls the instant the press died down, surely there was no reason to reinstate them if it was Merlin’s plan to close rapids rides by stealth, or kill them off using the “death by a thousand cuts” approach? If Merlin wanted all rapids rides gone due to H&S, then why were those waterfalls turned back on? Surely turning the waterfalls back on would have been a change that had the opposite effect to the desired effect in that instance, in that it took non-essential H&S risks and improved guest feedback on the attraction?

I’m not saying that H&S isn’t a factor in Vikings River Splash’s closure, but I don’t think it’s the primary one and I don’t think that its closure is necessarily a death knell for Congo and Rumba. As outlined in this thread, Vikings evidently has its own issues that present compelling reasons for closure in themselves, with probably the biggest one from a corporate standpoint being its poor reliability.
 
Matt N said:
One counter point I would raise is; if it was H&S that caused the closure of Vikings and allegedly puts Congo River Rapids and Rumba Rapids on the imminent chopping block, then why did Alton Towers recently reinstate the waterfalls on Congo River Rapids after a number of years of absence?

The Splash Canyon incident has been out of the public conscious for a number of years now, so given that the park hadn’t reinstated the waterfalls the instant the press died down, surely there was no reason to reinstate them if it was Merlin’s plan to close rapids rides by stealth, or kill them off using the “death by a thousand cuts” approach? If Merlin wanted all rapids rides gone due to H&S, then why were those waterfalls turned back on? Surely turning the waterfalls back on would have been a change that had the opposite effect to the desired effect in that instance, in that it took non-essential H&S risks and improved guest feedback on the attraction?

I’m not saying that H&S isn’t a factor in Vikings River Splash’s closure, but I don’t think it’s the primary one and I don’t think that its closure is necessarily a death knell for Congo and Rumba. As outlined in this thread, Vikings evidently has its own issues that present compelling reasons for closure in themselves, with probably the biggest one from a corporate standpoint being its poor reliability.
Click to expand...
Firstly, so many people seem so convinced that the ride has poor reliability. Why? Don't forget, ride closed =/= technical fault, in Vikings case it was far more likely lack of staff.

Secondly, there is another misconception that Merlin always operates 100% as a group, and all decisions are at group level. Yes, there would absolutely be (in this example) group level H&S at play, but there will also be plenty of local decision making I imagine.
 
Islander said:
Firstly, so many people seem so convinced that the ride has poor reliability. Why? Don't forget, ride closed =/= technical fault, in Vikings case it was far more likely lack of staff.

Secondly, there is another misconception that Merlin always operates 100% as a group, and all decisions are at group level. Yes, there would absolutely be (in this example) group level H&S at play, but there will also be plenty of local decision making I imagine.
Click to expand...
Those are fair points.

However, I would ask a question about each:
  1. In terms of low staffing; if Vikings’ primary reason for being closed so often is low staffing, then how do Alton Towers and Thorpe Park manage to keep their own rapids rides open? Surely if Legoland can’t staff Vikings, then Alton Towers and Thorpe Park would also be unable to staff Congo and Rumba, respectively? Unless Vikings has unique quirks that require it to have more staff, I can’t think of why staffing would be a problem for it in a way that it isn’t for Congo or Rumba, particularly in the case of Rumba given that Legoland and Thorpe Park are located in close proximity to one another and likely have similar socioeconomic factors affecting their ability to recruit and maintain staff.
  2. Alton Towers’ decision to turn the waterfalls back on may have been a local decision, but surely if it breached Merlin’s group H&S policy or went against some agenda to smoke rapids rides out of the parks, they would have caught wind of the decision pretty quickly and asked Alton Towers to reverse it?
 
Islander said:
Firstly, so many people seem so convinced that the ride has poor reliability. Why? Don't forget, ride closed =/= technical fault, in Vikings case it was far more likely lack of staff.
Click to expand...

Both result in poor reliability, it doesn't really matter if that is caused by something mechanical more another factor.
 
Matt N said:
Those are fair points.

However, I would ask a question about each:
  1. In terms of low staffing; if Vikings’ primary reason for being closed so often is low staffing, then how do Alton Towers and Thorpe Park manage to keep their own rapids rides open? Surely if Legoland can’t staff Vikings, then Alton Towers and Thorpe Park would also be unable to staff Congo and Rumba, respectively? Unless Vikings has unique quirks that require it to have more staff, I can’t think of why staffing would be a problem for it in a way that it isn’t for Congo or Rumba, particularly in the case of Rumba given that Legoland and Thorpe Park are located in close proximity to one another and likely have similar socioeconomic factors affecting their ability to recruit and maintain staff.
  2. Alton Towers’ decision to turn the waterfalls back on may have been a local decision, but surely if it breached Merlin’s group H&S policy or went against some agenda to smoke rapids rides out of the parks, they would have caught wind of the decision pretty quickly and asked Alton Towers to reverse it?
Click to expand...
In terms of staffing, could well be as simple as Vikings requiring more staff than either Congo or Rumba lol.

As for the waterfalls, clearly turning them back on won't have breached any group H&S policy, else they wouldn't have done it. Also I don't think there's necessarily any agenda to "smoke rapids rides out of the parks". Vikings will have been closed for whatever reasons, and there's strong reason to suspect that the same will be applied to Congo and Rumba in the short to medium term. Doesn't mean that it's already planned right now, and there's a plan to remove all rides.

pluk said:
Both result in poor reliability, it doesn't really matter if that is caused by something mechanical more another factor.
Click to expand...
Yeh tbf that's just a case of semantics lol. To me, poor reliability relates entirely to the ride hardware, and mechanical/electrical/etc. issues. Issues with staffing lead to poor availability, which I would argue is not the same thing. But yeh, potentially the two terms are being used interchangeably here.
 
Rapids rides seem to becoming bigger and bigger money pits when it come to energy and staffing costs.
Added to the fact the Vikings one seems to be a reliability nightmare, looks awful, and offers a complete lack of adventure compared to any of the UKs other rapids.

Best off ripping it out and sticking in a reliable family coaster that'll look good as people come down into the park instead of a broken down mess of concrete.
 
Towers and Thorpe also (theoretically) have better/easier ways to expand/install new rides in their parks. Whether that’s using undermined areas or replacing other ageing attractions.

LLW meanwhile are rather more landlocked and limited when it comes to expansion/replacement, down to the number of park staple rides and the park having pretty much built on the whole park boundary now.

In-line over what’s already been mentioned alongside likely poor KPIs and ridership, it probably made sense for the park to close it. Making the substantial swath of land available for the next major investment (maybe 2026).

VRS is no ghost train, but it hasn’t aged particularly well at all.
 
Matt N said:
One counter point I would raise is; if it was H&S that caused the closure of Vikings and allegedly puts Congo River Rapids and Rumba Rapids on the imminent chopping block, then why did Alton Towers recently reinstate the waterfalls on Congo River Rapids after a number of years of absence?

The Splash Canyon incident has been out of the public conscious for a number of years now, so given that the park hadn’t reinstated the waterfalls the instant the press died down, surely there was no reason to reinstate them if it was Merlin’s plan to close rapids rides by stealth, or kill them off using the “death by a thousand cuts” approach? If Merlin wanted all rapids rides gone due to H&S, then why were those waterfalls turned back on? Surely turning the waterfalls back on would have been a change that had the opposite effect to the desired effect in that instance, in that it took non-essential H&S risks and improved guest feedback on the attraction?

I’m not saying that H&S isn’t a factor in Vikings River Splash’s closure, but I don’t think it’s the primary one and I don’t think that its closure is necessarily a death knell for Congo and Rumba. As outlined in this thread, Vikings evidently has its own issues that present compelling reasons for closure in themselves, with probably the biggest one from a corporate standpoint being its poor reliability.
Click to expand...
Why did they paint up the theming for Ice Age 4d before chucking it in a skip months later? Why did Nemesis and it's station get a full repaint at significant cost just before it got dismantled for a retrack? Most self respecting park operators keep things clean and keep up appearances for the benefit of guests, Merlin do so little of this that there's often a misconception that when they do bother to care about guest experience at some point in one of their parks, then there must be a deeper meaning.

As has already been stated, there is a disconnect between local decisions and those of the wider business. Getting the waterfalls back on looks very much like a local AT project to me. Maybe, just maybe, a park manager walked past the rapids one day, found it quite depressing and Dave the maintenance guy mentioned that he could get them working again in a few days, gave them a cost and then received the thumbs up? Who knows? It would be looking far too much in to a simple waterfall firing back in to life to make the assumption that this must mean that this attraction type has a secure future group wide.

I didn't say that H&S closed Vikings. In fact, too much is put on the "H&S gone mad" blame levelled at the HSE to explain why Merlin have taken the decision to run all 3 of their UK rapids rides in the way they have since Splash Canyon, in my opinion. Again, I repeat that the HSE is not a legislative body and there's been much debate about the nature of their guidance aimed at preventing people standing up on rapids rides in the wake of Splash Canyon. The way Congo, Vikings and Rumba are run could be due to Merlin's interpretation of guidance, but I very much believe that, a company that doesn't let you wait on a train platform, would have thought "sod that" after what happened at Drayton and implemented most measures with or without HSE guidance.

These measures come at a significant labour cost and degradation of guest experience, which makes these rides more pointless, less popular and therefore less important to justify the cost of keeping and operating them. There is no single reason why any ride closes, which I stated. Businesses just simply don't operate and make decisions like that. There's only contributing factors that are weighed up. In terms of Vikings, an unreliable and unappealing attraction with a large repair bill attached would have tipped the balance to make the closure decision, but would have been supported by a long list of other factors behind it such as labour costs and energy usage. That list is almost identical to the list lingering in the background for Congo and Rumba. If Rumba was faced with an increasing repair bill like Vikings, or if some hot shot had identified an attractive proposal for the Congo site, then we would probably be doing an autopsy on their demise now instead.
 
Matt Creek said:
Towers and Thorpe also (theoretically) have better/easier ways to expand/install new rides in their parks. Whether that’s using undermined areas or replacing other ageing attractions.

LLW meanwhile are rather more landlocked and limited when it comes to expansion/replacement, down to the number of park staple rides and the park having pretty much built on the whole park boundary now.

In-line over what’s already been mentioned alongside likely poor KPIs and ridership, it probably made sense for the park to close it. Making the substantial swath of land available for the next major investment (maybe 2026).

VRS is no ghost train, but it hasn’t aged particularly well at all.
Click to expand...
I can never understand why people think LLW has no room to expand. I can think of at least 5 places the park has expansion room:
- The Enchanted Village is being built on previously unused land, and that's large enough to allow for 2 or 3 phases of expansion.
- There's also more land available next to that, which isn't likley to be used for the park, but if all the service buildings moved to there it opens up a huge section of land where the current staff area is.
- The area inside Pirate Falls could easily fit a few rides.
- Behind Pirate Falls and The Dragon is a section of the Safari still unused.
- There are a number of small plots around the park that can easily fit Haunted House sized additions.

There could be some complications I don’t know of stopping them from using some of the above, but even if 1 or 2 of them aren't possible that's still a lot of available land. Definitely more than Chessington and Thorpe have available.


I also don't think Vikings removal is a sign that Rumba and Congo are also going. As Islander has already highlighted there's a massive assumption that all the Merlin parks make decisions as one. But this couldn't be further from the truth. Especially in the case of LLW, which isn't even part of the Theme Park Resort's division of the business (LEGOLAND Parks are their own division).
Of course they are all influenced by operating in the same UK Market, and being a part of the Merlin group. Which is why all 3 have seen a lack of investment ever since the Drayton incident. But Alton or Thorpe could decide like Drayton did to start investing in their rapids again, despite LEGOLAND's decision.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top