• 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.

Paultons Park: General Discussion

Danny said:
One ride in three significantly large areas is hardly anything to beat a drum at. I'd discount Hex as it isn't listed in any of them.
Click to expand...

Sure and I agree with the sentiment of what is being said, it just wasn’t technically correct and using Dark Forest as an example when there are only two rides, one of which IS for those under 1.4m wasn’t really fair.
 
IanB said:
I think a lot of families that go for Peppa Pig World the first time, but return for the rest of the park. Even if the children are not ready for the big rides in Tornado Springs or Lost Kingdom, there is a smaller rollercoaster or play area for them to enjoy. Families can see that if they have two children and one is ready for the bigger rides, there is still plenty for the other child to do while waiting for the bigger child. And when they plan trips for next year, they remember the other areas and think that the children will be ready for that area.

Compare this to Alton Towers, you go as a young family, You have Cbeebies Land. The next step up from Cbeebies is World of David Williams, and that is hardly going to justify coming back as a family. Comparing the appearance of Cbeebies Land and Peppa Pig World, is no comparison, Peppa Pig World feels fresh and new and cared for. Compared this to Cbeebies land where effects are not working, mould is growing on the props and the area feels tired and dated. There is nothing for those under 1.4m to do in X-Sector, Dark Forest or Forbidden Valley. Even Katanga Canyon is 1.1m for all its rides.

I think all of Paultons caters for 0-12 year olds. Annabelle might want to go on bigger rides, but Storm Chaser, Flight of the Pterosaur, Cyclonator, Velociraptor and Cobra are still fun for her. This is what makes Paultons Park feel so much better values than Alton Towers, even though your paying £10 more. No matter where you are in the park (With the exception of Edge and Cobra, which will be address with the new Viking area, but there was the digger ride and seal ride a short walk away) there is something for all the family to do, so as a parent your never sat there trying to keep the little ones entertained.

So for those who are saying the park does not need another junior coaster, you are missing the point of them. They are there so everyone in the family has something to do, so everyone can go on a ride no matter where in the park you are. I hope the new Viking area sticks to the 1m height for the big coaster, but I also hope there is a junior coaster added for those who might not be ready for the big ride.

At Alton Towers, you end up in areas where there is nothing for those under 1.4m to go on, and you are thinking why did I pay so much money for them to come to the park, where there is nothing to do. You feel ripped off, have a grumpy child who does not want to sit and wait for the others on the bigger rides. Paulton's do suffer from this a little as well with Peppa Pig World, as the older children don't want to do all the kid rides, and want to do something bigger, but at least they can go on the rides (And lets be honest, it does not matter how old you are, everyone loves the dinosaur ride in Peppa Pig World). At the end of the day, you leave Alton Towers feeling like all you have done is try to keep the little ones entertained while the big ones queued two hours for a ride, and then get charged £6 to leave the place.
Click to expand...
There's definitely some very valid points with this especially with Alton Towers and the poor progression between Cbeebies and the most thrilling rides.

One positive is that we do see Play Areas in most of the larger areas of the park and I wouldn't be surprised if we see some variation of that in the new area. I'd like to see something slightly different and for all ages like an Adventure Trail similar to Phantasialand.

With the big rollercoaster, it's already been established that it's likely to be the most thrilling coaster yet and a step up from Storm Chaser. The park's equivalent of Mandrill Mayhem with likely a 1.2m height requirement. There is a new Intamin Family Thrill LSM Launch Coaster model with a 1m height requirement that offers inversions so it could be possible.

I do still stand by my view that the park are well stocked on Junior Rollercoasters and with Lost Kingdom being nearby, we may not see a classic junior coaster. I'd say with Cobra getting it's retheme - the area would be complete coaster wise. It could be wise if Cobra became a 1m coaster like other Gerstlauer Bobsleds.

With family thrill and even family, there's plenty of coasters the park could choose if they're adding another coaster for the Viking area.

I can see one thing for certain and that will be quite a few supporting rides will be aimed at families with a larger water ride being the largest part of the offering for families. I'm thinking it's a super flume however rapids seems like a potential as well. I'd also say a lot of the flats will be family or family thrill however I can see a thrill flat coming along.

I think the one thing we need to bear in mind is that the park is expanding further into thrills and the all ages market rather than solely maintain the young family market.
 
owenstreet7 said:
I do still stand by my view that the park are well stocked on Junior Rollercoasters and with Lost Kingdom being nearby, we may not see a classic junior coaster.
Click to expand...

Another aspect of this when comparing to AT is the sheer size of the parks. Even if the new area didn't have a family ride, it's hardly a slog to get to one versus traipsing over to Forbidden Valley (and the ensuring queues) potentially taking several hours out of a family's day.
 
owenstreet7 said:
I do still stand by my view that the park are well stocked on Junior Rollercoasters and with Lost Kingdom being nearby, we may not see a classic junior coaster.
Click to expand...
But by that logic, Alton Towers should not invest in another large rollercoaster?

The point I was making about the perception of value for money, having a good time, comes from all these smaller rides that the children can go on. You should not have to make a choice of sitting around doing nothing, or walking to a different part of the park and splitting up as a family. As good as the new Forbidden Valley is, would it of cost that much more to have the big helicopter sitting on top of a kids play area? A little more expensive, but a nice little monorail ride, which takes you on a tour of forbidden valley(Spot your family members queuing for the ride), or a junior coaster, the Spawn of Nemesis or a crazy taxi style flat ride themed around the eggs. Even if you dont go on the rides, just seeing them makes the park fill more complete.

The great thing about Paultons Park is they clearly target the 0-12 year old child range, so why should they go and add a ride which targets the 12+ age range? Its a lot easier to design and build a new area when your target range is 0-12. Tornado Springs is a perfect example of this. If you are in that age range, there is plenty of things for you to do, whether its a play area, junior ride, or a big ride. I don't see any new area Paulton's introduces, breaking away from this approach.

Should Paultons decide they want to cater for guests 12+, then a 12+ ride would need to be added to Tornado Spring, Lost Kingdom and the Viking area first. The the new areas could introduce a 12+ coaster, with supporting rides to cater for the 0-12 year age range. You can not add a single 12+ ride, and expect that to lead to visitors wanting to come back each year.

The smaller the age range your targeting the easier it is to do that and I get that by targeting families with children who are not school age, you can get more midweek visits, but if you went to Alton Towers and paid £150 for a family of four (Where the Children are over 90cm, but under 1.2m) is CBeebies land enough to make you want to come back or feel like you got value for money? For an extra £30 the same family of four could go to Paulton park, and experience so much more.

By having CBeebies Land, Alton Towers opens itself up to these comparisons with Paultons Park. I like the idea of a family park, which has something for everyone but it has to be done the right way. I wonder if Alton Towers would be better off scrapping CBeebies Land, and adding a new area which is focus on the 8+/1.3M child, and stop worrying about those under 7. Each area needs to have something for everyone, and Alton Towers is the worst park at failing to take in to account all the guests who are visiting.

I think its why Paultons can charge £10 more person but still feel better value. Imagine what Towers could spend £15 million a year on if it increased its ticket price by £10 per person.

I understand why people want to see Paultons Park go for bigger and more thrilling rides, I have to admit Annabelle is already moved on from the rides there, and Daisy has moved on from Peppa Pig, but as others have said, it is a little to far out the way to justify going for 1 big ride.
 
IanB said:
Should Paultons decide they want to cater for guests 12+, then a 12+ ride would need to be added to Tornado Spring, Lost Kingdom and the Viking area first. The the new areas could introduce a 12+ coaster, with supporting rides to cater for the 0-12 year age range. You can not add a single 12+ ride, and expect that to lead to visitors wanting to come back each year.
Click to expand...
Tornado Springs surely already has two 12+ rides in Storm Chaser and Cyclonator. They are family thrill rides that can be enjoyed by adults, teens, and children tall enough to ride them. It’s not like they are kiddie rides like the Pirate Boat or Dino Chase.
 
Shaggy_Dog_ said:
Tornado Springs surely already has two 12+ rides in Storm Chaser and Cyclonator. They are family thrill rides that can be enjoyed by adults, teens, and children tall enough to ride them. It’s not like they are kiddie rides like the Pirate Boat or Dino Chase.
Click to expand...
IanB said:
But by that logic, Alton Towers should not invest in another large rollercoaster?

The point I was making about the perception of value for money, having a good time, comes from all these smaller rides that the children can go on. You should not have to make a choice of sitting around doing nothing, or walking to a different part of the park and splitting up as a family. As good as the new Forbidden Valley is, would it of cost that much more to have the big helicopter sitting on top of a kids play area? A little more expensive, but a nice little monorail ride, which takes you on a tour of forbidden valley(Spot your family members queuing for the ride), or a junior coaster, the Spawn of Nemesis or a crazy taxi style flat ride themed around the eggs. Even if you dont go on the rides, just seeing them makes the park fill more complete.

The great thing about Paultons Park is they clearly target the 0-12 year old child range, so why should they go and add a ride which targets the 12+ age range? Its a lot easier to design and build a new area when your target range is 0-12. Tornado Springs is a perfect example of this. If you are in that age range, there is plenty of things for you to do, whether its a play area, junior ride, or a big ride. I don't see any new area Paulton's introduces, breaking away from this approach.

Should Paultons decide they want to cater for guests 12+, then a 12+ ride would need to be added to Tornado Spring, Lost Kingdom and the Viking area first. The the new areas could introduce a 12+ coaster, with supporting rides to cater for the 0-12 year age range. You can not add a single 12+ ride, and expect that to lead to visitors wanting to come back each year.

The smaller the age range your targeting the easier it is to do that and I get that by targeting families with children who are not school age, you can get more midweek visits, but if you went to Alton Towers and paid £150 for a family of four (Where the Children are over 90cm, but under 1.2m) is CBeebies land enough to make you want to come back or feel like you got value for money? For an extra £30 the same family of four could go to Paulton park, and experience so much more.

By having CBeebies Land, Alton Towers opens itself up to these comparisons with Paultons Park. I like the idea of a family park, which has something for everyone but it has to be done the right way. I wonder if Alton Towers would be better off scrapping CBeebies Land, and adding a new area which is focus on the 8+/1.3M child, and stop worrying about those under 7. Each area needs to have something for everyone, and Alton Towers is the worst park at failing to take in to account all the guests who are visiting.

I think its why Paultons can charge £10 more person but still feel better value. Imagine what Towers could spend £15 million a year on if it increased its ticket price by £10 per person.

I understand why people want to see Paultons Park go for bigger and more thrilling rides, I have to admit Annabelle is already moved on from the rides there, and Daisy has moved on from Peppa Pig, but as others have said, it is a little to far out the way to justify going for 1 big ride.
Click to expand...


As @Shaggy_Dog_ as put it perfectly, Paultons Park already offers family thrill rides at a similar scale to Chessington or Drayton Manor.

Storm Chaser and Cyclonator are both fantastic examples showing that Paultons Park are willing to both maintain their offer for younger children as well as building up an offering that grows with their current audience.

The park are not necessarily going all out and putting in a big 1.4m rollercoaster like Nemesis however consistent with what the park has said and hinted, they are almost certainly going for their equivalent of Mandrill Mayhem. I don't think it's very likely we'll see a massive 150ft RMC at the park.

Paultons Park's main competitors in their niche of the market would at the moment be Chessington and Drayton Manor rather than Legoland or Gullivers. In years to come when the park develops, Alton Towers is another that could be mentioned as a competitor. It wouldn't be a stretch to say Alton Towers of the South although bizarre to say it now. I would say it's unlikely to turn into Thorpe Park either way.

The park are not alienating their audience by adding thrill rides, they are simply growing their ride offering as their current audiences age so they can continue attending as they grow up and in turn, bring their own children to the park as adults.

The idea is that it would be aimed at all ages and multiple generations which the park has a made a very good start at.

With my statement about the park being well stocked in junior coasters.

The park has - from the youngest to oldest.

Dino Chase
Farmyard Flyer
Cat O Pillar
Flight of the Pterosaur and Velociraptor
Cobra
Storm Chaser

I'd say that between Dino Chase, Farmyard Flyer and Cat O Pillar, the park is very well catered for younger thrillseekers. The one thing I'd add would be a Mack Powered Coaster like Runaway Mine Train to complement this.

With the likes of Flight of the Pterosaur, Velociraptor, Cobra and Storm Chaser, the park has a fantastic range of family and family thrill coasters. You could add a range of coasters such as a wooden coaster which would complement this selection of coasters. Juvelen or a Water Coaster could also be fantastic options to add to this as well.

Naturally, above this group of coasters, the park will naturally be looking for a coaster similar in thrills to Cyclonator which could easily be a wooden or a launch coaster admittedly. I'd say that something thrilling with a 1.2m-1.3m height requirement and at least one inversion and/or a decent amount of airtime wouldn't hurt the park as it'd give children something to build themselves up to and aspire to as they grow up. It keeps the children coming back and back to the park as they grow and even actually keep them coming back.

The park will always include family rides as part of their offering and will continue to add as per Splash Lagoon however the park seem to want to enhance their offering by installing upgraded rides of their previous offering and including different experiences such as Ghostly Manor.

I'd also say that with Tornado Springs, Paultons did well that Alton Towers does terribly. Creating a themed area that covers a wide range of age groups.

At Towers, they tend to do areas with less variety for different age groups i.e. Forbidden Valley for thrillseekers but not a lot for younger ones.

Tornado Springs included Storm Chaser and Cyclonator for the braver riders, Windmill Towers, Farmyard Flyer and Buffalo Falls for families and Al's Auto Academy, Rio Grande Railway and Trekking Tractors for the younger ones. It also includes two separate play areas for both younger and older children. It's fantastic at what it does and it helps grow the audience of the park much like Lost Kingdom did. I'm sure Vikings will do the same as well with the rides both catering for the existing audience but increasing the level of thrills incrementally so there's a step up from Tornado Springs.

My main point is that the park is increasing their offering effectively growing up with the park's growing audience whilst growing the offering for it's existing target market that they cater for well with new generations of families.
 
Shaggy_Dog_ said:
Tornado Springs surely already has two 12+ rides in Storm Chaser and Cyclonator. They are family thrill rides that can be enjoyed by adults, teens, and children tall enough to ride them. It’s not like they are kiddie rides like the Pirate Boat or Dino Chase.
Click to expand...
Storm Chaser and Cyclonator may be fun for 12 year olds but I suspect most 11/12 year olds will be wanting to go on something bigger and with more inversions. Storm Chasers 1m height limit also means you will get children as young as four/five riding it. With Cyclonator, the higher height limit pushes the age up, but you will still get six/seven year olds going on it.
owenstreet7 said:
My main point is that the park is increasing their offering effectively growing up with the park's growing audience whilst growing the offering for it's existing target market that they cater for well with new generations of families.
Click to expand...

I love this idea, but you need to grow the existing areas as well to avoid spreading the park to thin and losing that magic. I think there needs to be four/five key rides aimed at you to make it worthwhile visiting a park. Merlin with Chessington and Thorpe is in the perfect position to make it work, although Thorpe seems to have focused on older teens rather than younger teens. But you have Chessington with the 0-14 age range, and then Thorpe with the 10-18+ age range.

Paultons is perfect my Daisy who is 7 (She is already begging me to take her back to Europa Park for Blue Fire next year), but for Annabelle who is 11, she wants to go on rides like Voltron, Nemesis, and Hyperia. Paulton Park is never going to have any of these rides, and that is okay. We had great memories there, we would recommend it to friends and family. We may still visit for the new attractions, but I suspect once Daisy is 12 and Annabelle is 16, as fantastic as the park is, it wont be the right place to go as a family anymore.

That being said, I think if Paultons were to add an Arthur style ride, with a fantastic story and themed area, that would potentially be a ride that would get us to visit the park if we passing the area. The more I think about it, any Mack Megacoaster would get me to visit at least once, and a Voltron style ride would make it at least once a year park. I was thinking I could justify it and say it would not make a difference because Blackpool have had their Mack coaster for how long now? And I have still not been up to Blackpool to ride it (Even with a free entry) but I have not passed by Blackpool recently. As I type this, I am thinking I do need to make an effort next year to go to Blackpool and ride it. There is a certain charm to the wooden coasters, even if they were a little rough.

I would love to be wrong, and it would be fantastic to see Paultons grow in to a Mini Europa Park and have a park that is a must visit no matter who you are. It is already the park that makes me feel closest to being in Europa Park in the UK.
 
IanB said:
Storm Chaser and Cyclonator may be fun for 12 year olds but I suspect most 11/12 year olds will be wanting to go on something bigger and with more inversions. Storm Chasers 1m height limit also means you will get children as young as four/five riding it. With Cyclonator, the higher height limit pushes the age up, but you will still get six/seven year olds going on it.
Click to expand...
I'm really puzzled by this view. My kids are 12 and 13 and they absolutely love Storm Chaser, it's one of their favourite coasters anywhere as it's a really good ride. The fact that four or five year olds can ride it doesn't take away from the fact that it's a really fun ride that anyone can enjoy. And again with Cyclonator it's a great thrill ride, I'm not sure what the fact that six or seven year olds can go on it has to do with it, it's a very solid thrill ride. In fact my kids are actually too intimidated to go on it.

You seem to perhaps be focusing on the height limit a ride has such as 1m and making an assumption on how a young person would find the ride and assuming it would not be thrilling for them rather than actually looking at what the ride does. The majority of guests at Paulton's Park will not be thrill seeking adenaline junkies that are seekking out more extreme experiences.
 
Shaggy_Dog_ said:
I'm really puzzled by this view. My kids are 12 and 13 and they absolutely love Storm Chaser, it's one of their favourite coasters anywhere as it's a really good ride. The fact that four or five year olds can ride it doesn't take away from the fact that it's a really fun ride that anyone can enjoy. And again with Cyclonator it's a great thrill ride, I'm not sure what the fact that six or seven year olds can go on it has to do with it, it's a very solid thrill ride. In fact my kids are actually too intimidated to go on it.

You seem to perhaps be focusing on the height limit a ride has such as 1m and making an assumption on how a young person would find the ride and assuming it would not be thrilling for them rather than actually looking at what the ride does. The majority of guests at Paulton's Park will not be thrill seeking adenaline junkies that are seekking out more extreme experiences.
Click to expand...
I thought @IanB was focused on what his children enjoyed not the height restrictions. He stated that his kids have moved on from what others think are suitable coasters for their ages and his kids want something more thrilling than Paulton offers even at age 11.

Do you have kids?
 
IanB said:
Storm Chasers 1m height limit also means you will get children as young as four/five riding it
Click to expand...

I’ve mentioned several times over the years how ridiculous this height restriction seems as it’s arguably more intense than any 1.1m coaster in the country and even level with the 1.2m offerings. Not that it’s dangerous. You do often see young children overwhelmed by it though in my experience

I think part of this conversation is revolving around the very old tech at AT. They’ve not built a ride with that restriction since 2013 (not that they’ve built many rides but I digress) and the comparable models elsewhere in the world all have lower restrictions because ride safety has evolved. 1.4m is increasingly an extinct model and subsequently the expectations of what children can and will ride have evolved.

This puts Paultons in the favourable position of being able to add attractions that are more thrilling whilst still being accessible to more of their demographic

Tbh I’d be surprised if a coaster with a 1.4m restriction is ever built in the UK again unless we have a notable new design style.
 
There's definitely some valid points and I'd say that it's a similar thing with Chessington as there is Paultons with families growing out of their ride offering. Especially with both parks aiming for the family and under 14 market right now. I saw on Paultons FAQ page that it does say that.

I'd also say it is because rides are becoming more accessible to younger children who are becoming more adventurous with their rides. I've seen people as young as 6/7/8 on Hyperia which is crazy.

I wouldn't be surprised if Paultons are looking at the likes of Efteling, Phantasialand and Europa Park to see how they're growing their parks.

I definitely wouldn't be surprised that by 2030 or 2035, that it becomes a multi generational park similar to those I've said.

Bowser said:
I’ve mentioned several times over the years how ridiculous this height restriction seems as it’s arguably more intense than any 1.1m coaster in the country and even level with the 1.2m offerings. Not that it’s dangerous. You do often see young children overwhelmed by it though in my experience

I think part of this conversation is revolving around the very old tech at AT. They’ve not built a ride with that restriction since 2013 (not that they’ve built many rides but I digress) and the comparable models elsewhere in the world all have lower restrictions because ride safety has evolved. 1.4m is increasingly an extinct model and subsequently the expectations of what children can and will ride have evolved.

This puts Paultons in the favourable position of being able to add attractions that are more thrilling whilst still being accessible to more of their demographic

Tbh I’d be surprised if a coaster with a 1.4m restriction is ever built in the UK again unless we have a notable new design style.
Click to expand...
I'd also say this goes in line with what is being said. 1.4m height requirements are becoming more of a thing of the past with more thrilling rides being commonly 1.2m-1.3m.

I'd also say it has been a golden rule for Merlin for a long time with rides being 1.4m for the sake of being 1.4m. Hyperia is an exception and that was likely because of Mack's lap bar restraints.

I think one of the most recent 1.4m coasters is Zadra at Energylandia and that's the park who have their Zamperla Disko Coaster at a 1.4m height requirement which is bizarre.

I honestly think this very much supports Paultons and aiming to grow towards a more diverse ride offering in the near future.
 
Shaggy_Dog_ said:
Yes I do, I just explained in my previous post that my children absolutely love Storm Chaser. Even though they’ve ridden bigger and more intense rides elsewhere it’s still high up in their rankings as it’s so much fun.
Click to expand...
Sorry half asleep still and missed that first line.

I know what you mean by bigger isn't always better, as an adult I would say Spinball Whizzer is 10x more fun than Smiler.
 
Something like Lightning Run at Kentucky Kingdom would be a really good box ticker for the 1.2m bracket. It's outrageous fun, packed with air time, compact in height and size and with inflation accounted for would cost somewhere in the sphere of $9m (£7.2m).
 
Danny said:
Something like Lightning Run at Kentucky Kingdom would be a really good box ticker for the 1.2m bracket. It's outrageous fun, packed with air time, compact in height and size and with inflation accounted for would cost somewhere in the sphere of $9m (£7.2m).
Click to expand...
I believe Mattel are doing multiple Hot Wheels themed Chance Hyper GTX's with a launch and a couple of inversions at their theme parks they're building in the states.

Hot Wheels Twin Mill Racer - Mattel Adventure Park (Glendale, Arizona, United States)

Looking for statistics on the fastest, tallest or longest roller coasters? Find it all and much more with the interactive Roller Coaster Database.
rcdb.com

These could work I suppose 🤔
 
When I went in the summer school holidays last year outside of Peppa pig world the only rides with a queue bigger than 15 mins was buffalo falls and the new log flume with Peppa pig rides ranging from 15m upto a hr.
Now that’s telling me lots of families are visiting with kids under 1m who would be free in. Now I’m not sure on the day price but if I wanted to go with my 2 kids it would cost me £180 online. With petrol and food a day out there will be roughly £250.
 
This was my thought when I visited with my OH in October - if we'd had two young kids between us it would have cost us exactly the same. As it was, it seemed really expensive for two people compared with other parks with a similar offering. Yes it's lovely and well-kept and the theming of the newer areas is well done, but the pricing model currently only really makes sense for families with Peppa-Pig-World aged children. If they're going to try appealing more to all-age families they are going to have to revisit that pricing model. Better to reduce the cost for an adult visitor and bring in a tiered pricing system for younger visitors. I don't think all kids under 1m should be free when they're the best catered visitors at the park currently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top