TBC: SW9 Speculation

[Kraken27]

I remember going to the SMDC planning office to view the plans for this coaster (in the days before you could just view planning applications online).

From what I can remember the main planning issue was the presence of a badger sett in the valley very close to the proposed site f the ride. Also for saying the ride was going through woodland, a surprisingly low number of trees had to come out. It would have been a bold move for Tussauds to have built this ride, but it would have been an excellent ride with 200ft drops.

The plans did not even go to a planning meeting as the park withdrew them. Who knows if they would have got permission - there was definitely local opposition to the plans, I remember a "Stop the coaster" [or words to that effect] poster in the newsagents in Alton village.

 

[Ethan]

Or they could build an intamin blitz, mack or RMC and every enthusiast would be very happy. A cross valley coaster isn't required

 

[Alsty]

Wasn't the cross valley woodie just two humongous drops with nothing else? I'm not sure it would've been that good.

Anyway this is the SW9 thread... I can't see them resurrecting old plans like this one.

 

[DiogoJ42]

Well, Oblivion is just one drop.....

 

[ianto42]

Wasn't the cross valley woodie just two humongous drops with nothing else? I'm not sure it would've been that good.

Anyway this is the SW9 thread... I can't see them resurrecting old plans like this one.

It might only be two big drops but most coasters are built around that, no? Big initial drop and then a secondary one. Its the stuff you do with all the momentum that makes it fun. They could have built/dug tunnels, barrel rolls, loads of near miss points, twists and turns etc. The size of the plot would surely mean they had mountains of flexibility to change it to fit any planning issues. I dont get why they keep shoehorning rides into tight areas (Smiler/Wickerman) and removing older rides when they have so much land which would, if nothing else, spread out the guests a bit so everyone isn't clustered.

SW9 talk though - can I be controversial and request there isn't one? I'd much rather they spend the £15-20m on a f-ton of flats... They rip out things like Ripsaw, Submission etc but never replace them, just a bare patch of earth or one of those annoying games where you win a stuffed dog. The park needs more flats to soak up crowds and give people variety. A few of my friends won't want to go with me to AT because they say "I don't like rollercoasters, that's all they really have"...

Ramble over!

 

[Ethan]

Well, Oblivion is just one drop.....

Knew that was coming from someone

 

[Danny]

I dont get why they keep shoehorning rides into tight areas (Smiler/Wickerman) and removing older rides when they have so much land which would, if nothing else, spread out the guests a bit so everyone isn't clustered.

Because they already have planning permission in these areas to build; so it's much easier to make decisions based on submitting planning applications that are more likely to be approved.

What I think some people don't understand is these applications cost money to submit. Whilst Merlin would never be ballsy enough to risk looking at new sites thoroughly and properly, their money pot in the grand scheme of things is certainly not infinite. They certainly won't want to be wasting it on re-submitting planning applications to appease the council and locals when they have safe areas for them to invest on.

 

[Doublethink]

I originally thought an RMC had no place in the park however having seen how good outlaw run is which has a tiny footprint but incredible reviews I think a small rmc could be ideal for towers. Riding Wildfire made me realise how much we need one of these in the UK.

 

[ianto42]

Because they already have planning permission in these areas to build; so it's much easier to make decisions based on submitting planning applications that are more likely to be approved.

What I think some people don't understand is these applications cost money to submit. Whilst Merlin would never be ballsy enough to risk looking at new sites thoroughly and properly, their money pot in the grand scheme of things is certainly not infinite. They certainly won't want to be wasting it on re-submitting planning applications to appease the council and locals when they have safe areas for them to invest on.

I guess that makes sense. But there's definitely something to be said for taking risks - if they just play it safe and build on nice little flat parcels of land then everything feels safe and unexciting. Whilst I dont like The Ultimate at LWV (Yorkshire park for those that don't know it) for how uncomfortable and rough it is, I love that it departs from the park and you go off into the forests and genuinely feel like you've left. If they keep going with the safe option you end up with all the rides in a fenced off little squares and it stops being immersive.

 

[Ethan]

I originally thought an RMC had no place in the park however having seen how good outlaw run is which has a tiny footprint but incredible reviews I think a small rmc could be ideal for towers. Riding Wildfire made me realise how much we need one of these in the UK.

I want SW9 to be an RMC or intamin blitz

 

[ChristmasPud]

What I think some people don't understand is these applications cost money to submit. Whilst Merlin would never be ballsy enough to risk looking at new sites thoroughly and properly, their money pot in the grand scheme of things is certainly not infinite.

How much does it cost for a big application? I mean maybe, but cost of applying is hardly going to be big enough to dent their finances. It's only an admin fee and Merlin spend money pretty frivolously on other things after all (arguably not where it's needed).

I think the preference for the general development area is just because anywhere outside that is going to be 10x more difficult to get it approved. Fair enough, but sometimes they're going to need to venture a little beyond it to avoid cramming the park

I guess there's a case to be made that the planning process should simpler too, still robust but less, well, standoffish!

 

[Jb85]

I heard it will be a dark ride in an already used area of the park....

This was just a Facebook rumour though so may have no backing....but someone somewhere will know what is being planned as their next big investment

 

[Danny]

See I saw a Myspace rumour that it will be a single rail inverted prototype from RMC on the site of the driving school.

Social media, eh?

 

[Jb85]

See I saw a Myspace rumour that it will be a single rail inverted prototype from RMC on the site of the driving school.

Social media, eh?

I wouldn’t mind one of the single rail RMC coasters (forgets the model name)

Maybe they will just pimp up the driving school

 

[elliott]

Honestly I think a well themed intamin blitz on the site of Rita would be a safe bet. But that seems to be the obvious choice for them and many other parks seem to be adding them to their line-up and I don’t think they’ll follow the crowd, they’ll want something unique. I think they’ll do something different and quite possibly a new sort of model or combination of model like a launched wing coaster or a flying dive coaster (not saying that’s what they’ll do it’s just an example)
Mind due they probably have learnt from wickerman this sort of approach doesn’t always work and sometimes it’s better to just include a well themed package.

 

[Thameslink Rail]

I personally would like to see a water coaster at Alton Towers because there aren't any in the UK yet, (at least that I can think of). Knowing Alton Towers, they would add some sort of twist e.g. a launch or an inversion so they can call it a world's first. This sort of ride would be popular because it would be a good spectator ride and it would bridge the gap between Cbeebies and Nemesis. (as usual, please tell me if this is a terrible idea).

 

[elliott]

I personally would like to see a water coaster at Alton Towers because there aren't any in the UK yet, (at least that I can think of). Knowing Alton Towers, they would add some sort of twist e.g. a launch or an inversion so they can call it a world's first. This sort of ride would be popular because it would be a good spectator ride and it would bridge the gap between Cbeebies and Nemesis. (as usual, please tell me if this is a terrible idea).

I could see a coaster which like skims against water in a part just not a fully fledged water ride. I’m honestly not sure how an inversion would work on what you are describing, some rides already incorporate water by including a splash down element it acts as a natural brake for the ride. A fully fledged water ride is unlikely in my eyes since water rides are seen by some as unsafe and after the smiler they wouldn’t risk it as well water rides are very expensive to run meaning they are unsustainable for a park, that’s the trap Blackpool have found themselves in and it takes up a lot power. There’s also the task of having to have drainage systems.

 

[pluk]

How much does it cost for a big application? I mean maybe, but cost of applying is hardly going to be big enough to dent their finances. It's only an admin fee and Merlin spend money pretty frivolously on other things after all (arguably not where it's needed).

You are looking at the wrong cost issue there.

The admin fee with the council for an application is minimal, but to get to that point is hugely expensive. You can't just jot an idea down on a scrap of paper; for the council to consider it they'll have had to have done geological survey, tree survey, drainage and run off survey, noise survey, perimeter visibility survey, business viability plan, transport survey, and many many other things which are damned expensive. And that's before you've paid architects to actually draw up plans in minute technical detail for something that's often hugely complex for its size in comparison to nearly any other sort of structural development and very likely to be completely unique. And if you are developing a new technology you need to have R&D'd that to death to make sure the whole thing is viable.

A major development could swallow millions just to get a planning application in.

 

[Dave]

It wouldn’t surprise me if SW9 is not a roller coaster. Certainly think it’s going to be a family ride.

 

[ChristmasPud]

A major development could swallow millions just to get a planning application in.

Yeah I appreciate that side of it, I work in design for construction and you're right to point out how immense that process is. But that's just construction, that's part of the deal if you want to develop a theme park.

The original post was referring to costs of re-submission of planning applications in order to make adjustments until the council accept it, so I was only talking about the admin fee (after the main planning had already been done) :

What I think some people don't understand is these applications cost money to submit. ... They certainly won't want to be wasting it on re-submitting planning applications to appease the council and locals when they have safe areas for them to invest on.

You'd still have to do R&D, feasibility, drawing up plans, paying all the people in the development process even if you don't submit an application, that's just planning rather than planning permission, so the GDA wouldnt cut the major cost out. Merlin draw up full plans that they don't submit all the time, this goes back to the Tussauds days.

So it's expensive but I don't see how going outside the GDA could be a valid obstacle for a company as large as Merlin, I think it's well within proportion for Merlin and the benefit it would bring to the park.