- News all the latest +
- Theme Park explore the park +
- Resort tour the resort+
- Future looking forward +
- History the archives +
- Community and meetups +
- Features explore more +
A very large number of people thought Oblivion was too short when it first opened, the biggest criticism was that it simply didn't do enough...it was declared simply not long enough by an awful lot of people...never a complaint with nemesis.Oblivion was the world's first vertical drop coaster, and is short because it focuses on the drop being it's main element. It can therefore afford to be short, because the drop is what it was intended to be about. The same with Stealth, it's about the launch and top hat. As far as I'm aware, hyper coasters are not designed to be short generally, and this is why Oblivion and Stealth aren't fair comparisons to what should have been a full length hyper coaster, not half of a layout and a 50 mile long break run.
Zadra and Iron Gwazi are being mentioned as short coasters that deliver but this new Break Run: The Ride coaster at Thorpe STILL looks even shorter than them. And by quite a margin too.
Why would you build a coaster so high and then waste all of the velocity slamming it into a long final brake run half way through the layout? Unless you can't actually afford a proper hyper coaster but wanted bragging rights. All very PLC Merlin this.
As has been mentioned, it's already in a country full of short coasters. The Swarm is very disappointingly short and it's in the same park. It's rare to see something so tall being built in the UK and they should be taking advantage of it.
I'd say they're likely to be pretty indicative given that they're based upon the planning application and the details given in that.Of course, we don't actually know for sure that all these geek recreations are indicative of the final layout. But if the lift hill is that high and the brake run is that long, then it smacks of having the old school PLC Merlin marketing and finance departments finger prints all over it.
NL2 creations based on vague planning documents are not anywhere near the same as the blueprints. We'll only know exactly what it's like when we're getting off the ride and waking through the exit gate.I'd say they're likely to be pretty indicative given that they're based upon the planning application and the details given in that.
If they have designed a rollercoaster that is going to slam into the brakes at full speed, I do wonder if there might be a bit of an environmental backlash in the pipeline. So far, the theme park industry hasn't really had too much scrutiny over their energy consumption, but will a ride that obviously wastes quite so much energy draw negative attention to Merlin's environmental credentials?
Equally, with the current trajectory of energy costs, will Merlin still have the stomach for a ride that wastes so much power by the time they finally have planning permission?