• 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.

Thorpe Park: General Discussion

At the moment all you can say is it’s tall and short, there are short coasters that are amazing, there are tall coasters that are terrible.

It does scream “we want tall but don’t want the costs associated with a decent length” but that doesn’t mean it won’t be a good coaster, pre-opening appearances can be deceptive, I thought Icon looked good before I rode it and look how wrong that opinion was.
 
Nosferatu said:
I think it looks like it will pack a punch. Despite its short length, the layout is constant action and is always doing something. There are at least 4 airtime moments on this thing and there will no doubt be some great hangtime through the stall/immelmann.

Just to quote the maker of the best precreation in regards to how it will ride "My thoughts on this in its current form? Easily the best ride in the UK. If the forces inside NL2 are the same in person, this thing will be a top 5 coaster in Europe easily. Insane first drop, ejector out of the non-inverting immelmann, consistent strong floater on the outerbank with some nice whip on the inversion coming out of it, sustained hangtime on the dive stall, and STUPID ejector on the wave turn and final airtime hill. Now if the pacing is killed due to some trims on the drop, the ride will become poor. It will NEED to rely on the speed and intensity to be world class"

The short length should have been expected Thorpe Park don't exactly have all the space in the world. There is no way that they can fit a massive out and back layout that most people were expecting. Heck it doesn't even look that short anyway, the ride time from the first drop til the breaks clocks in at 40 seconds, on the precreations I've watched anyway.
Click to expand...

All this from a NL2 creation of a coaster that we only have a rough outline layout of? Just a slight change in profiling can change a ride significantly. No one knows with any kind of certainty how it will ride so sweeping comments like "STUPID ejector" from geeks on the internet should not be taken seriously.

The only reason we should be expecting a short length is because it's Merlin paying for it. Space is not an issue and never has been. There's tonnes of space there to build a far longer layout, look at the rediculous length of the proposed break run. 40 seconds from drop to breaks IS short for any coaster, it's very short for a 230ft+ coaster where so much effort and space seems to be devoted to taking all that earnt velocity out of it at the end.

This looks like a very short hyper coaster. It's short due to cost and nothing else. Swarm 2.
 
Could the layout it just be different, ie only the parts of the ride causing issues with height are actually shown?

it’s too short simple as - but I have no idea how it will ride as it’s not yet built.

round and round in circles here. Let’s be honest, none of us have a clue until we see and ride the final product
 
Jb85 said:
Could the layout it just be different, ie only the parts of the ride causing issues with height are actually shown?
Click to expand...
I think that’s unlikely; Chessington’s consultation showed the entire planned layout of their upcoming coaster, for what it’s worth, so I’m not sure that Exodus would be any different, personally.
 
Jb85 said:
Could the layout it just be different, ie only the parts of the ride causing issues with height are actually shown?

it’s too short simple as - but I have no idea how it will ride as it’s not yet built.

round and round in circles here. Let’s be honest, none of us have a clue until we see and ride the final product
Click to expand...
This is Merlin.
They do not comprehend the idea of "too short".
Twenty pages in the first month... we will only know fast, slow, airtime, best ever etc when we get to ride it.
 
I had a rather interesting thought about Exodus.

With Exodus having some rather big, impressive-looking inversions within it as its primary elements (including what many are saying will be the world’s tallest inversion, although I’ll admit I’m unsure on that one given that that record currently sits at 197ft; I’d certainly nominate it for the UK’s or even Europe’s tallest inversion, though), as well as being a more traditional sit-down coaster in style (unlike, say, Saw with its beyond vertical drop and more compact cars), could they potentially have built it to fill the niche of big multi-looper that Colossus currently occupies as well as to break the UK height record, as opposed to the airtime coaster niche that hypers more traditionally fill?

I know that Colossus would still have the 10 inversions as a substantial boost over Exodus, so it’d still be far from redundant by any means (the most I can see Exodus having is 3, by the looks of things), but now that the ride’s key selling point of the world inversion record has long since been beaten over at Alton Towers (and a newer version of the same layout is being built at Flamingo Land), could the park be psyching Exodus up to replace it as the park’s “big, impressive inversion coaster”? It’ll be a much bigger, more dominant ride than Colossus is at present, with some much larger inversions, and although we obviously can’t judge yet, it looks like it’ll satisfy the demands of the modern market more than Colossus does at present (for instance, less restrictive restraints and greater negative g’s; even if there’s no straight airtime hills on Exodus like Colossus’ bunny hill, I do think some of those elements have a fair shout at working negative g’s into them, whereas I stayed firmly in my seat for the entire ride last time I rode Colossus, even over the aforementioned bunny hill… not a scrap of airtime to be found anywhere, unfortunately).

So seeing as Colossus doesn’t seem to be an overly loved ride from what I can gather (while I won’t deny it has its fans, it doesn’t really seem to have a huge fan following, and not too many like it a huge amount), as well as that it’s Thorpe’s oldest thrill coaster and it has been usurped at its original purpose even within the UK, my question is; could Exodus have been built to fill its niche in 2024 so that they can remove Colossus in preparation for their next coaster in the late 2020s or so? Let’s say this hypothetical coaster comes in 2028, 4 years after Exodus; that would likely see Colossus removed at the end of 2026, by which point it’ll be 24 years old. That isn’t overly young for a coaster by any stretch…

What do you guys think?
 
Matt N said:
I had a rather interesting thought about Exodus.

With Exodus having some rather big, impressive-looking inversions within it as its primary elements (including what many are saying will be the world’s tallest inversion, although I’ll admit I’m unsure on that one given that that record currently sits at 197ft; I’d certainly nominate it for the UK’s or even Europe’s tallest inversion, though), as well as being a more traditional sit-down coaster in style (unlike, say, Saw with its beyond vertical drop and more compact cars), could they potentially have built it to fill the niche of big multi-looper that Colossus currently occupies as well as to break the UK height record, as opposed to the airtime coaster niche that hypers more traditionally fill?

I know that Colossus would still have the 10 inversions as a substantial boost over Exodus, so it’d still be far from redundant by any means (the most I can see Exodus having is 3, by the looks of things), but now that the ride’s key selling point of the world inversion record has long since been beaten over at Alton Towers (and a newer version of the same layout is being built at Flamingo Land), could the park be psyching Exodus up to replace it as the park’s “big, impressive inversion coaster”? It’ll be a much bigger, more dominant ride than Colossus is at present, with some much larger inversions, and although we obviously can’t judge yet, it looks like it’ll satisfy the demands of the modern market more than Colossus does at present (for instance, less restrictive restraints and greater negative g’s; even if there’s no straight airtime hills on Exodus like Colossus’ bunny hill, I do think some of those elements have a fair shout at working negative g’s into them, whereas I stayed firmly in my seat for the entire ride last time I rode Colossus, even over the aforementioned bunny hill… not a scrap of airtime to be found anywhere, unfortunately).

So seeing as Colossus doesn’t seem to be an overly loved ride from what I can gather (while I won’t deny it has its fans, it doesn’t really seem to have a huge fan following, and not too many like it a huge amount), as well as that it’s Thorpe’s oldest thrill coaster and it has been usurped at its original purpose even within the UK, my question is; could Exodus have been built to fill its niche in 2024 so that they can remove Colossus in preparation for their next coaster in the late 2020s or so? Let’s say this hypothetical coaster comes in 2028, 4 years after Exodus; that would likely see Colossus removed at the end of 2026, by which point it’ll be 24 years old. That isn’t overly young for a coaster by any stretch…

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...
I think the simple answer is we don't know and won't until at least 2024 but probably later. I imagine colossus will be removed at some point although I'm not sure it's immediately immanent.
 
Poisson said:
t'll be 1 train with 12 passengers per train so the throughput will be 240 a year
Click to expand...
I get this is a joke but the plans/ consultations show it's a target of 1000.
Which given Thorpe's *excellent* operations mean it'll actually get 750 - 800 pph (higher than Colossus, but lower than all of Thorpe's other coasters).
It'll probably have 2 trains with 6 cars each.

Also, this ride is far too short and definitely needs a much longer ride experience if Thorpe are even thinking about competing on a national, let alone international, scale.
 
Ivsetti said:
I get this is a joke but the plans/ consultations show it's a target of 1000.
Which given Thorpe's *excellent* operations mean it'll actually get 750 - 800 pph (higher than Colossus, but lower than all of Thorpe's other coasters).
It'll probably have 2 trains with 6 cars each.

Also, this ride is far too short and definitely needs a much longer ride experience if Thorpe are even thinking about competing on a national, let alone international, scale.
Click to expand...

The coaster is very short, it will have a higher throughput than 800.
 
In fairness, I could see it getting pretty close to the 1,000pph mark, perhaps even hitting or exceeding it dependent on the length of train used.

For reference, the (longer) Flash clones have a theoretical throughput of 1,040pph on 24 rider trains, and I can imagine that those Mack trains are some of the easiest in the business to get a high throughput out of due to how simple the restraints are and how spacious the trains are; I can imagine the Mack trains would be quite possibly some of the most throughput-capable ride vehicles at Thorpe. Certainly more so than Stealth, Swarm and Colossus, and no less so than something like Inferno or Saw, anyway; as I said above, the Mack trains are very roomy, with very simple restraints, so there should be fairly minimal faff.
 
Poisson said:
Remember, they'll probably have silly seatbelts too which Thorpe insist on every single one being fastened prior to dispatch. Colossus is supposedly capable of 1300pph and gets nowhere near. Thorpe are very good at operating very badly.
Click to expand...
Agreed, just look at Icon for example. The seatbelts have hindered the throughput and dispatch times a fair bit. :oops:

Pretty sure Exodus will have seatbelts though if it's Mack. Those trains' restraints only have double redundancy, and many countries require rides to have at least triple redundancy, hence the addition of seatbelts.
 
Last edited:
I know some Mack coasters, such as DC Rivals, have automatically releasing seatbelts that make throughput higher, so maybe Exodus will have those?

In regard to Icon’s seatbelts; I’d imagine this could work differently to Icon, as Icon’s seatbelts were more of a quick retrofit, whereas Exodus would hopefully be designed with seatbelts from the get go, so they could integrate features to speed up operation such as the aforementioned automatic release. Also, correct me if I’m wrong here, but weren’t Icon’s decreased throughputs partly caused by other factors, such as Speedy Pass, with the seatbelts on their own having a smaller impact?

I do think phenomenally high capacity is one thing they did miss out on by not going with something like a B&M Hyper, however… B&M Hypers tend to have longer trains, and their restraints are also simpler again, with them literally being a “pull a bar down and go” affair. I guess Thorpe doesn’t need phenomenally high capacity, however.
 
Jb85 said:
@Matt N whilst agree re capacity surely you should future proof any investment - so planning a ride with a high theoretical throughout would make sense

Again shows short term planning
Click to expand...
I think it depends whether or not you want to grow the business substantially in terms of guest figures, or in terms of what way you wish to grow your business.

If you are relying on a smaller number of more significant rides or have less significant rides to begin with, then high capacity would make sense, but if you are relying on a greater number of less significant rides or have a fair existing lineup of headliners, then it possibly doesn’t matter quite as much.

Thorpe has an existing backbone of headliners that isn’t insignificant, and they also have a pretty respectable amount of filler to absorb crowds (they have a lot of flat rides, and quite a few water rides too, as well as DBGT doing some heavy lifting in the dark ride department and the likes of Black Mirror and Angry Birds 4D as sideliners). I also wouldn’t say that any of their current coasters especially suffer from low capacity given the park’s visitor numbers, so Exodus perhaps has less pressure to have a really high capacity than if it were the sole headliner in a park with less headliners or less attractions in general.

Thorpe Park said at the consultation that they don’t see Exodus causing a substantial rise in guest figures, and as I said above, I don’t think any of their current crop of coasters particularly suffer on the basis of horrifically low capacity, so if Exodus has a theoretical of 1,000pph or slightly over and attains high triple figures (Stealth has a theoretical of 1,000pph and has gotten a solid 850pph on both of my timings with bulkier restraints and less roomy trains than Exodus will likely have, so I certainly think it’s doable for sure), then I think it will cope fine. From my timings, Thorpe’s current highest throughput coaster is Swarm at around 950pph on both visits, and that never seems to get particularly excessive queues. The only two I usually see with queues of over an hour are Saw & Colossus, and they are Thorpe’s two lowest capacity coasters by a notable amount from my experience (Colossus has averaged about 600pph, with 550pph on one visit and 650pph on another, while Saw usually attains around 700pph); I’d be very surprised if Exodus didn’t have a throughput higher than those coasters. (If you’re interested, my usual/average readings for Thorpe’s coaster throughputs across two visits have come out as; Colossus: ~600pph, Saw: ~700pph, Inferno: ~850pph, Stealth: ~850pph, Swarm: ~950pph)

I can get as geeky about throughput as the next person, and I love a queue muncher as much as the next person, but if Thorpe Park doesn’t need an obscene people eater attaining 1,500pph+, I guess it does beg the question of whether it’s feasible for Merlin to spend the extra money on the extra train or whatever’s required to eke the throughput up by a few hundred pph.
 
Last edited:
@Matt N - your post summarises piss poor business planning though. The sentence ‘Thorpe don’t see Exodus causing a significant rise in guests’, or words to that effect show they are very short sighted.

Why would any business invest £15-£20m (guessing here - not seen actual numbers) during a pandemic and not plan for the investment to increase visits or future proofing the ride for capacity purposes.

I can only assume that this is going to be a period of sustained investment in Thorpe, and to a lesser extent Chessington as their new coaster has similar issues. If they build 3-5 attractions of similar capacity in a relatively short period then that will more than make up for a lack of capacity in Exodus.

either way, it still screams missed opportunity- surely everyone can agree to that?
 
Jb85 said:
@Matt N - your post summarises **** poor business planning though. The sentence ‘Thorpe don’t see Exodus causing a significant rise in guests’, or words to that effect show they are very short sighted.

Why would any business invest £15-£20m (guessing here - not seen actual numbers) during a pandemic and not plan for the investment to increase visits or future proofing the ride for capacity purposes.

I can only assume that this is going to be a period of sustained investment in Thorpe, and to a lesser extent Chessington as their new coaster has similar issues. If they build 3-5 attractions of similar capacity in a relatively short period then that will more than make up for a lack of capacity in Exodus.
Click to expand...
I think sometimes, you need to invest to stop your guest figures from decreasing instead of to necessarily raise your guest figures a huge amount.

The justification for the investment into Exodus at the consultation was because park attendance has been steadily falling since around 2010, and 2019’s figure was around 500,000 below 2010’s figure. They said that Exodus was to reverse the trend of declining attendance and to keep existing visitors coming back; I think they could well expect 100,000-200,000 additional guests (similar to what a new coaster at Alton traditionally gets, and I’d imagine that the UK’s tallest coaster could generate a fair amount of demand, at least initially), but I’m not sure if they want to drastically increase guest figures; for instance, they said they’re not aiming to return to the 2009-2011 peak by installing Exodus.

They did also say that Exodus was part of a longer term plan of investment over the next 5-10 years, though, so there could certainly be a follow-up not too long after that raises attendance a little bit more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top