• 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

Tom said:
Genuinely now don’t see how it can run ‘normally’ without a major alteration.

During a routine stoppage where you need to send a few empty trains in the middle of a day, it would have little confidence it can be sent without dummies. Maybe loading is a feasible permanent solution but I suspect not.

You can claw back a little speed with wheel compounds etc maybe, but seems way out of its comfortable margin for error. I know it’s morning testing, but this is June. Imagine spring or autumn temperatures.

Seems like a liability without a booster or re-tracking of an element. Sounds extreme I know, but where else is the speed coming from? It is in danger of becoming the Odyssey of the South.
Click to expand...
Stick another 50ft on it. It won't stall again. 🤣
 
Well I can't re-iterate enough - design flaw. If it's supposed to work in 40mph+ winds, then there's something seriously wrong. Every time you want a slow element, you must have tech in place to speed up/slow the train.

This isn't a "trailblazing coaster" by tech standards. It's quite tame. If anything - the design, implementation, and testing are all to blame. I could have easily solved this for only £200k/year + benefits.
 
Smiley said:
Well I can't re-iterate enough - design flaw. If it's supposed to work in 40mph+ winds, then there's something seriously wrong. Every time you want a slow element, you must have tech in place to speed up/slow the train.

This isn't a "trailblazing coaster" by tech standards. It's quite tame. If anything - the design, implementation, and testing are all to blame. I could have easily solved this for only £200k/year + benefits.
Click to expand...
You were a marketing expert last week mate. Is there anything you can't do?
 
Could we get back to some sensible discussion please?

The speculation in here is quickly descending into daftness, let Thorpe and Mack do the work to establish the cause of the ride’s most recent issues. We don’t need to get into hyper specifics of costs or remedies, or indeed who could do it for whatever price. Thanks.
 
LordOfDarkness said:
I look forward to reading the news articles that will follow this...
Click to expand...
Plenty of coverage in the usual places as you’d expect - some more accurate than others:

www.bbc.co.uk

New Thorpe Park coaster shut for third time in a month - BBC News

Hyperia has been operational for just seven of the 27 days since it launched.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

Thorpe Park's new £18,000,000 Hyperia rollercoaster closed again after 'breaking down'

Thorpe Park confirmed they were closing the rollercoaster Hyperia 'due to unforeseen circumstances' after the ride broke down on Saturday.
metro.co.uk

www.independent.co.uk

New Thorpe Park rollercoaster closes again days after second breakdown

It cost £18 million to build
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk

www.getsurrey.co.uk

Another closure for Thorpe Park's Hyperia after people stranded mid-air

Hyperia at Thorpe Park in Surrey is closing today (Wednesday, June 19) due to 'unforeseen circumstances' - and it's not yet known when it will reopen
www.getsurrey.co.uk

Also heard a reporter on LBC News this lunchtime talking about it (surprisingly he seemed to have a good level of knowledge and knew a certain amount about Mack Rides so quite a way away from the “the cOaStEr iS bRoKeN fOrEvEr” type stuff we’ve seen in places).

In any case, another PR nightmare for TP.
 
Just watched the roll back on video. It wasn't even close.... Oh dear oh dear.
Whom ever Mrs t dropped a season pass too when they where building icon. Has. Done a fantastic job
 
Last edited:
Polarexplorer2025 said:
Just watched the roll back on video. It wasn't even close.... Oh dear oh dear.
Click to expand...
The video you've most likely seen was after the initial rollback, when it was see-sawing.

A video which appears to capture the actual moment of the stall and rollback was posted earlier in the thread. I can understand if you've lost it though. As you've missed it, I've handily included it for you in the quote below:
Manchester1894 said:

From: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGegYpMnA/
hard to keep up with social media these days. It's great for relaying breaking news but it seems news of the roll back being way off wasnt true. Here's a better video.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stuntman707 said:
As with the Big One, the weather does have a greater effect on hypercoasters. Some of the tests look like the train is going to valley it's that slow. Surely the lifthill you think would be solid being a very conventional design. I heard rumour there were issues with people leaning on the airgates causing it to e-stop. I saw a video of the wheels squealing when it takes the outer banked turn out the station but again, the ride is still bedding in so it could be normal.
Click to expand...
In light of today’s news, I’d just like to leave this here.
 
Don’t quote me on this, and take it with as much salt as you like, but I’m now hearing a theory that whatever work they did on the lift hill during the first extended closure has caused it to run more slowly, and this has made the outerbank more stall-prone when it wasn’t before.

Now as I say, I cannot personally corroborate the validity of this theory, but I think it would make some sense, as I only remember the agonisingly slow empty test runs coming in after the work they did on the lift hill. Empty test runs I saw from before the work (e.g. opening day) did not look as bad, with the train making it through the outerbank quite comfortably.

If this is true, then it would imply that whatever fixed the first issue with the lift hill has slowed the lift hill down and caused the outerbank to become more of a stall risk. A long-term fix would see the lift hill returned to its original speed while not allowing whatever happened the first time to happen again.

Again, I would like to stress that this is simply a theory and not confirmed fact by any means, but I think it’s interesting to ponder and I think it would make some sense.
 
Matt N said:
Don’t quote me on this, and take it with as much salt as you like, but I’m now hearing a theory that whatever work they did on the lift hill during the first extended closure has caused it to run more slowly, and this has made the outerbank more stall-prone when it wasn’t before.

Now as I say, I cannot personally corroborate the validity of this theory, but I think it would make some sense, as I only remember the agonisingly slow empty test runs coming in after the work they did on the lift hill. Empty test runs I saw from before the work (e.g. opening day) did not look as bad, with the train making it through the outerbank quite comfortably.

If this is true, then it would imply that whatever fixed the first issue with the lift hill has slowed the lift hill down and caused the outerbank to become more of a stall risk. A long-term fix would see the lift hill returned to its original speed while not allowing whatever happened the first time to happen again.

Again, I would like to stress that this is simply a theory and not confirmed fact by any means, but I think it’s interesting to ponder and I think it would make some sense.
Click to expand...
Possibly they maxed out the lift hill originally to reduce the risk of it stalling. But i wonder if this caused something to wear out or break prematurely. It's all very well running it at full power when empty but when the train is loaded it must put a tremendous strain on the motor....
 
Matt N said:
Don’t quote me on this, and take it with as much salt as you like, but I’m now hearing a theory that whatever work they did on the lift hill during the first extended closure has caused it to run more slowly, and this has made the outerbank more stall-prone when it wasn’t before.

Now as I say, I cannot personally corroborate the validity of this theory, but I think it would make some sense, as I only remember the agonisingly slow empty test runs coming in after the work they did on the lift hill. Empty test runs I saw from before the work (e.g. opening day) did not look as bad, with the train making it through the outerbank quite comfortably.

If this is true, then it would imply that whatever fixed the first issue with the lift hill has slowed the lift hill down and caused the outerbank to become more of a stall risk. A long-term fix would see the lift hill returned to its original speed while not allowing whatever happened the first time to happen again.

Again, I would like to stress that this is simply a theory and not confirmed fact by any means, but I think it’s interesting to ponder and I think it would make some sense.
Click to expand...
Are there any videos showing a train on the lift before and after the initial closure? It might then be possible to work out whether or not the lift has been slowed down a little.

I can’t say I thought it seemed any slower when I was there on Saturday mind. And I’m not convinced that it would make that much of a difference to the running speed when you consider how massive that first drop is anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top