- News all the latest
- Theme Park explore the park
- Resort tour the resort
- Future looking forward
- History looking back
- Community and meetups
-
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. - Thread starter Burbs
- Start date
- Favourite Ride
- Ride to Happiness and Chiapas
- Favourite Ride
- Ride to Happiness and Chiapas
- Favourite Ride
- Voltron Nevera
- Favourite Ride
- Ride to Happiness and Chiapas
- Favourite Ride
- Ug Bugs
- Favourite Ride
- VelociCoaster (Islands of Adventure)
Thorpe Park: General Discussion
I can just imagine the outcry if Thorpe decided to use the whole Rumba Rapids area to create a brand new family area in the style of Paw Patrol or similar at Chessington!
I always think about Thorpe that it’s not the biggest park and what few family rides it has are purely box ticking ones, such as the teacups and the flying fish. To actually become a proper family destination would have to mean diluting their thrill offering, and then they could get caught in an identify crisis.
One thing is for sure though, rotting and SBNO rides appeal to absolutely nobody.
I always think about Thorpe that it’s not the biggest park and what few family rides it has are purely box ticking ones, such as the teacups and the flying fish. To actually become a proper family destination would have to mean diluting their thrill offering, and then they could get caught in an identify crisis.
One thing is for sure though, rotting and SBNO rides appeal to absolutely nobody.
owenstreet7
TS Member
Good spot, I haven't noticed that and it's still on the app
I can't see that one's closing though so think it's an oversight/error when they were taking the rapids off. Zodiac still seems to be there on the website but isn't on the app so it's probably going to be straightened out soon.
Even then, it did go against the park's strategy a drastic bit and more thought could've been put into this from the park.
That last point hits the point perfectly, it's the 1m-1.3m rides that are needed more.
1.3m is now the benchmark for modern thrill rides so can imagine a lot of future additions will be that but it's the 1m-1.2m market that needs some supplementing. It's not so much to attract families with young children but to include a wider audience including the "wimps" and thrillseekers in training too which would help the park further.
A height restriction review is absolutely needed!!! A lot of 1.4m rides probably shoots Thorpe Park in the foot a bit when it comes to bringing people in.
1.3m Swarm, 1.2m Saw and 1m X/Walking Dead is definitely something they'd do to benefit long term.
I'd say if executed right, it could go very well. It needs to focus on the thrilling aspect of their marketing, the rides appeal to a wider audience if family so thrillseekers enjoy them too and don't add in children's rides at all. This is why I'd say tap into family thrill is the best way forward if executing the strategy again.
A Wave Swinger would be a hit at Thorpe Park as an example.
All you would do by reducing the height limit is increase the wait times of the coasters we certainly don't want that. Also height restrictions are not just for the ride itself but also if it has a darker theme that might not be suitable for a younger audience, the forces on the rides are also a factor at certain ages you cannot sustain the g-force it applies to you
...and they still have two don't they?
Tidal wave and the ring thingy, which was top marks on our last visit.
Perfect excuse to cut the less popular third water ride.
Not that I'm excusing the loss of flume or rapids, I also love them both.
The flume at the Beach was the top attraction of my early youth, only thing you had to queue for.
owenstreet7
TS Member
Swings and Roundabouts, it'd probably take some pressure off Hyperia too, the pathways and some of the other rides.
It's actually also reduce complaints from some of the Merlin Mums on the Facebook groups about the Beach being closed which is quite frequent.
With Saw specifically, the height restriction is way above what Gerstlauer would've recommended and with Swarm, as time has gone on, it's likely a height restriction review is doable with the likes of Fenix being 1.3m and that's as intense as Lech (a 1.2m as well).
The UK are too accustomed to 1.4m height restrictions in my view.
Again with Saw the Ride its likely to do with theme Saw is a pretty dark theme.
Skyscraper
TS Member
As @Hid has correctly stated, Saw's height restriction is higher than usual due to the horror theme. TWD The Ride is the same as well.
Insurance companies are the ones that usually need convincing.
Because its just that, a rumour doesn't mean its fact an Intamin Multi Launch would be nice though
Enter Valhalla
TS Member
I’m hearing a lot of people saying that Swarm could be reduced from 1.4m but I’m not entirely sure what people are basing this on.
The family wing coasters at Legoland Deutschland and Chessington are smaller and have fewer inversions. Without knowing the exact reasoning behind how height restrictions are calculated, I don’t think we can boldly claim that Swarm could be lower.
Walking Dead on the other hand being 1.4m is a joke. We know that this exact ride was only 1 metre when it was X.
The family wing coasters at Legoland Deutschland and Chessington are smaller and have fewer inversions. Without knowing the exact reasoning behind how height restrictions are calculated, I don’t think we can boldly claim that Swarm could be lower.
Walking Dead on the other hand being 1.4m is a joke. We know that this exact ride was only 1 metre when it was X.
owenstreet7
TS Member
There's definitely a lot of rumours going round but I'm sure an Intamin Blitz and Stealth can co-exist, the Blitz needs to be different.
Incredibly unlikely that we'd get a Stealth extension, Top Thrill 2 is a technical nightmare plus it's probably better off doing something new.
Fenix at Toverland is a 1.3m and it's very intense, close to Lech if not worse. It's been cited as having a G Force of 5, full size and has 3 inversions so I'd say this would be a good basis on this.
Bowser
TS Member
The restraints are the same as other rides which have lower restrictions.
The forces are the same or less as other rides which have lower restrictions.
The theming is not relevant to the height restriction.
Other parks have lowered the restrictions on B&M coasters after opening.
What are the reasons that it couldn’t be modified?
BarryIsAnIsland
TS Member
I remember going on the rapids on a school trip when I was circa 13. It was pretty much the headline attraction as far as my vague memories go. One of the attractions I'm pretty sure was a boat trip on the Thames! I'm in my 40s now. No issues that it's time for it to go, especially as expensive to run. But it needs replacing with a family ride. It's all well and good saying teens and thrills are the focus, teens don't have any money, mum and dad do. Families have different aged children at the same time, and have members with different appetites for thrills. You have to have enough rides that they can have a good day, or they won't come back. That has always been the (entirely obvious) problem with the plan to stratify between Thorpe and Chessington as thrill/family. Real Families and groups aren't so stratified in that way. Chessington has moved away from it, Thorpe shouldn't double down on it.
GooseOnTheLoose
TS Member
Ride manufacturers set the base minimum height requirements for their installations, the parks can choose to increase them but can't lower them if the manufacturer hasn't signed off (unless they want to accept full liability).
The only two things preventing Thorpe Park from lowering height restrictions on rides would be if the manufacturer deemed it unsafe (below their minimum recommendation), and what their appetite is for potentially increased insurance premiums.
Enter Valhalla
TS Member
I never said Swarm’s height restriction can’t be modified.
I said that we don’t know the reasoning behind that height restriction. You listed some potential reasons but there could be other reasons why that restriction has to stay at 1.4m. My point is that we don’t know.
People are suggesting Swarm can be reduced as if it’s fact. The reality is that none of us really know.
Last edited:
Matt N
TS Member
Contrary to the belief of some, I don’t believe focusing on thrills has ever been Thorpe Park’s problem. The park’s attendance skyrocketed with the addition of the large thrill rides throughout the 2000s, and their highest ever years were 2009-2011, when the park was quite far into its thrill phase. Going for young families makes little sense when Chessington and Legoland are under half an hour away and Paultons is only an hour away down the M3; in the context of the local area, the young family market is saturated and thrills are a far more obvious differentiator from the rest of the local offering.
I personally think their issues have been multi-faceted.
Firstly, I’ll perhaps counteract what I said above to a degree by admitting that they could perhaps have targeted a less rigid definition of thrills, particularly post-Merlin. I think everything up to Stealth was relatively sound and had reasonably universal appeal, but I think theming Saw to a horror movie franchise and making it another 1.4m coaster was perhaps a limiting choice in the long run that might have put off older families. I wonder if Wardley’s proposed GCI might have made the park feel a bit more rounded and accessible to an older family audience while still maintaining the core onus on thrills.
Also, I wonder if the “failure” of Swarm spooked them a little too much. I do feel that the perception of the commercial performance of Swarm was quite a critical factor in the park taking the path it did over the next decade or more, and despite the many contextual factors contributing to decreased attendance in 2012, it seemed like they were so spooked by it that they turned away from coasters entirely and flitted from one flavour of the month to another for a good decade afterwards. Swarm feels like it made the park not quite know what to do with itself for a number of years afterwards; they seemed to go very extreme down certain paths for short periods without ever wholeheartedly committing and then do a complete about turn the next year.
The other thing I’d say about Thorpe is that I think they relied solely on things with overly niche appeal and/or very little staying power during the mid to late 2010s and early 2020s. Derren Brown, for example, was an enormous investment into something with incredibly niche appeal and limited longevity compared to a roller coaster or more traditional dark ride. And what did they follow this up with prior to Hyperia? The utter own goal that was The Walking Dead (as much as the execution looks fairly good from what I’ve seen, I think retheming a Vekoma junior coaster to a horror IP might be one of the silliest theme park decisions ever made), Black Mirror which lasted only 2 or 3 years, and a series of temporary flash in the pan events like BounceZilla. And even prior to Derren, the park was resorting to things like Angry Birds and I’m a Celebrity (only lasted 3 years). While these sorts of attractions are sometimes OK in isolation and in moderation, this stuff is not what’s going to pull people in long-term.
If I were to map out the park’s course for the next few years, I could go for something thrilling with a lower height restriction that might be slightly more accessible to an older family audience. Something along the lines of a GCI would work very well, in my view.
I personally think their issues have been multi-faceted.
Firstly, I’ll perhaps counteract what I said above to a degree by admitting that they could perhaps have targeted a less rigid definition of thrills, particularly post-Merlin. I think everything up to Stealth was relatively sound and had reasonably universal appeal, but I think theming Saw to a horror movie franchise and making it another 1.4m coaster was perhaps a limiting choice in the long run that might have put off older families. I wonder if Wardley’s proposed GCI might have made the park feel a bit more rounded and accessible to an older family audience while still maintaining the core onus on thrills.
Also, I wonder if the “failure” of Swarm spooked them a little too much. I do feel that the perception of the commercial performance of Swarm was quite a critical factor in the park taking the path it did over the next decade or more, and despite the many contextual factors contributing to decreased attendance in 2012, it seemed like they were so spooked by it that they turned away from coasters entirely and flitted from one flavour of the month to another for a good decade afterwards. Swarm feels like it made the park not quite know what to do with itself for a number of years afterwards; they seemed to go very extreme down certain paths for short periods without ever wholeheartedly committing and then do a complete about turn the next year.
The other thing I’d say about Thorpe is that I think they relied solely on things with overly niche appeal and/or very little staying power during the mid to late 2010s and early 2020s. Derren Brown, for example, was an enormous investment into something with incredibly niche appeal and limited longevity compared to a roller coaster or more traditional dark ride. And what did they follow this up with prior to Hyperia? The utter own goal that was The Walking Dead (as much as the execution looks fairly good from what I’ve seen, I think retheming a Vekoma junior coaster to a horror IP might be one of the silliest theme park decisions ever made), Black Mirror which lasted only 2 or 3 years, and a series of temporary flash in the pan events like BounceZilla. And even prior to Derren, the park was resorting to things like Angry Birds and I’m a Celebrity (only lasted 3 years). While these sorts of attractions are sometimes OK in isolation and in moderation, this stuff is not what’s going to pull people in long-term.
If I were to map out the park’s course for the next few years, I could go for something thrilling with a lower height restriction that might be slightly more accessible to an older family audience. Something along the lines of a GCI would work very well, in my view.