• 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

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Enter Valhalla said:
Why is everyone assuming it’s going to be a hyper?
Click to expand...
It’s pretty strongly rumoured, and there’s nothing else really being suggested in terms of rumours.

That’s not to say that it will 100% be a hyper, because I know as much as anyone that anything could be in store for us on 10th December, but I’d say that it seems like a logical guess, personally, based both on what’s coming out of the rumour mill and what the park could do with.
 
Enter Valhalla said:
I’m not convinced.

I doubt there’d even be space for one around the old Canada Creek area.
Click to expand...
I think the idea was that you could have a landing area for a hyper where Logger’s formerly sat, with lift hill, brake run, station, queue etc. going there, and then the main body of the ride itself could stretch out of the site in another direction; either out over the lake going towards the car parks or along the service road around the back of the park.
 
Jb85 said:
For me - if a public consultation is happening then this points to something being out the ordinary - ie. Tall

I think we are going to see a hyper - but I’m prepared to be wrong
Click to expand...
This is my view. If there was no consolation I would say there's no chance and have done in the past. I've always said that Thorpe would suite a hyper not that they'd build one.

Doing a consolation makes me believe they are either building something really noisy or tall. I doubt they'd go with noisy as the park is already quite noisy for the locals and so they would struggle, even with a consultation, to get permission. I think a height somewhere like 10ft taller than The Big One should be achievable but that's just my personal guest.

I also wouldn't be too disappointed if we don't see a hyper there are plenty of other coasters Thorpe could build and its not just limited to one. As long as we do see something I wouldn't be too bothered. My main concern is how they market whatever they get.
 
Enter Valhalla said:
I’m not convinced.

I doubt there’d even be space for one around the old Canada Creek area.
Click to expand...
Matt N said:
I think the idea was that you could have a landing area for a hyper where Logger’s formerly sat, with lift hill, brake run, station, queue etc. going there, and then the main body of the ride itself could stretch out of the site in another direction; either out over the lake going towards the car parks or along the service road around the back of the park.
Click to expand...

I'd be very surprised if we see anything going over the lake towards the car parks. The park are quite restricted with how much they can put in the lake, plus the resulting noise and visual issues it would cause. On top of that, that particularly body of water is used by the jet-skiers (I believe is in some way owned by them too), so it would make it very difficult.
It's possible they could have some sections over the lake that was in the middle of what was once Loggers, but again, they're restricted with how much can be put into the lake.

Going down the service road is tricky too because it's an important service road and there isn't a lot of space. Not impossible, but I'd've thought somewhat impractical.

Ultimately, the Old Town site is very big. And if they were to include going over to say the Slammer site and the yard adjacent to what is now Trailers, that's more than ample space for a coaster.

Jb85 said:
For me - if a public consultation is happening then this points to something being out the ordinary - ie. Tall
Click to expand...

This is true. I can't recall a time when the park have ever had a public consultation like this.

BUT, at the same time, pretty much any mid-sized investment or bigger from 2004 has been outlined in a Mid Term Development Plan from the park. Having one of those deals with similar things a public consultation would deal with.
It could simply be a case that a public consultation is the best way to go to be sure of getting approval later down the line.

All I'm saying here is, yes, it's out of the ordinary for the park to have done this, which could suggest it being an out of the ordinary investment for the park. But it's not worth getting hopes up for that just yet.
 
I agree with the hyper - they’ll no doubt market it as “UK’s tallest” as the USP, we know what Merlin are like.
However wouldn’t this potentially overshadow Stealth a little bit?
Ideally I’d like an Intamin launch akin to Velocicoaster rolling over the lake. Or complete curve ball - B&M surf coaster?
 
You could argue that it’ll overshadow Stealth, but a couple of Cedar Fair parks have a B&M hyper coaster and a B&M giga coaster (Kings Island and Canada’s Wonderland). They’ve built a bigger version of a coaster type they’ve already got. According to RCDB Silver Star’s 240ft and a shade under 80mph, so Stealth might still be the fastest ride in the park. And a rocket coaster with a hydraulic launch is a bit different to what a hyper coaster would be.

There’s a lot to be said for a B&M hypercoaster. B&M do make well engineered products. I suspect this will have a shorter train than Silver Star, so the throughput probably won’t be quite as high. Merlin do seem to have gone for slightly shorter trains, for example Inferno has a row less than Nemesis. Nonetheless, even if Merlin do go for a slightly shorter train (to save money?), it’s still likely to have the highest throughput in the park. Although there are a couple of good bursts of airtime on Saw, most of Thorpe Park’s coaster are more about inversions than airtime, so this would add some variety to the line up.

The most obvious downside is that it’d probably have another 1.4 metre height requirement.
 
The newer B&M hypers like Mako and Candymonium have 7 row trains because B&M think that a slightly shorter train navigates the parabolic airtime hills better and so they do the shorter trains as long as the park is willing to marginally sacrifice capacity. The throughput is still stellar with them running on a 3 train service even with the 7 row trains though.
 
Also, not all new B&M Hypers have 7-car trains; the gigas have 8, and Himalayan Eagle Music Roller Coaster, that opened in China in 2019, has 9. I think the number of rows, as well as the train style, is very much a park choice.

Mako and Candy just happened to have 7-car trains because the park chose them. In fairness, I don’t think Thorpe probably needs the capacity of a full 9-car train, so if Thorpe were to build a B&M Hyper, I could see them opting for 7 cars based on the fact that Inferno and Swarm, the park’s existing 2 B&Ms, also have 7 cars. Admittedly, I can’t seem to find any throughput stats for Mako and Candy, but I reckon that even a 7-car B&M Hyper Coaster would be Thorpe’s highest throughput coaster by some distance, especially if it had the typical Merlin baggage hold.

Also, in terms of the Stealth comparison and whether a hyper would undermine it; I think Stealth’s hydraulic launch would still make the ride hold its own against a hyper, as even if a hyper were to be faster than 80mph, a launch going from 0-80mph in 1.8 seconds is a totally different experience from anything that a hyper would offer.

One thing worth noting about whether a Thorpe hyper could hit 80mph is that I think the 4-across trains would possibly require less drop height to exceed it, especially with less cars. For reference, Mako hits 73mph with a 200ft drop and Candy hits 76mph with a drop of no more than 210ft. Due to them having less drag, I reckon a 7-car hyper would only need a drop of 220-230ft or so to exceed Stealth’s top speed.
 
RicketyCricket said:
Not sure Stealth is still relevant considering it's 15 years old. Not an issue to have it overshadowed by a bigger, better coaster.
Click to expand...
It’s still a fairly iconic coaster at Thorpe, and I do still think it’s one of the ones that people mention the most alongside The Swarm and Saw.

Oddly, though, it never seems very popular when you’re actually on park… Thorpe’s most popular coasters actually seem like Saw and Inferno, if I had to guess; Saw always has a huge queue, even when taking throughput into account, and in spite of it having one of Thorpe’s highest throughputs, Inferno nearly always has a huge queue…

In terms of a hyper, though; even if this coaster doesn’t end up being a hyper, I reckon the Thorpe hyper is now becoming almost as notorious (for lack of a better word) as a hypothetical ride concept as the Towers woodie was prior to Wicker Man’s construction, so given that Thorpe can technically build higher than Stealth (after some research, they are apparently outside Heathrow’s inner surface), I reckon it will happen eventually, even if not 2024! Given enthusiasts wore Merlin down enough to build a wooden coaster, which they literally said even only a few years prior that they would never do due to them being unmarketable, I’d suggest that a hyper would take far less convincing!
 
Last edited:
Talking of Rollercoasters at Thorpe Park did anyone know that Colossus never existed? Originally Colosus was planned for Chessington World Of Adventures. Unfortunately at Chessington the plans for Colosus were met with opposition. This was due to the people that lived around the area not wanting noise. The rule still stands today. Due to the fire of the year 2000 Tussads grasped the opportunity, to reverse the target audience of Thorpe and Chessington. This is how Colosus came to be. Unfortunately I don't know which land at Chessington World Of Adventures Colosus was intended for,if someone could inform me I would be extremely grateful.
 
Prof Burp said:
Talking of Rollercoasters at Thorpe Park did anyone know that Colossus never existed? Originally Colosus was planned for Chessington World Of Adventures. Unfortunately at Chessington the plans for Colosus were met with opposition. This was due to the people that lived around the area not wanting noise. The rule still stands today. Due to the fire of the year 2000 Tussads grasped the opportunity, to reverse the target audience of Thorpe and Chessington. This is how Colosus came to be. Unfortunately I don't know which land at Chessington World Of Adventures Colosus was intended for,if someone could inform me I would be extremely grateful.
Click to expand...
Cheers for the info @Prof Burp; I’ll admit I do find that rather surprising given that Chessington can’t build above the tree line, and that a ride like Vampire generated huge local backlash, but I know that Chessington were intending to appeal to thrill seekers too at one stage (Samurai was built in 1999 and Rameses in 1995, so they clearly had thrillseekers in the picture during the 90s), so I guess it’s not the most outrageous theory that they may well have considered a 10-looper akin to Colossus.

Although with regard to your point about them reversing Thorpe and Chessington’s target audiences due to the 2000 fire; I thought the whole reason Tussauds purchased Thorpe was to have a thrill park in the South, as well as to eliminate Chessington’s closest competition in the family market?
 
Prof Burp said:
Talking of Rollercoasters at Thorpe Park did anyone know that Colossus never existed? Originally Colosus was planned for Chessington World Of Adventures. Unfortunately at Chessington the plans for Colosus were met with opposition. This was due to the people that lived around the area not wanting noise. The rule still stands today. Due to the fire of the year 2000 Tussads grasped the opportunity, to reverse the target audience of Thorpe and Chessington. This is how Colosus came to be. Unfortunately I don't know which land at Chessington World Of Adventures Colosus was intended for,if someone could inform me I would be extremely grateful.
Click to expand...
Source please
 
Prof Burp said:
Talking of Rollercoasters at Thorpe Park did anyone know that Colossus never existed? Originally Colosus was planned for Chessington World Of Adventures. Unfortunately at Chessington the plans for Colosus were met with opposition. This was due to the people that lived around the area not wanting noise. The rule still stands today. Due to the fire of the year 2000 Tussads grasped the opportunity, to reverse the target audience of Thorpe and Chessington. This is how Colosus came to be. Unfortunately I don't know which land at Chessington World Of Adventures Colosus was intended for,if someone could inform me I would be extremely grateful.
Click to expand...

I’ll have some of whatever you’ve been having.
 
Sorry to double post but.....

Who else predicts that Timber Tug Boat and Lumber Jump will be relocated to the position currently occupied by the Water Slides? If this happens I can envisage the return of some of the Octopus Garden rides. I know that Slippery Surpent is stored on-site.
Please jot down your views and predictions on the return of some of Octopus Garden.
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top