JoshC.

2/10 Half of it is something you didn't even come up with yourself. You spelt Bellewaerde wrong too.

The system you describe Zach is fine working out a queue time at a snapshot in time. As you say, if you've got x number of people in the queue and you're getting y people through per minute, the queue length is x/y minutes. The trouble is, queues aren't like that, you've always got people constantly entering the queue as well as leaving it. If you don't have a way of predicting the number of people entering the queue, you can't get an accurate estimation of the queue time for the people who are thinking about joining the queue. To use some numbers... Say we take your numbers - 300 people in a queue, with an average of 10 people leaving the queue per minute. You advertise a 30 minute queue. But say, on average, 20 people enter the queue per minute. In a 5 minute period, 50 people have left the queue, but 100 people have joined it - there's now 350 people in the queue, and (assuming the throughput is the same), there's now a 35 minute minute queue. The last people to have joined that queue would have expected a 30 minute queue, but have now got a 35 minute queue. Okay, it's only 5 minutes, but the exact same problem would arise on a larger scale. It's also worth noting the same 'problem' arises if less people enter the queue than who leave it. This is the trouble, unless you can predict the number of people entering the queue, you can't give a truly accurate queue time. You can use it to make a rough estimate, and maybe then add a bit extra to that time just in case, but then you get complaints that the queues aren't accurate enough / parks are trying to sell Fastrack. There's also a problem of how often do you update it? If you update it too often, you risk confusing or even frustrating guests. Don't update it often enough and you get inaccuracies. It's a difficult game to play. This is the ingenious thing about RnR. RnR eliminates the need to predict how many guests are going to enter the virtual queue. The virtual queue tells you exactly how long you need to wait, based on the throughput and the number of people ahead of you - it's a snapshot of the queue line. And so the system you describe actually is the perfect theory for why RnR should work and gives more accurate queue times!

The virtual wait removes those variables since it is just a 'pure' queue - the numbers won't incorporate things like Fastrack, pass use, etc. The theory would be that you would get on more or less straight away (which was actually the case during the very first trial I did in 2013...except on one go when the system mucked up the numbers completely), but the 'up to 15 minute' thing allows for leeway I guess, in case of unexpected numbers of people using Fastrack / access passes or breakdowns and the like - it's almost like a backup. I guess it's wrong of me to say RnR removes the variables - it more just makes them less of a worry. To be honest, I'm not sure I'm explaining this very well, which could well be why what I'm saying isn't making as much sense as I'd like it to! One thing I think we do agree on though is that RnR would be better used as a Fastrack replacement than a real queue replacement. It seems like a better and simpler idea to work on! Whilst in theory this is a fabulous idea, I don't think it works in practice. Calculating the average number of people leaving the queue (ie: going on the ride) is fine, but you need to be wary of the average rate of people entering the queue also. Because if the rate of people entering the queue is more than the rate of people leaving the queue, the idea you describe is inaccurate as it underestimates the queue length. The trouble is that working out the average rate of people entering the queue is a lot more difficult, since it depends on so many things (current queue time, time of day being major ones, but even other things like location of ride, how long its been open, etc could feasibly be a factor). I'm sure if a park was dedicated enough to giving very accurate queue times, they could collect data over a long period of time and find out the necessary trends to be able to get a truly perfect estimation system - but for the effort, its not worth it really; even though it does sound really interesting to me.. That's why I think the best system - in terms of practicality and good estimations - is to just work out times from experiencing them, see where a certain queue time is in the real queue, and then just add a little bit extra to take into account any small problems that may occur.

It's a little hard to tell from the photos how much has been built, but my guess is something like this... (Apologises for the crude, low quality picture) The yellow section appears the be the part of the building currently constructed, and the starred section is where I think this tunnel segment is. There's still a lot more to be done - don't judge the attraction by a bit of the building!

With regards to the speed - the launch hits a top speed of 45mph, but the actual coaster reaches a top speed of 73mph, making it the first launched wooden roller coaster and the fastest wooden coaster outright. It looks like an interesting idea; will be interesting to see how it rides and whether this will take off and see further developments of wooden coasters, or whether this will just be a gimmick that only gets rolled out onto a couple of coasters. The ride itself looks fun either way though!

Has a love for Chessington, somehow.

Phalanx Control (the known official account) has been confining with the occasional cryptic tweets. The most recent is this: The numbers are in fact coordinates for Sub Terra. Phalanx Archive (the 'intruder') is still active too, and is making very similar tweets to Phalanx Control. It is also saying that the Control account has been compromised. Very low key stuff, but I'm expecting to see some more interesting Scarefest things officially announced tomorrow.

I did an immersive tunnel at Bobbejaanland, and whilst a fun ride (possibly the best attraction on park), the actual tunnel section is a bit underwhelming. It's a fun little experience, but I wouldn't want it to be a major ride at Thorpe. Plus, this tunnel section on the building seems a bit too small for an immersive tunnel in my opinion! And given how much other space they have in the building, I think it would be a bit anticlimactic. I wouldn't mind it as a preshow, but that would be a lot of space, effort and time for a pre show. Also, for reference, I believe it's been confirmed somewhere Lightwater Valley are getting an immersive tunnel from Simworx.

Nice find - thanks for sharing! Looks like the general idea of mind-bending illusions and messing with your mind seems to be the route being taken, which I like the sound of!

More has gone up, courtesy of Ride on Review's FB.... A very curious structure indeed...

The way RnR works I believe is that it has an allocated number of people it can deal with each hour. When people book a slot in the virtual queue, it boosts the virtual wait up accordingly. After your virtual wait is up, you should be on the ride within 15 minutes (which I don't think is advertised specifically, but is more what is expected of the system by the park). The virtual wait is easy to calculate - it's just a case of the park setting the numbers. For example, If an RnR queue is set up to cope with 500pph, and there's 250 people currently virtual waiting, the 251st person to join the virtual queue would have to wait 30 minutes before joining the queue. The 15 minute 'real wait' time is there to deal with any problems that arise during the virtual wait - say a small breakdown, a higher influx of Fastrack / Ride Access Pass users, etc. With a real queue (without RnR), it becomes a lot more complicated. Whilst they could do the simple thing of just calculating the number of people in the queue and seeing how that matches to the throughput, they can't control things like small breakdowns, the number of Ride Access Pass users and so forth. There's also the case of the number of people joining a queue at a specific time, which will vary all the time (depending on time of day, length of queue already, and so forth) - so it's another thing they can't predict or calculate accurately. Since they can't predict all these things, it makes it more difficult to create a computerised way of calculating the queue time any more accurately than getting a human person to do it. That I think is the brilliant thing about how RnR should work - it gives the park the opportunity to have accurate queue times for guests whilst bypassing all the complications. Chucking in a standby queue makes life more difficult in my opinion, as you've got a real queue with difficult-to-estimate queue times, plus possibly disgruntled guests, which makes it hard of staff. As someone who would sort of like to see RnR be successful in the long run, this is such a frustrating thing to see! Too much going on at once, with too many complications and it makes RnR look like the bad guy. Quite possibly there was over-allocation on the RnR system, but there's also questions of is that too many Fastrack users and why is Stealth on 1 train in August anyway... LC raises a fair point though - this is a problem which should have been solved by now. Last season, RnR was tested on the mazes during Fright Nights and not the coasters. Will be interesting to see if that's how they do it this time round, or whether they do it on the coasters or both. Last season's trial during FN wasn't exactly great though given it unfortunately happened whilst the park was at it's busiest it had been for quite a long time.

Another Twitter account, @Phalanxed , has been created. Hard to see ask three of them being real, but all three are currently active today..

It would very difficult, perhaps impossible?, for a computer to predict queue times. The maths behind queuing times is quite complicated, and there's too many variables for a computer to do any better than what a human could do I reckon. As for a remark about queue times being 1.7-2.1 times longer with one train compared to two: IF this is true, then this shows that Thorpe are pretty decent on one train operation; one would expect queue times to be at least twice as long on half the number of trains..

Aren't the number of spins counted automatically on these rides? Or is that just at one specific park (that I can't remember the name of now...) EDIT: Beaten to it; nice to know it does indeed count automatically!

I agree - I'm not sure if they were just less prominent last year, but I only caught a glimpse of last year's roaming actors from afar, which was a bit unlucky. In previous years, I always seemed to bump into them. I think that's another reason why a scare zone would be a good idea, along with roaming actors. A scare zone would provide guaranteed contact with actors outside a maze environment, whilst the roaming actors' purpose would not be lost.

Along with this comes some teasing for the geeks, with the Phalanx Control Twitter account (last used in advertised Sub Terra), now becoming activate again - https://twitter.com/PhalanxControl Another Twitter account, Phalanx Archive, has also been made - https://twitter.com/PhalanxArchive. Phalanx Control has tweeted the account, calling it an intruder, and the official Towers Twitter also told TowersStreet that it is an "intruder", the Phalanx Control is for "official communication". So it is possibly a fake account (we know how much some love people love to fake advertise for Towers!), but it could all be part of a story to tease us geeks all the more. Note how Phalanx Archive is a lot more active and has posted reference to SW8... --- On a more Scarefest-orientated note, a bit of a wild idea, but could the Sub Species maze be located IN Sub Terra? The maze is clearly themed around Phalanx and surely must go in Forbidden Valley. But space is quite a premium there. So, given how Sub Terra isn't a wholly popular attraction these days, could Towers have decided to close the ride down for Scarefest, not use the ride system, and instead turn the building into a maze location? It would fit in with the original idea that ScareTour were first given (sewer-dwelling people, etc), especially if they could make it safe for people to travel to the lower regions of Sub Terra's ride area. It would make for an interesting maze, with a decent length, and could also be easily converted into the escape game now mentioned, what with the different rooms and scenes. I know it's a wild idea and I'm likely barking up the wrong bush, but it does seem to fit.

Sounds brilliant and it's great to see the park offering such experiences. But at £99pp (and even £80 with AP discount), it's just too steep. Not all that surprising, but when you consider that there's similar things for cheaper (Twisted Attractions in Birmingham currently offer an hour long escape game for £18pp), it's hard to justify such a steep price.

MBV is definitely returning, just relocated. Where exactly is not known yet. If be surprised if there was left over space in the WC16 building for a maze on the future as well, since the vast majority of the queue seems to be outside

Happened at Thorpe in 2007 for a short period of time. I think that was introduced before Merlin were in charge though, and only lasted a few months. I can't remember of other parks stated charging though!

I've no problem with lifetime Fastrack so long as it's incredibly limited and not for sale (which, by the "money can't buy" thing, I think this is). It's not that surprising that they're trying to make them a thing though. By just being a decent park?

Was expecting someone to play the "Slammer is unique" card.The thing is, if Thorpe are pumping money into Slammer because it's unique, why aren't they advertising it so? If its uniqueness is such a good thing, tell people about it and make them want to ride it!

Love how they've already got benches and bins ready; made me chuckle for some reason! Remember Chiapas opened a year late though! I assume that's why they're doing everything so early though; not wanting to take any chances and whatnot.

If Thorpe can spend the time and effort on doing Slammer up every year, even with it being closed for several months each season, then I don't see why they can't do the same for Samurai to be perfectly honest, even if it means just taking the hit and getting an entirely new model.

SRQs are a good move so long as they can be handled properly. The trouble with many of Thorpe's queues is that it makes it difficult to have a SRQ that works efficiently and doesn't hamper operations. Having SRQ on filler rides is fine (especially if they're testing popularity for them to be installed on future additions), but I can't see SRQ going onto any of the major coasters any time soon without some relatively big queue line changes.

Absolutely no chance of any outdoor section to the ride. The plans show it to be totally indoors, and Thorpe have to stick to those plans pretty much by the letter. Do remember that this is still one of the largest dark rides in the UK in terms of floorspace, and it's got a pretty decent volume to it as well! This is by no means a small building. No; there's real details about the sizes of anything inside the building really. Given the size of the building though, they could quite easily put it into a small section of the building (possibly even over two floors) and it not have any real effect. I'm sure they'll have used the space cleverly enough though!