JoshC.

Surely if the the trouble was about the time required for the land to set, then surely a woodie could have gone in the main core of the park whenever they wanted? After all, that's had 35-40 odd years to set! I'm no ground expert, but surely if they can't build on a woodie on the core area of the park because of this dense support stuff, then they won't be able to build one anywhere - can they really infill land to make it more suitable? (I have no idea, genuinely curious, but it does sound pretty weird to me). If I'm being perfectly honest, I've never quite fully believed the whole land stability thing. I've never heard that about it anywhere than at Thorpe, I guess you could argue why would you, but meh, and it just doesn't seem to make sense to me. Where did these rumours ever come from in the first place anyways? Surely if the ground was not suitable, then the Canada Creek woodie plans wouldn't have got so advanced before being shelved? As I say, I really have very limited knowledge on all this, but is the ground stability really the main reason why Thorpe aren't getting a woodie? As for the question about the next Thorpe coaster, who knows. One of those RMCs seems to have been thrown about a lot, but I dunno, would it really fit Thorpe? Just looks like another coaster that Thorpe have, except it's partially made from wood. We all know Thorpe need a ride with good airtime, so something along the lines of a Mack Megacoaster or a B&M / Intamin airtime machine would be nice...

I can see people's concerns about all of this. However, I do feel that they'll be unfounded. The image pluk posted is great for visualising this. The screen will be between the two middle pillars and be about two thirds of the way up the 'window' in the middle. The side posters will cover the rest of the canopy and reach to the 'towers'. I tried to do a sort of mock up image, but given my terrible photo-editing skills, it just didn't look good. It will bring a bit of vibrancy to the entrance area I think, but the main shape and look of this entrance bit won't really be affected. It's of course not the most convenient or best option for the park (a complete revamp of the entrance has been wanted and needed for ages), but it's still an alright move for, hopefully, a shorter term basis.

Entrance improvements ahoy! - http://thorpeparkmania.co.uk/news/10-04-2014/Entrance-Improvement-Plans Hopefully this is the first step to a totally new entrance structure; would like to see the main ticket section given a bit of TLC soon too.

So, did this today and I think the ride essentially sums up Chessington for me... The queue is a bit of a mixed bag. The cattlepen is probably horrendous to queue in and I feel sorry for anyone who ever has to queue in it. The indoor section is boring and too hot (WHY was the heater on on such a nice day?). However, when the train goes over the 'mine shaft', it does sound a bit like a scuttle of a scorpion; not sure if that's me wanting to finding positives or whether that was intentional though. The outside queue section is a bit more interesting - there's actually things to look at! - and is nice. As for the ride, did the original Runaway Train only do two circuits, or did it do three (I genuinely can't remember)? Well, Scorpion Express only does two circuits. This means it takes two thirds of one circuit before you even get up to a fun speed which the family can enjoy, and spend half of the second circuit cruising down so you can safely land back in the station. Makes the ride feel lacklustre and even some of the younger kids seemed unexcited by it. As for the ride's effects. I liked the smoke effects; good touch. The fire is good, but goes off too much. When you're queueing outside, it gets a tad annoying (especially considering the way the queue seems to move like a decrepit scorpion on its last legs...). Having it go off once per ride, as opposed to every circuit, would be more preferable for me. The water effect is more like a dribble and only got the closest side to the scorpion. The large scorpion was pitiful; it's tail moved in the wind, and I noticed the claws twitch with movement as I was exiting. I almost felt like there should be some comical sparks from inside it was that bad... Now the most important thing really - the theming. When it boils down to it, Runaway Train had some brilliant theming which made it feel more than a figure of eight circuit. Unfortunately, Scorpion Express doesn't do the same thing. The backdrops feel lazy, with them just going for very generic shop fronts in the wild west, and not even hiding the red building to the right of the ride. Nice one. The smaller metal scorpions are quirky and clever though. The warning signs are a nice touch, but make no sense to the ride, seeinghow the big scorpion is out in the open, and the mine shafts have nothing bar a couple of the smaller scorpions. Oops. Perhaps I was just wanting it to fail deep down, so I feel like I had the right to moan some more about the park not upkeeping the old cave. But still, this ride is pretty much a Chessington ride; it's quite 'meh', despite the fact you can tell a lot of thought went into it.

The thing is, Merlin aren't exclusively going for gimmicks. Wardley said at the event thing that Merlin want two things (Varney also said this in an interview last year I believe): 1) A phrase / sentence that sums up the ride. 2) A killer image (usually in terms of a concept art). I think both of those are quite self-explanatory. We can look at all of Merlin's coasters, and I'm pretty sure we can think what each of these are. So, for example: Saw: 'The steepest freefall drop in the world'. Later, you can also add 'The world's first roller coaster themed to a horror film'. Flug der Dämonen 'Germany's first wing rider coaster / Germany's first winged coaster'. Under the two criteria, it's not too hard to imagine a ride which doesn't have any gimmick and still fits in. Whilst it's technically a low-key example, think of Scorpion Express: 'A runaway train with a sting in its tail'. We have a killer image and a phrase which sums up the ride. Yet it is literally just a bog-standard mine train. Of course, the easiest thing to fit into the two required criteria is a ride with a major gimmick, as that instantly gives you your phrase, and you can base your 'killer image' around that. So I think it's a bit of a misconception that Merlin only wants gimmicks. They want rides which, as Ryan says, will attract people the year they open, and it seems to two criteria Merlin outline is the best way to do that. Unfortunately, it's a lot easier to find a gimmick and just make it work round what's required, as opposed thinking of something which is of high quality, sells itself, is original, and fits in with the two criteria to Merlin's satisfaction.

No Limits recreation of the ride. That first inversion looks...odd. It just seems unnatural and that it could ride so uncomfortably...

Doesn't seem anything overly special. Alvey in overhype shocker! I've noticed they're saying it's the first RMC woodie in Europe, but isn't Tayto Park in Ireland building one for 2015?

Placing a bet on it being a 'wooden' (as in a RMC woodie) Gravity Max.

Smiler's airtime hills are fun (due to the fact that they're pretty much the only elements on the ride which don't turn you upside down...). However, Saw's airtime hill has seems to give a lot more airtime for me than on my 2 experiences with Smiler. The shape of the airtime hills probably plays a factor in that to be honest.

I wasn't visiting the park every week. However, I visited it regularly enough during the time, and was quite unlucky to not get to ride it until May-time (I do have vague memories of hearing how it was open at times, but never when I was around. Seemingly a long time ago now, so can't fully remember though!). Whilst Rush wasn't exactly free of troubles of course, but more often than not, it was open when I visited from what I remember. Just seems we had different experiences with our trips!

Have I missed something and it's only 4 people per train or is that just an incomplete train?! :S

I must have been lucky with Rush and unlucky with Slammer then!

Rush opened in June-time I think and Slammer opened for the start of the season, if I remember correctly.

Did you miss the part where Slammer seemed to be closing down a lot of the time when it first opened? I didn't get on Slammer until late-May in 2005 (well, around then) and I was going quite regularly from opening! On the other hand, I got on Rush very quickly after it opened. Rush was temperamental, yes, and had it's fair share of troubles, but Slammer's reliability hasn't been great from the start.

Never knew it had two different programs! Always seen it do 3 cycles both ways; never 2. Well, at least Thorpe pretty much always run it on the longer cycle. [/ThinkingPositive]

It's a fair point you make; I do agree with you to a certain extent. The thing is, the everyday customer won't know there's a plan for a proper hotel. In their eyes, it's Thorpe's hotel at the moment. It's not exactly an ideal situation for them, and one which no one wants to see really.

I don't see why you can't mention Ben Dowson's name on here (at least, I assume that's who you are referring to?). He was relatively open on his Twitter account about his involvement in Smiler.

What would you class as a 'capacity dream' for a flat ride, just outta interest? Given how long the ride cycle takes (especially the going up and down), I doubt that it's maximum theoretical throughput can reach above 600. I wouldn't call that a capacity dream for a flat ride. I wouldn't call it THAT popular either. I think I've only ever seen Slammer have a queue of over an hour once or twice since it opened. Considering it was probably barely reaching 500pph, it's not exactly the most popular ride out there from that perspective.

I don't think any of us know the exact reasons why Thorpe haven't gotten round to building the 'proper' hotel yet. They've got the approval, and they've tweaked the plans on occasions. We can speculate (costs, Thorpe having a bad year, etc.) but don't know why exactly. I don't think it's really fair for us to judge why Thorpe have gone for shipping containers over a proper hotel at the moment considering we don't have a clue what's happening behind the scenes!

Because, hopefully, Merlin's wallet will eventually have a bigger say than their fetish for wanting world firsts / world onlys. (Now there's a sentence I didn't think I'd ever say!)

Never get people's obsessions with wanting to replace Detonator with a different drop tower to be honest. It's a good drop tower and, form what I've heard, packs more of a punch than most others out there... As for the next coaster, it can potentially have a maximum height of 164ft.

I'm not really a betting man and have no idea about horse racing, but usually take an interest in the Grand National. Won't be betting this year, but if I was, it'd be on Double Seven... (Obviously haven't just chosen the first coolish looking name I saw that had okay odds)

I totally agree with you about the lack of coherent story. What always gets me is how (if you're in the second car), Billy tells us 'This is what happens if you lose...' when you leave. Yet, at the end of the ride, we're told we've survived. It doesn't make sense, and it is a real shame (waits for some ironic comment saying that the Saw films don't make sense, but I'd disagree with that ). It's a real shame; they had such a good opportunity to create a good story, but they didn't. It's also a shame about the lack of soundtrack too; it's one of the key things you associate with Saw. I think it would have been perfect as a background noise in the building; both in the queue and the ride itself. I also forgot about this; actually can't remember the last time I heard it! Hopefully it can make a return... I don't know what they would have or have not considering to be honest. But, of course, they wanted the riders to remember they're in the Saw environment, so it makes sense to have a nice little touch to end the ride. It doesn't mean they can get away with cheap effects. What they have is a small addition which keeps in line with the films, and the gist of it is well known enough outside the films in such a way that if you haven't seen the films, you can see why it relates. Of course I think the experience was analysed so that people who haven't seen the films are kept happy - this ride is suitable for anyone over 12 apparently! The designers no doubt wanted to make sure there was actual things from the films so you see this was 'Saw - The Ride' and not 'The imitation of Saw ride'. I don't think it's a coincidence, either, that most of the traps that come from the film relate to the first film - in fact, the only that isn't is the actual Rack Trap from Saw 3. They only took things from the most iconic and likely-most seen Saw film so that there's a greater chance that more people can relate to it. Then, everything else is generic 'Oh, this can kill you if this was real'. It is indeed an ideal situation to be in that riders are receptive to everything around them. However, that isn't just a trouble for Saw, it's a trouble for all coasters! However, just because not every rider is receptive to their surrounds and pays attention to everything, it doesn't mean everything has to been shoved in your face. There should be things which are subtle, or even just less obvious. Yes, it means people will miss some things, but their experience on the whole is still going to be good. For the 'ideal rider', or even just a rider that is really into the ride, the ending is fine. In your last experience, I'm guessing your average riders were who were in your car, maybe one other car as well? You can't really base a view on a couple of cars. I still think that, overall, the average riders are going to be people who haven't ridden Saw many times, if at all, have maybe seen one or two Saw films and, given the audience of the ride, going to be teens / young adults who are looking forward to the ride.

Yeah, I get what you mean. Just don't think it's right to call it a kid's park.

My point was, you're making it sound awful. Just like saying Smiler's ride ending is just 'A bit of blurry writing on the wall followed by a corridor with some projectors in it'. That makes it sound rubbish, when it's actually clever. Likewise, if you say Saw's ending is 'A puppet that gets lit up with a bit of audio, followed by walking down a staircase', you're making it sound naff. As for not being able to hear it...Well, when the timings work properly, you hear it fine. Granted, the timings aren't always perfect - and why that is, who knows - but when it does work, which is quite a lot of the time, it's fine really. As for seeing it from a guest's point of view, that's exactly what I am doing! In fact, I'd say you're the one who is not! Your average guest is probably riding Saw for one if the first times ever. They may have watched the first Saw film, or at least know the gist of it. They might not have been to many parks (they may not be aware of 'a theme park world outside the UK'). For that sort of guest, see it from their view - they've just been whipped round a final inversion, and then crawled into the station to, hopefully, been told they've survived. I don't see how that's not effective to your everyday guest really? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the ending is perfect or the best thing since sliced bread. However, it does the job in my eyes; which is a start at least.