JoshC.

Yeah, the park have mentioned that on their FB today! https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152202782745867&set=a.377923300866.202576.27217550866&type=1&theater

Well, this is the worst flooding we have seen in Chertsey since the 1950s (though might actually be the worst on record soon I believe). Pretty sure Thorpe have taken precautions so that when they build rides, flood risks are taken into consideration and such. The park will be fine.

So it's now open and all that, and there's a Merlin-esque PR stunt to go with it: The option to buy a clean pair of underwear! (Retweeted by Screamscape on Twitter)

Seeinghow other people have mentioned their first ever coaster, may as well throw it out there that my first coaster was THE Flying Fish...

I may pop in for a while; depends how much work I get done in the next couple of days. XD

Monk's Walk is just a footpath that connects the town of Thorpe to Chertsey. It runs along the back of the park, essentially parallel to the old train route to the farm. It's a public walkway, so not owned by the park, and is used by people for bike rides, walking dogs (trying to sneak into the park, hence why security walk down that area), etc. The park use the pathway next to it as an access road I believe (they have a road built now which takes you over the old Treasure Island and some reclaimed land to quickly get to the Engineering building) and a couple of other things. Somewhat surprisingly, I've never been down Monk's Walk all my life (it was only a couple of years ago I found out how to actually get there!), but some fanboys have been down during Closed Season to take pictures: - http://forum.maniahub.com/topic/3156-samurai/page-2#entry38608 - http://www.baffles.me.uk/features/tpg/archives/projdylan/page2/index.html Scroll down to the January 2009 update at the bottom; I *think* those photos were taken from Monk's Walk. - http://forum.maniahub.com/topic/4210-closed-season-2008-2009/ - Probably some of the best photos you'll get of views from Monk's Walk. If you want an actual picture of what the actual pathway itself looks like, then: Yep, it looks like a bog standard path! (Image from Google)

I reckon if it does get a name change, it will still incorporate the word Detonator; so something like what c1hrisin suggested. Thing is, I don't think we're seeing any theming added to Detonator per se, so just an audio change and such so that it's more shoe-horned into the area. A full out name change just doesn't seem necessary to me.

Banned for not following the rules! (You're meant to ban pluk for a reason related to him )

If by 'big coaster' you mean a 1.4m coaster, then my first 3 were: 1) X:\No Way Out 2) Colossus 3) Nemesis Inferno To be honest, no entirely sure about the order of Colossus and Inferno (did all 3 of those coasters on the same day - oh to finally be 1.4m!), but it sounds about right. If by 'big coaster' you mean (one of) a park's major coasters, then stick Antelope at Gulliver's World as the first on that list.

Flappy Bird has limited appeal, like Marc said. People will get bored of it, and it will die away quickly (properly before Thorpe even opens). It was only some weird internet craze that got its popularity boosted - it was released last May after all!

I was joking! Probably should've but a smily after it actually...

Also the 'dead body' wrapped in barbed wire may not be the best thing for 8 year olds to see. You could easily say that some of the mazes at Thorpe don't have that much that could scare children (just people shouting BOO essentially), but alas, they have a 13 restriction.

I totally agree with you. After all, I bet most people on here were such young children you wanted to go on such a ride! However, one thing which would concern me is if they build a coaster which is 50m high, for example, and is pretty much right next to Stealth, it's going to look large. It's going to look intimidating too, regardless of the theme or what type of ride it is, to a 7 year old kid. Then, when you compare it to the park's other rides, and it's taller than 'The one that goes upside down 10 times', 'The one based on a horror film' and the like, my worry is it's going to be seen as something which is scarier than it should be. Especially when the park is as small as it is - it's really easy to make comparisons. But then if the park don't go for a tall ride, and instead go for something around the 25-30m mark so that it could come across as less intimidating - but still a perfect family thrill coaster - then the park are potentially losing out on the potential of having another really tall coaster. I know people will say 'height isn't everything, etc.', but there's only so much you can do by sticking at the same height (which was the whole point of the parking applying to the council to have taller coasters). Maybe I'm over-thinking / over-complicating it, but I definitely think there's a fine line that the park need to be careful about. They could risk creating a ride which isn't suited enough to the desired market, further alienate the market they're trying to appeal to, or miss out on an opportunity of getting a certain coaster at a certain time.

Who wants another B&M goodness photo? Everyone of course (From Heide Park's Twitter)

Those three guesses all seem very plucked out of the air to me. -S&S Free Spin seems to be much against the grain of the recent direction the park are taking. Not to mention it would undermine Swarm massively. -Dragon Fly seems to have been floating around for a while, and I just can't see it ever really taking off, nor Thorpe going for one. -RMC inverting woodie is of course being put about an awful lot recently. Could it happen? Who knows? Thorpe are now in the perhaps very sticky situation in that they've got the opportunity to build their second-tallest coaster on park and (if they leave opening until 2017) potentially their longest coaster, but they also need a big family coaster for everyone (a 1.2m ride, fun for all, etc.. Basically, what Th13teen did for Towers). Would the park's 2nd tallest and longest coaster be able to appeal to the entire family? Or would they have to shun a family coaster so they could use those more relaxed restrictions to make another thrill monster of a coaster? Or would they put off building a taller coaster for another 3 years? The way I see it, whatever they end up doing, it's likely to have a couple of negatives.

I genuinely just don't find it uncomfortable! I accept that the restraints are 'tight fitting' if you will, but I didn't find it bad in any way really. Certainly necessary to enjoy the ride. Thing is, I've found that on Vortex, for example, there's been times when the restraints really made my legs uncomfortable, so it's not like it's a general thing that I don't find things on my legs uncomfortable!

Genuinely gutted Submission is going. Loved it; decent ride and never saw why people thought it was uncomfortable. Can't see any rides that could replace it though; not exactly ample space there, ey?

I don't think we'll see it introduced this season. It's a very bold system to introduce, and I think they'll need to trial it more in real life before actually implementing it. Maybe try it on a different ride as well if they can. I think it is something that really needs a lot of work (not to say they haven't already done that) before they consider actually implementing it. Then again, if I remember correctly, some of the 'review questions' after the trial asked if people would be willing to pay for it, meaning it could be used as a way of replacing Fastrack. So yeah, who knows. But I reckon if the park are serious about it all, they'll definitely trial it a couple more times this season.

I certainly cannot do the 26th or 27th due to being back at uni. I remain very unsure about the 12th or 13th. I'm likely to have gone to Chessie a few days before then with family, and at the time would be in the swing of revision for exams / already back at uni. So, I won't vote as I'm unlikely to be attending, but holding out for the 12th or 13th plus some luck in my schedule meaning I'll be able to go.

Put me down!

Starting velocity = u = 0 m/s Final velocity = v = x m/s (What we're trying to find) Height = h = 205ft = 62.484m Gravity = g = 9.81m/s^2 (gravitational pull towards to earth) Using Suvat equations, we get the equation: v^2 = u^2 + 2gh I.e.: x^2 = 0 + 2*9.81*62.484 = 1255.94. So x = 35.01 m/s Converting that into miles per hour, we get a maximum speed of 78.3 mph. As Benin's pointed out, not the most accurate thing to use, but there's a nice ball-park estimate I guess.

Ah, fair enough. I figured Suvat would give a fairly reasonable idea as to it all. But of course, with all of the assumptions you have to make, it's hard to tell how accurate it could be. And, tbh, I haven't touched any sort of mechanics in 2 years, so wouldn't know of any other of giving an idea for finding a more accurate result.

Seeinghow JohnD's post seemed to slip off the radar, I'll quote, and I'll give some Maths to the situation too... If you were to drop a particle (ie something very small such that friction, air resistance, etc. are negligible), we can see how fast the train would go if we were to drop it (yes, physically crane a train up to 235ft and just let it go). Starting velocity = u = 0 m/s Final velocity = v = x m/s (What we're trying to find) Height = h = 235ft = 71.628m Gravity = g = 9.81m/s^2 (gravitational pull towards to earth) Using Suvat equations, a nice little trick from A Level Maths / Physics, we use the equation: v^2 = u^2 + 2gh I.e.: x^2 = 0 + 2*9.81*71.638 = 1504.54. So x = 37.49 m/s Converting that into miles per hour, we get a maximum speed of 83.9 mph. Of course, things like friction and air resistance, shape of the track and so forth can and will reduce that maximum speed. No amount of wind could counteract that, surely...

From Mack's FB