JoshC.

Don't be silly Benin - they're only changing the back two rows on one of the trains; just in case people want to ride the back row facing forward! But in all seriousness, that should dis-spell that rumour now...I hope. On a different note, doesn't Swarm look lovely in the snow.

I voted for the 23rd and 30th. Sundays I won't be able to make, the 16th I move back home from uni, and the 6th is my birthday, and already have plans. I'll definitely be able to do the 30th, but not too sure on the 23rd. I *should* be able to make it, but it depends on a few things - will know nearer the time.

TST member Stevie recently posted these quotes from AT's staff newsletter; 'The Pulse': Mod's note: Please be aware this information may give away some of the surprises of the SW7 attraction. Sounds great! EDIT: I assumed that this was okay to post seeinghow it had been posted earlier on TST with no issues. If it would be better to remove it or something, do say and I can delete the post.

I didn't even know Silver Star set any form of record in Europe when it opened; learn something new everyday! I've wanted to write something like this for a while now, but admittedly the more I started actually writing about it, the less I began to thought there was anything to say. I guess, in a way, something only becomes 'vanilla' after something else comes along (like you say with Silver Star; it's become vanilla since due to other things coming along afterwards). This would then make the idea of vanilla coasters a bit pointless, as it would just describe something which is a bit old. Hmmm...

I was more sticking to Thorpe rides, as Sid mentioned one. To be honest, any refurb at Chessington would be much loved; and soon.

In the past two decades or so, roller coaster manufacturing has seen many technological advances. Back in the 1980s, the idea of having a roller coaster where the trains were underneath the track or having a launched roller coaster was about as technologically superior as the industry has reached. The first 'suspended' coaster, 'The Bat' at Kings Island in America, opening in 1981, only to close two years later due to being highly temperamental, whilst the first launched coaster, 'King Kobra' at Kings Dominion opened in 1977, though the model was inefficient and nowhere near the type of launches commonly used in today's roller coasters (although clones of King Kobra do still operate today!). However, in the past two decades, we have seen many technological advances. 21 years ago saw the introduction of the first 'inverted' roller coaster (not to be confused with a suspended coaster), which was the first roller coaster to have trains underneath the track, yet act like one where the trains were above the track. In 1998, the world's first vertical drop roller coaster opening, with Oblivion at Alton Towers. Though this may not sound impressive, it is indeed a technological advancement in the way the train's wheels are designed, so that the trains are able to stay on the track. We have also seen the introduction of many other styles of roller coasters, such as flying roller coasters, winged roller coasters, beyond-vertical drop roller coasters and so much more. So, what is this 'vanilla roller coaster' I speak of in the title? It's not a technical term when designing a roller coaster, not is it something said to market one; it is probably a term I've made up.. Well, it's a plain and simple roller coaster - the train sits above the track, you sit down in the train, get strapped in, and away you go. There's no bits of 'trick track' (whereby the track itself moves to create an additional effect, such as track dropping vertically like a drop tower). There's no gimmicky elements to the track, such as ridiculously steep drops (vertical and beyond). There's no launches or anything like that. So basically, the plainest of the plain roller coasters (much like the flavour vanilla). Silver Star is an example of what I would call a 'Vanilla Coaster'. (Photo taken from CoasterForce). Saw - The Ride is not what I would call a Vanilla Coaster, due to the gimmicky 100 degrees 'beyond-vertical' drop it features. Hopefully that gives a clear enough definition of what I define to be a Vanilla Coaster. Of course, many may disagree that vanilla coasters are something which should be defined, or that what I class as vanilla coasters is incorrect, but more on this later. But, are vanilla coasters now dying in the current coaster market? There's a plethora of ride types available, all of which are capable of doing something vanilla coasters cannot, so they will add an extra dimension to any park's line up - give something for parks to scream and shout about. The addition of a gimmick or something different brings in crowds, so, what's not to like? Now seems like a nice time for a little analogy - what would you prefer: a rich, creamy Madagascar Vanilla ice cream full of proper vanilla flavour, or some Tesco Everyday Value chocolate ice cream? Coming from someone who prefers chocolate ice cream to vanilla ice cream, I'd still go for the former of the two options. And the same goes for roller coasters - I'd much rather be riding a excellent roller coaster which does nothing but go round a track with no gimmicks, than ride an okay coaster that has some gimmick(s) to it. So then, are vanilla coasters actually a dying concept? Well, in my opinion, yes, they are. Let's that UK theme parks for an example. Since 2003, the only vanilla coaster I can vaguely think of being introduced in the UK is 'Kiddi Koaster' at Adventure Island in 2011. So, out of at least fifteen new coasters added in the UK in the past 10 years (there's no doubt more, but this is just a quick search from major theme parks), one of them has been my so-called vanilla coaster. So, in my opinion, it's safe to say that vanilla coasters are dying in the UK, and no doubt worldwide. Why exactly they are dying is likely down to what I explained earlier - that other coasters can offer things vanilla coasters cannot. If a park gets something different, something unique, and it is in itself a good ride, then of course such a coaster is going to be seen as a better option than a vanilla coaster. To go back to the earlier analogy - given the choice of a rich, creamy Madagascar Vanilla ice cream or a 500ml tub of Ben & Jerry's, you're pretty much in a win-win situation, and it comes down to personal taste. The same applies here; given the choice of a great vanilla coaster or a great non-vanilla coaster, the choice just comes down to what is preferred - and that almost always is the non-vanilla option, because of the large variety of choice. So, on that note, we can see that if the concept of the vanilla coaster is dying, it's not a bad thing. But maybe, it's not dying, and the concept of a vanilla coaster is fluid - perhaps what defines 'vanilla' changes as coaster manufacturing improves. For example, launches are a very common feature these days on rides, and are incorporated a lot more naturally than they used to be. It is far from unusual to see launches used on coasters with lift hills, and the launch is not as much as a gimmick 'one hit feature' of a ride (unlike with, say, Stealth, where the launch pretty much is the ride). So maybe vanilla coasters have naturally developed to include launches, thus greatly expanding what defines one. Maybe the gimmick of vertical or beyond vertical drops is not really that much of a gimmick, and just an extra feature available due to advancements in technology. Really and truly, is it just picky of me to call Gerstlauer Eurofighters such as Saw a non-vanilla coaster? Probably. So, again, that expands the rides defined by a vanilla coaster. With inclusions such as these, the concept of a vanilla coaster is most certainly not dying. Even rides inverted coasters are pretty common these days, though to call it a type of vanilla coaster in my eyes would be rather extreme in my opinion, it is perhaps a 'chocolate coaster', in that it is common, but not the most basic. One final point to finish - maybe all of this just doesn't matter. So what if a certain type of roller coaster design is becoming less commonly built? There's still plenty of good coasters types out there, and plenty of good coasters to be ridden. Some types of roller coasters have bitten the dust in the past, such as 'pipeline coasters', and some types never really caught on, such as backwards in the dark. Other types never rethinking / extra work done to them before they catch, as can sort of be seen with 'Winged roller coasters'. Maybe the concept of a vanilla coaster dying is in no way a bad thing; it just shows a natural development in the roller coaster industry, and for all we know, they could come back into fashion before we know it.. So, that's it really. I had no idea where this would be going, so no idea if the trail of thought of this seems logical in any way. To be honest, even though this is finished, and this was a 'topic' I've thought about for a long time, I don't even have an idea of what I've concluded. I've argued it is possible that vanilla coasters are dying, but in the Golden Ticket 2012 Awards (one of the more reliable roller coaster rankings I've seen), the Top 10 steel roller coasters all fit my original definition of a vanilla coaster. So, maybe, even those aren't dying? But who knows? I guess what I finish off with saying is that the roller coaster industry is developing in so many ways that sometimes it is forgotten that all is need when it comes to the actual roller coaster is trains on a well-designed, fun track layout.

At Warwick, if you do a 4 year course, you can move back into Halls of Residence in your 4th year, which are specially for 4th years (and even some some 3rd years in their final year). I love my Halls though; don't wannt move out of them at the end of the year.

^Colossus before Inferno please? Great news to hear that we're getting what we wanted with Oblivion. A spruce up is what it has needed for a while now. Also great to hear about The Sanctuary as well - I absolutely loved it, and it's a great move opening it for a short period of time, as it sustains the build up and story of the ride. I wouldn't like it to stay for too long though, simply because it is a Scarefest attraction, and I'd much rather see money put elsewhere than running a maze for a long period of time. I assume the budget of the Oblivion spruce up will be separate from SW7's budget as well then?

Sorted all that out over a month ago - aww yeah.

The giraffes Tonda, Kismet, Karamoja and Kito have arrived! I guess what is shown of the giraffe house is more the back of it which guests won't see; and even that looks nicely themed - seems to be very promising! And Zufari is being said to be a "safari trail with a theme park twist". I'm genuinely looking forward to doing this in March.

I think I may have done you know, oh well. But yes, it is definitely strange and confusing that they'd consider Island E for the next coaster, due to the space available on Island A and the fact that it stands out more (where Island E has been used appropriately as advertising space). Maybe it's all part of some master plan?! Woo speculation indeed..

Love the trip report Peaj! It was really great to read it, and made me even more disappointed I missed it. I look forward to this special announcement as well...

We do indeed Sids.. In the MTDP documents submitted in 2010, it only allowed Island C to go up to 50m (and that was the only island located for the 2015 coaster). Islands A and E (island E being where the Snoozeboxes are going) were marked as potential locations for the 2015 coasters, and had 40m as their maximum height. In the planning application for The Swarm, this was said: (Sorry it's a bit skewed; the paragraph was spread over two pages ) In the Snoozebox application, this was stated: (Sorry for not cropping this or anything; as you can see, I screen-capped it last year and couldn't be bothered to do so before putting it on Photobucket) So, it is "likely" that the "2015 coaster" could be 50m tall. This makes me think that it's possible that the way Thorpe wrote it in the MTDP was that they originally planned the 2012 coaster to be 50m, and the "2015" one to be 40m, but changed their mind. So, in fact, the location has nothing to do with it, it's just coincidental because Swarm was only considered for one island. At least, that's how I read it. Either way, the high points of the coasters on all the islands have already been carefully marked (they were highlighted on the MTDP in 2010) to create minimal visual impact for surrounding areas, so I don't think there should be any problems interchanging the maximum heights. I've always had issues with the way the Snoozebox application was worded with regards to the "2015 coaster", though. It only specifies that the "(2015) coaster on Area E may not built until 2016" now. However, as the Snoozeboxes will be there during the 2015 season, there wouldn't build a 2016 coaster on island E, otherwise those staying in the Snoozeboxes are staying on a construction site. So that would mean it would be built in 2016, and likely open in 2017 (or, pushing it and with an early application, mid-way through 2016, seeing how Snoozebox have to go by February 2016). So, it is still possible the "2015 coaster" could be built for the 2015 season, and simply just be built on island A (which seems more logically anyway); at least, that's what I gather from it. Saying that though, I have heard many rumours here and there that, regardless of where it's going, it won't open until 2016 anyway, due to Snoozebox, like you've said Sid. Anyway, to go back to the original point, I believe the next roller coaster will be able to go up to 50m, according to some planning applications (though not the MTDP.. XD)

Nevertheless, the "2015 coaster" can, according to the MTDP, go up to about 50m (just over 160ft). Interesting that you call 2007 and 2010 (I'm ignoring 2004 because I personally don't think the 3 year investment strategy started / came apparent until 2006) "small investment years". Whilst I don't disagree that what they've added in those years haven't been particularly large, the years after them have seen even smaller investments (Time Voyagers and Storm Surge). So, really, 2007 and 2010 should more be medium investments, and yet we've only ever got these "small investments". Even though I've always thought about it, the way you worded it here makes me realise just how long the park hasn't had a large non-major year, and is due one soon. (Just to say, I don't think a large non-major year requires a larger ride, but something like a year dedicated to spruce ups in which a fair bit is spent). With the surprises the park have in store, will be interesting to see just how much they are investing in the actual theme park this year..

Okay, shoot me for double posting in the same day or whatever, but it's worth it imo...

Yeah thanks Dan - was going to do that now actually.. Submission, Sub Terra and Th13teen should've been a bit higher in my opinion and Nemesis is the Number 1 at Alton, but other than that, the results are largely reflective of my opinions!

Experience the evolution? First thoughts are possibly alien-related (aliens could involve once they land here), so Swarm related. Could well be Vengeance becoming a Swarm bolt on, X retheme to become a Swarm bolt on or something similar. Or it could a nudge at the evolution of X in general, and some sort of nightcluby theme? Basically - it could still be anything that's be rumoured. YAY!

This could well come in handy at some point in the future..

This.

Air (3) Nemesis (7) Oblivion (5) Nemesis + Air - Nawwww, no Hex

Air (4) Hex: The Legend Of The Towers (4) Nemesis (5) Oblivion (7) Hex + Air -

Air (5) Hex: The Legend Of The Towers (3) Nemesis (6) Oblivion (6) Hex + Air -

Do not even joke about that!

Air (5) Duel - The Haunted House Strikes Back (4) Hex: The Legend Of The Towers (5) Nemesis (6) Oblivion (5) Hex + Duel -

Air (5) Duel - The Haunted House Strikes Back (5) Hex: The Legend Of The Towers (5) Nemesis (7) Oblivion (5) The Gardens (3) Nemesis + Gardens - Aww, no Sub Terra any more. Could have at least kicked Duel out before it..