Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thorpe Park Mania Forums

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

JoshC.

Moderator
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JoshC.

  1. I believe I remember someone saying it in Chat a while ago? Not too hard to believe when you think about it. It's what, £9 for an over 12 at the moment? When you consider how much a £9 pizza would cost at an ordinary Pizza Hut, and how much people would eat whilst there (no doubt people would eat less), and how it is constantly rammed in there, it seems plausible.
  2. JoshC. replied to Confuzzled's topic in The Past
    Then Mark and I are pretty much on the same page?! Though I wouldn't say that, whilt on the bridge, Storm Surge particularly ruins the view.. And also, it's not just being a student that's preventing me from visiting new parks, home or abroad. so yeah..
  3. JoshC. replied to Confuzzled's topic in The Past
    I don't particularly see what you're saying there as being blunt. Unfortunately, it is, at this stage difficult for me to go to new parks, for a variety of reasons, as you can appreciate. However, I do think you've missed my point a little here. My point focused solely on the bridge as a setting. You go through the turnstiles and then you're greeted by a bridge, with a huge dome structure in front of you, and rides just past that and to the side of you. As you cross that bridge and approach the island of rides, it is like entering somewhere completely different; the chance to be away from reality. The setting of the bridge is just purely fantastic and in my it is the best you can have. The points you made are slightly different. The gravel car park and ridiculous plaza area before the bridge, I totally agree, are not great. They don't set any tone and don't bring any excitement. However, as said, my point was focused on the bridge, as opposed to the entire entrance; likely me being a bit unclear there. As for what they've done with the bridge, with the selling of photopasses and drink capsules and such (in my personal experience though, I have only see those selling photopasses in recent years, with the drink capsules sellers more being around the dome), that is a good point you raise. It detracts from the rides, the experience, and isn't the greatest. Whilst I agree with what you're saying, I still don't think that takes anything away from what I was trying to say - the bridge helps create one of the best entrances you can have to a theme park. Unfortunately, what the park are doing with it is taking away from that. Maybe the fact I haven't visited many parks means that my opinion on the entrance is skewed somewhat. However, the setting of the park means that the necessary inclusion of a bridge has, quite possibly inadvertenly given the park one of the best types of entrances to a theme park you can have. With a spruce up of the entrance plaza and car park (in particular) as well as the dome, I think it would do the park wonders, and helps the entrance bridge reach its full potential.
  4. JoshC. replied to daboywunda's topic in The Past
    If this is happening, I'd be interested to know if this was in Thorpe's grand scheme of things (seeinghow they always like riding high on their new coaster for two years), or if it is a quick panic job. I still don't get why this would happen though? If they've always wanted this to happen, then okay, fair enough - but I still don't quite know why they would think 'Oh, okay, let's reverse the direction of 2 rows of the train after a season, market it as a new twist..'. If it was to be a more 'panic move', I think that's even worse. Yeah, okay, last season wasn't great for Thorpe. But there could be a variety of reasons for this - the wet summer, the Olympics, double-dip recessions, etc. are all a variety of plausible possible reasons. Maybe restricting their target to young adults has started to catch up with them? Whatever the reason, it seems perculiar to think 'Well, we had a bad year, let's put it down to our new ride and add a new gimmick to it to make people come back'. That just seems desparate of them. With the Crash Pad, they seem to be expanded out to target 'up for it families', so maybe they are taking note that at the moment, solely targetting young adults isn't the best step forward yet. By the sounds of it, this back row job seems likely to be happening. Whilst I no doubt would ride it backwards if it were to happen (don't lie now - many people will think to themselves 'Oh, how different / better / worse would that ride be if it was facing the opposite direction?'), I'd still be perplexed as to why it would happen, or why they would even consider it.
  5. JoshC. replied to Confuzzled's topic in The Past
    Well, looks like I'm going against the general opinion, and say that this is perfect for the Crash Pad. First of all, lets think about the entrance bridge. It is one of the best entrances to a theme park you can have - you're going over water onto an island of rides, taking you away from reality, and you can see a good number of rides. You then have the Dome; a huge domineering structure which is again a great feature. As it is, those two things are perfect in my opinion. The bridge is basic so, in a way, it doesn't draw attention to itself - it is not meant to be a key focus. So, for the 'boardwalk' we are getting for the Crash Pad, what do you want? Do you want something amazing looking that draws attention to itself (ie - have a good sense of theming to it)? No, because then it makes people look at the bridge, and then the Crash Pad (and of course, we want as little attention on the Crash Pad as possible). So, you want something plain and simple, that blends in, and tries to disturb as little as possible. In other words, we want a nice quick bridge, that is the same style as the main entrance bridge, and we want it to blend in and feel as natural as possible. The way I see it, that's exactly what is going to happen. Granted, this will inevitably take away from the entrance a bit, and nothing of this project is ideal, but when push comes to shove, this is the best we could ever get from this project in my opinion.
  6. You see, I was expecting something similar (well, the current Africa land being expanded into Forbidden Knigdom at least), and joining with Zufari to create a large African land. However, on Chessington's website, they class 'Zufari' as its own land. Will be interesting to see how the lands develop over the next few years though. As for the next major investment, 2016 looks likely. But then, that's what's rumoured for AT's next major development, and even Thorpe's. I dunno how exactly costs work at Merlin, but having 3 huge investments into those 3 parks (don't have a clue when Lego's is - isn't the next one 2014?), surely 2016 is going to be one expensive year for them..? Whenever Chessie's net major investment is though, I just hope we see something good added in the years between them..
  7. JoshC. replied to daboywunda's topic in The Past
    If they turn part of the train backwards, they can just add backwards near misses! Simple! I just don't know what to think. This latest clue seems to point to the back 2 rows turning backwards. But then how on earth is that going to work out logisitically when queueing? Front row queue is a bit of a mess as it is, and that's all about queueing for a special row. SRQ was scrapped as well due to the complicated issues it could have. Maybe they'll get rid of the front row queue and sort it out like that? Maybe there could be an additional charge? Goodness knows. No matter how much thought gets put into this, I fear for how the queue system could work. Then there's the more sensible / logical idea that it just won't turn backwards and the park can just add extra theming, spruce up the park and market themselves as a place where you can get a variety of high quality experiences. That would help draw in the crowds.
  8. JoshC. replied to daboywunda's topic in The Past
    I'd expect that the overall investment of Saw Alive, however, is greater than Storm Surge. Saw Alive - theming, repainting / redesign of a boat and actors = expensive. Storm Surge - Removal of OG. Moved from America to England = quite cheap. I'd be interested to know why you think Storm Surge was the 'medium investment' and Alive the 'small investment' though (not that either of them are particularly large..)
  9. JoshC. replied to daboywunda's topic in The Past
    Think you're slightly confused there. The MTDP stated that between 2010-2016, they'd install up to 5 round rides, where there are a possible 9 locations. One of the rides was Storm Surge, so it's likely they'll install at most 4 more, though I wouldn't be surprised if we only see another two (at most) between now and 2016.
  10. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BAr1Y1FCUAADcy5.jpg:large (From CF's Twitter - not allowed to post it for some reason?) Just look at it!
  11. JoshC. replied to th13teen's topic in UK Attractions
    I'd love to see it spread to adverts for Youtube videos. Is it possibe to have just have one which is just 5 seconds with a face with spinning eyes saying 'It's coming #getcorrected' or something similar - that would be a great online campaign. Would love to see it on buses as well though! Cannot wait to see where this leads. Geniunely looking forward to it!
  12. I like the idea and think it is fairer. This transitional period means that people will have to even wait a little bit longer till they get their cup, or just buy one which lasts a few months, rather than 12 (and when you think about it, due to the way the parks are open, unless you use it loads at Warwick Castle, it's only really used March-November in the old system in a way anyways...). After that, like Fred says, this system is fine, and a lot better. I'm annoyed they haven't changed the design of the cups though. I had no end of problems with my last year... ¬¬
  13. JoshC. replied to daboywunda's topic in The Past
    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.
  14. 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.
  15. JoshC. replied to th13teen's topic in UK Attractions
    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.
  16. 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...
  17. JoshC. replied to th13teen's topic in UK Attractions
    I was more sticking to Thorpe rides, as Sid mentioned one. To be honest, any refurb at Chessington would be much loved; and soon.
  18. 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.
  19. JoshC. replied to Phill's topic in Nonsense
    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.
  20. JoshC. replied to th13teen's topic in UK Attractions
    ^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?
  21. JoshC. replied to Phill's topic in Nonsense
    Sorted all that out over a month ago - aww yeah.
  22. 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.
  23. 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..
  24. 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...
  25. 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)

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.