JoshC.

If it is down to poor sales, then I think it shows they were a bit ambitious with the dates to be honest. Last season, they had two Reload nights, whereas this year, they have become monthly, which is a big jump, and probably too big of one for now. They probably should have left it to be bi-monthly for a while, let it further grow in popularity, improve it, etc. etc. before making it monthly. So harm in being ambitious though..

Did think that was a bit of a silly point to raise; understand what you mean now though. Really have no clue what I'd prefer them to have done in this situation in honesty, just hope that the issue is resolved soon...

*Dusts off topic* http://old.towerstimes.co.uk/news/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1334345973&archive=&start_from=&ucat=1,9& Surprised this hasn't been brought up actually...Saw this article on TT, saying that The Flume has had some modified boats installed to allow for children above 1.0m on the ride. Of course, last season, all Mack flumes increased from a 0.9m restriction (1.1m to be unaccompanied by an adult) to 1.2m (1.3m unaccompanied). I guess it's a good thing, and maybe a sign of things to come at other Merlin parks?

I guess it's one of those things where we're just not going to agree. The way I see T&Cs, they have no justification / right to refuse people based on age, and what they are doing is a form of discrimination. Fungle and Carousel are different kettles of fish in my mind, simply because they are aimed at young audiences (you didn't see young adults complaining they couldn't ride OG rides for example, nor that they can get into Temple of Mayhem - or whatever it's called now - when at Chessie). However, your point about being in park's property so they're in charge is a silly one really; just because they own the area, doesn't mean they're above the law and can be discriminatory with no right. One final point from me - just because they are being discriminative, it doesn't mean that this is necessarily the worst decision they could have made. As has been said countless times, this is a lose/lose situation for the park because people have been idiots. The park have hopefully made the best temporary decision they could, and this comes across in what people who are more 'in the know' have been saying...

Seems a bit...strange at the moment to be honest. No announcement, just changing the days on the site so it's only open during FN. Makes it a waste having it advertised at all. As Dodge said above, something serious must've gone down for this to happen (or, they're just changing days around or something and it's just not all updated?)

The fire effects have already been tested I think? They're just waiting for the 'final seal of approval' as it were from H&S. Unless they have to make changes, then they won't need any further testing. And as Benin said, any testing of fire effects would be done during closed hours.

Na, it didn't come across that way at all; sorry if it seemed as though I was slightly abrupt or anything though! Interesting that you've brought the T&Cs into this. I just had a quick browse through them, and I can't find anything which really 'covers' themselves; there's nothing I can find which allows them to refuse the right to ride a ride to a particular age group. The closest I can find in the T&Cs (found: http://www.thorpepar...conditions.aspx) is this: The way I read this, it says absolutely nothing about how they have a right to stop people from going on a ride because of their age. You could argue that the changing of the programme of a ride could come under this, however, the age of somebody does not come into this. On a serious note, could anyone point out a ride which has an age restriction? (Saw would not count, as it is only a recommendation, not a restriction). I'm willing to bet there isn't one, because the programme of rides will not affect how old someone must be before they can physically ride a ride. Therefore, as far as I can tell, Thorpe have not covered this in their T&Cs and are hence being discriminative. They have no right, in the eyes of their T&Cs (and the law, some may say, but I'm not going into that...) to refuse someone of a particular age the option to go on Rumba Rapids, even if it is for the health and safety of all. As I've said before, Thorpe are in a winless situation at the moment, and whatever they would have done for now would not have been 'right'. What they are doing is, in principle, discrimination, and I think that is something which cannot be disagreed with. Whether being discriminatory is the best thing to do, even for a temporary thing, is somethign we'll probably never know.

I was going to post that gif Benin, but I think I've used that a couple too many times this season with regards to Merlin merch.. Merchandise has definitely improved the past few seasons and this highlights that!

Personally, I'd feel more shocked that someone died on a ride than being turned away from a ride, but I guess for the public, it would all depend on how the press deal with it. As you said at the end though, it is lose/lose, which is the bad thing about this situation. As for better ways of dealing with this, I guess without knowing all the details and that, we will never know whether this was the best way of handling this..

Just to clarify, all I'm saying is it may be a contributing factor. The media and a 'traumatised' guest(s) can spin things to make it seem as though Thorpe are in some sort of wrong, whether they are or not. If, for example, some twit was to muck around on Rumba, fall out and get themselves killed / seriously injured, and it was reported nationally, it would not look good to the majority if you saw 'Teenager dies on rapids ride' or something as a headline. Of course, with all the information, many will understand it was 'some twit who mucked around' and wasn't the park's fault, but there will also be many who think 'well that's unsafe, not going there' and so forth. All depends how it is reported, of course. I remember a few years ago reading an article in a local paper about how an 8ish year old girl 'fell out' of Billy's Wizzer at Chessie, because the seats didn't lower fully, and the op asked everyone to stay in their seats, but she didn't (well, along those lines). From what I remember, she wasn't seriously hurt, but of course, family bring it up with the press, saying it's unsafe / irresponsible of the park, yadda yadda yadda. Had say this girl died / seriously injured, and the story went nation wide, despite Chessie being at no fault, it would look bad on the park in many people's eyes, just for the simple fact there was a death. tl;dr - Someone dies or gets seriously injured + Media Spin = Bad Publicity.

The way I see it is that Thorpe are in a winless situation. If they've pinpointed that accidents / bad situations arise from just young adults, then the way they see it, if they stop them from riding, such problems will go away. Now, as has been seen, this causes a backlash - rightly so, in my opinion - by teenagers, as it is discriminating against them for problems caused by the small minority of people in the age group; which is nothing new of course in current society. So, what if they decide to just let everyone go on in, except the few that look 'suspicious' (or tell them to behave before riding) some may ask. This leads to a problem that is just as, if not, slightly more, discriminatory, as people will feel segregated, and quite possibly wrongly in many cases, all because of a couple of incidents. The thing is, if Thorpe just do nothing and carry on as normal, they're going to see it as an increase in the risk of incidents occurring. All it takes is one of these incidents to go public, and whether it is the fault of the park or the guests, it will reflect badly on the park with the way today's media can be. If they just decide to close it off to everyone, then it's a ride down - which is able to be enjoyed by everyone in the terms of the given height restriction - which isn't good, especially as it's a water ride during the Easter break, and when supposedly the weather is becoming more suited to water rides. So, whatever they do, Thorpe are in the position which will upset guests to some degree or another. I dislike this restriction, and agree that how it currently is, it is discriminatory. However, if this is a temporary situation and, at the moment, the 'lesser evil', then it's a case of having to lump it for the time being. The only people at fault, really, are the guests that have made Thorpe do this, and this is a disappointment. A bit similar to last season, where three rides had to have their restrictions changed (though, in those cases, permanently), it is a case where Thorpe are losing out through no fault of their own...

Or it's just yet to be added? Like the thematic parts of the train?

Another £6 odd of my money goes to Merlin... They are very nice though!

Banned for having two words combined into one for his name.

It most definitely is not not in Florida, or anywhere in the US. The queue line TVs say how there's a crash scene / explosion at Thorpe Park, and have callers from the local area. In other words, it is themed to be in Thorpe Park. Personally, I'd have loved it if Thorpe put a subtle sign somewhere giving a name of the island, such as 'Now in *insert name here* island' or something. Let the name be two words, and have the two words start with L amd C respectively - Lake Conetina island for example (bad example, but ah well..). Would be a nice touch and make the whole thing that little bit more surreal. However, having 'The Swarm' written on the charred wood piece on the island entrance suggests they are simply leaving the area to be called 'The Swarm island'.

That first inversion seems slightly faster than Swarm's? Or is that just me? (At least it's slightly different as well). I speed of this doesn't really bother me; speed isn't everything of course. However, I'd be more interested to hear review of the finished product, especially as the ride seems to have a lack of theming compared to other B&M wingriders...

Absolutely brilliant stuff by Thorpe!

Completely random point which I don't think has been mentioned, but Thorpe have got rid of of the SRQ on Flying Fish and has been replaced by a 'First Plaice Queue' (pun intended ). I doubt it's actually a front row queue or anything, but more a nice little thing to make people smile.

Hunger Games Having wanting to see it for a while, finally saw Hunger Games today. Haven't read the books, so didn't know much about the film (other than the whole fight to the death thing). Was well acted by all the characters, has a story line which doesn't drag on but doesn't feel rushed and everything about it clicks together. There are a couple of things which I feel should have been done differently, as there were a couple of bits which were a little bit too predictable / weren't given enough suspense, and the ending feels a little bit...weird. (Though this may be inherited from the book). Good, solid film, will probably end up reading the books and look forward to the sequel. 8/10

Perhaps the planned extension for Pizza Hut mentioned in the MTDP will mean a slightly changed layout / more service space, making the flow easier? Plus, £9!? Jesus, the price just keeps going up. Wasn't it like £7 two seasons ago? Just reaffirms my position that I won't be going to PH any time soon and I'll stick with the in house outlets and get my 20% off..

Still seems to be having a fair bit of trouble if I'm honest. It sounds incredibly squeaky and noise (sometimes it sounded like a woman screaming...), and not all the lap bars are locking at the same time either, meaning they have to be 'manually locked' (don't know how to describe really; hope that makes sense). At least it's up and working, and getting a few decent high swings. Am I right in saying it had troubles opening in 2008, and then was a bit off for a while before it's accident, the last time it has a major overhaul?

You didn't ride it this season then it would seen! Got pretty darn wet on it both of my times, wetter than you would on Loggers in one case..

The trouble is, if any incidents were caused by teenagers and they didn't institute a 'one size fits all' policy turning teenagers away, and instead turned away those who 'looked like they'd do something stupid', Thorpe would receive just as many complaints as they are now. However, as has been rightly brought up, just because someone is with an under 12, does not mean they won't do stupid things, or the under 12s won't do stupid things It's an unfortunate decision, and one I doubt any of us actually think is good that this is happening. To be honest, it's a lose-lose situation for most of the guests and for Thorpe. As is the way in the life, the stupidity of the small minority has ruined something for the majority...

Banned for being a teeny weeny bit lustful in the chat room...

Yep, it was Mike Vallis! Saw him round the park a few times actually (not that I'm a stalker or anything... )