Next Big Thing - 2016 Development ?

[Marc]

but I mean for general public... a standard wooden rollercoaster in an advert without being the tallest, steepest, fastest etc. just wouldn't appeal - but an advert showing a wooden coaster with inversions, it's new to the UK, it will get peoples attention.

I think your right on this one, we all know the public like gimmicks!

[Benin]

I think your right on this one, we all know the public like gimmicks!

*cough*Swarm*cough*...

EDIT - Also, "you're", what sort of example of spelling and grammar is that from the owner?

[EC!]

No offence, shouldn't we be talking about this on the "Next Big Thing-2015/2016 coaster" topic. This topic is for something completely different.

[pluk]

No offence, shouldn't we be talking about this on the "Next Big Thing-2015/2016 coaster" topic. This topic is for something completely different.

Indeed it should, and here it is!

Wood is the natural choice for Thorpes next coaster, but I would say that as I love 'em. I'm am interested in hybrids and would certainly not mind seeing one crop up here somewhere, but would prefer a solid traditional woodie here first. If the public really are scared of them (and I don't really believe that for second) I don't think sticking an inversion in for our first modern woodie would be the best idea.

Wouldn't read too much into these tweets though, I'm sure it isn't anything more than a bit of engaging with the the public rather than any hniting or clues to their plans.

[Mark9]

but I mean for general public... a standard wooden rollercoaster in an advert without being the tallest, steepest, fastest etc. just wouldn't appeal - but an advert showing a wooden coaster with inversions, it's new to the UK, it will get peoples attention.

I'd like to disagree with you and say that a quality ride will shine through but the Swarm proves that the public only care about something that the park can sell to them, a packaged ride with high loops and shiz.

A shame because what Thorpe could do if they got onto a ride like Wodan or Tonnerre de Zeus

[Eidderf]

*cough*Swarm*cough*...

EDIT - Also, "you're", what sort of example of spelling and grammar is that from the owner?

I don't think the Swarm's gimmick was particularly strong compared to say the Smiler, saying something is the UK's first wing roller coaster means very little to the general public. My friends for example had essentially zero idea of what that term meant and it's appeal was it just being something new at the park, whereas something more obvious and simple such as a 14 looping coaster is an idea that is a lot more accessible to those outside the enthusiast crowd.

I'd argue even the idea of braving it backwards helped since it's novelty that people instantly understand, even if it's not a particularly unique or clever element, perhaps the ride would have fared better for the park if that feature had been introduced from the start even.

[Ricky]

Just a shame that Thorpe don't really have the space for a wooden coaster really, it would only be able to be an out and back either toward the farm or toward Canada creek to be any decent size!

[JoshC.]

The one thing I've never got with Thorpe is, if 'woodies are unsafe' or whatever, why did they show Swarm to be a ride destroying test dummies, Storm Surge to have disturbed an ancient burial ground, Saw to have awoken ghosts after staff used a ouija board (to advertise Fright Nights, but the point stands), etc.?

Surely if the public don't want to ride unsafe rides, then such press stunts are going to have a negative affect to people wanting the ride these rides? Yet, we didn't see such widespread responses...

[Coaster]

I don't understand where Thorpe are coming from with the whole "woodies are unsafe" and "the public don't like woodies" thing - they seem fine with them at Blackpool and Oakwood...

[EC!]

But then Thorpe doesn't have sheep to graze the ride area to make sure nothing gets over grown

[Ryan]

Have I missed something here, have Thorpe themselves actually said they wouldn't do a woodie as it's deemed unsafe by the public? Even if they did say this it wasn't recent, public demand will always be changing so who knows what they can bring in!

[Mitchada04]

Here's a quote from Chessington Buzz when they interviewed Nick Varney which offers a view on why wooden coasters aren't being built by Merlin.

Does Chessington have plans for a new roller coaster and if so, has a family style wooden roller coaster been considered? Considering the wilder nature of wooden roller coasters, I feel that one could compliment the park's current line-up perfectly and it could test whether modern wooden roller coasters would be successful enough to introduce at one or more of Merlin's other UK parks.

I love wooden roller coasters as much as you do! The problem is that the general public doesn’t "get" what is so special about them and they therefore don’t represent good investments because historically parks will not achieve the visitor uplift required to pay for them. It is, I agree, very frustrating.

So basically, the only way we'll see a wooden coaster is if it has a gimmick that will draw in the customers.

[JoshC.]

I don't think Thorpe themselves have said it, but I think it's a Merlin-wide thing anyway.

I can't remember where or when it was said (I get a feeling it might be when the ECC had a Swarm ERT last year and got to see the woodie plans that Saw replaced, but probably earlier than that) that market research has told Merlin that the public feel woodies are unsafe / not good enough, and as such are hard to market. I think it's just easier to say 'because the public think woodies are unsafe' though, rather than explaining it like that.

http://www.totalthorpepark.co.uk/features/btsthrillsworkshop.shtml - There's a bit about the Thorpe woodie plans shown during the ECC tour, which says about that. Maybe someone who went (Mer, BenC, Valentez all went I think?) can shed a bit more light there?

EDIT: SCB's point is a lot better than mine; feel free to ignore this. XD

[EC!]

I wouldn't mind having an inverting woodie, they do look fun, unless they decided to go for the woodie height record, which currently stands at 196ft by Colossos at Heide Park, I could only see them putting inversions in to get it "Gimmicky" enough for the GP, if they did go down the woodie option.

EDIT: An inversion like this as it looks fun

Edited June 25, 2013 by EC!

[Coaster]

But they don't know it will fail unless they build one! It could be really successful - market research does not prove everything.

[Sidders]

Fore-note: Please excuse the essay. I wrote as I thought and researched.

Maybe it's just me, but I swear the GP opinion of woodies wasn't the only thing stopping Thorpe from building one. I swear at one point TPG/TPM reported that the reason Thorpe won't build a woodie was due to planning and logistical constraints pertaining to the typical wooden coaster support system.

First off, Thorpe comprises of reclaimed land. Island A and E (the proposed locations for the next coaster, though A is much more likely given the scale of the proposed coaster) are very young land masses. They can't be more than three years old in the case of Island A and two in the case of Island E. By 2015/16 they could still be too young to place woodie supports on them. Wooden coasters require a far denser support system than the slender poles of 21st century steel coasters (e.g. The Swarm, Stealth). I'm guessing the amount of footers required could potentially weaken the solidity of reclaimed land like Thorpe's, causing unstable foundations.

Which leads me to the next restriction on planning. The visibility across the park would be drastically impaired with the density of wooden coaster supports. You look at Stealth from the park entrance and you can still see it through The Swarm. You can do the same with Colossus and Saw if you're at the top of Depth Charge. You wouldn't be able to do that with woodie supports. I was under the impression that Thorpe's coasters were not allowed to impair visibility across the park or obstruct views from outside the park.

Nevertheless, as the plans from the Thrills Workshop Josh kindly provided point out, Merlin were considering a woodie, even after the rumoured Tussauds one got shafted. No-one knows why these were shelved (was it denied planning permission? or was it a result of Merlin's "market" "research"?) but what is known is they were just that - shelved, not scrapped (according to interviews with Thrills Workshop staff). The plans speak for themselves: a GCI woodie; it was going to be a very intense, high-speed wooden coaster with many turns and high points and... biggest clincher of them all, it was going to be built on Island F at the very edge of the park. Said island is also reclaimed land. Completed in 2007, it had only two years to solidify. So in writing this, I realise the first theory going against the construction of a woodie (unstable foundations) is rubbished as there really can't be much difference in the solidity or porosity of reclaimed land just over two thousand feet away.

But then another spanner gets thrown into the works when you consider the parameters of the mythical 2009 GCI woodie. Built under Saw's planning constraints, the woodie would only be a maximum of 27m (88ft) (saucy source). If an 88ft woodie in a section of the park closest to Chertsey town got declined, then how is a 50m (164ft) woodie going to materialise at the extremity of the park closest to Thorpe Village and still manage to clear noise and visibility abatement? Island A creates a new geographical edge for Thorpe Park and to stick a woodie there could be asking for denied planning permission. Granted, Thorpe Village hosts a view of the park including the two tallest rides: Stealth and The Swarm, but Stealth is nigh-on invisible in a London sky and The Swarm is only 38m tall, as well as it's high point being some 650ft further from Thorpe Village than that of the 50m coaster proposed for Island A.

A possible reason for the shelving/scrapping of the GCI woodie was that even when Saw's original plans were released for Island F, they needed to be revised due to deforestation issues on the peninsula in Abbey Lake (fewer trees meant a smaller sound barrier for Chertsey). See: the original Saw plans with the ridiculous decision to have two MCBRs, where the track ventured further out into the peninsula that can be seen with the final layout:

Okay, yes, Saw's only in construction here but you can see where the track is meant to be. It's important to note that the noise pollution would only become an issue with the removal of the trees (Logger's Leap happily sits on the peninsula), hence the layout revision in late 2008.

The "Canada Creek Coaster", for comparison.

So it would seem that a woodie's inherent noise levels may have been an issue for the GCI woodie. The wooden coaster really didn't stand a chance on Island F, as half of it's layout was on this tree-covered peninsula, the removal of said trees would surely cause issues with the locals in Chertsey. There also being no trees acting as a sound barrier on Island A pose a huge problem for a woodie, as you can't exactly dampen the sound of a wooden coaster with sand or foam, like you can a steel coaster.

And to put the proverbial nail in the proverbial coffin, that interview posted by scarycoasterboy on the previous page with Nick Varney about the potentiality of a Merlin woodie was recorded just this year (the source lies within), which says that their view on the GP's view of a wooden coaster still hasn't changed since their GCI woodie plan overhaul in 2008.

I'd love to be proven wrong, but Thorpe are going to have to get over some very stringent planning restrictions just to get permission to build the thing. Add to that the extremely limited space for a woodie intending to be anywhere up to 164ft (Island A is big, but even with the Treasure Island peninsula added onto the construction area, it's a tight fit), and the perceived impossibility of marketing such an supposedly 'outdated' and 'unsafe' design, and you can see why Varney still thinks it won't happen. It would be much easier and financially secure for Thorpe to simply whack a flyer in the space. Spare us the pretzel loop please?

P.S. But who knows? Maybe the début of Outlaw Run has caught their attention and maybe they're reconsidering the idea of a hybrid woodie for Thorpe with the comparatively marketable tagline of "Europe's first looping woodie/wooden coaster". Personally I'd prefer a thoroughbred GCI/Intamin (Intamin only if it was akin to Colossos at Heide Park) as whacking load of inversions on a woodie defeats the object of it being a woodie and not a steel coaster.

[OldFarmerDean]

does it necessarily mean the wooden rollercoaster got denied planning permission or just decided to change with the opportunity of a SAW IP, and liked the look of gerstlauers?

[Ryan]

When I was at Thorpe recently I saw some 'men in suits' looking around at Island F with clipboards, managed to get a sneak peek and there was pictures of the original woodie plans on one page and a load of official looking data stuff on another sheet. My iPod's currently dead at the moment which had the pictures I took from a distance of the pages, you can make out what it says though. When I get my iPod sorted I'll post the pics up on here

[Sidders]

does it necessarily mean the wooden rollercoaster got denied planning permission or just decided to change with the opportunity of a SAW IP, and liked the look of gerstlauers?

Well another reason for the choice of Gerstlauer is Thorpe had an MTDP submitted to the Runnymede Borough Council outlining future development. If you click here: (Omg, the website lives on!) you can see the 2004-2009 MTDP, outlining Thorpe's installation of Samurai, Slammer, Rush, a second Detonator (never happened), Stealth, Flying Fish 2.0, and what eventually became Saw, but was originally billed as "2008 coaster" (bottom of page, under "2006 coaster - 'Icon of the park'"). Infilling (Island F) is mentioned too.

In no way was the MTDP set in stone, but I'm sure Tussauds intended "2008 coaster" to be built in 2008. It, and Stealth, would've been the installations the rest of the MTDP was shaped around because those are the rides that would impact the surrounding towns and villages the most. Whatever ride was in planning (Tussauds' rumoured woodie possibly?) got pushed back after the purchase of Thorpe by Merlin. After dicking about with a few designs (the GCI woodie, the rumoured B&M flyer) it looks as if time wasn't on their side as the plans for Saw only materialised in November 2007. Gerstlauer was comparatively cheap and compact, which corroborates the rumour that the flyer was scrapped because of cost and size. For instance: would-be-sister flyer Air cost £12M, has no real themeing structures and covers over 200m end to end. Saw has tonnes of themeing (in comparison), an IP, and covers just over 100m for end to end, and only cost £13.5M. More expensive, yes, but compared to the sheer scale of Air which has no themeing, we can see how much more Thorpe would be paying to buy and theme a flyer even to Saw's standards. Being compact also meant that given the limited time frame to complete Island F for coaster construction, the actual hardware of a Gerstlauer could be erected very swiftly, which was necessary given all the extra themeing that needed to be done (windmill anyone?).

Something important to note then is that this MTDP came out under the Tussauds reign, and the image provided with "2008 coaster" was this one:

... Which cause something of a tizzy with the enthusiasts at TPG and TPM because it looks very much like a flyer layout. Too much in fact - it's Air's layout. And so the rumour of the flyer was born. Of course, this image only demonstrated the size of the coaster they wanted to build: "of similar scale to Nemesis Inferno" says the MTDP. Inferno is 2,460ft long (source) and Air is 2,755ft (source), hence the layout being used. It's not very clear here, but the proposed layout in this MTDP takes up much more of the available space on the Abbey Lake peninsula (and it's the coaster's high point), just like the woodie did. The Merlin GCI woodie was proposed to be 3,117ft (note the five year difference between this MTDP and the woodie plans, hence the slight increase in scale as Island F was not there in 2004). So the woodie plans were well-researched and subtle hints towards them extend as far back as 2004. But it is possible this extension in length was a contributing factor in its denial on top of all the other constraints I've visited in my earlier post. Saw's length is 2,362ft, so its in-keeping with the original plans much more than the GCI woodie.

So in my opinion, Saw was a quick fix after the ditching of a possible three previous coaster plans. Pushed for time and funds after the Merlin take-over in 2007, Thorpe dropped the Tussauds plans and after contemplating alternatives of their own, went for a cheap, easily marketable alternative to a woodie or a flyer. Both the woodie and flyer would have worked out more expensive not just for hardware, but also because of the required deforestation on the Abbey Lake peninsula. Which in my books means either of these too designs is up to construction in 2015, with possibly the flyer being more plausible.

EDIT: Very interesting Ryan! Why would they be over there with four-year old plans? Hmm...

EDIT EDIT: As for the Saw IP, I don't buy that it was part of the early planning process, or it would've been dropped alongside whatever plans Tussauds had for the park when that company ceased to exist. Not to mention that even after the construction of the coaster began, there were those 13 viral videos (of which only three or four materialised) and nothing so much as winked at the suggestion of a Saw IP until a period of silence and then the name was announced. I recall it was a Tuesday. Anyone remember the last video we received before said name announcement? With the builders doing a Jumanji and discovering a disturbingly noisy box on the building site? The one that they all ran away from when the opened it? Yeah, that one. Remember the 13 scratched into the lid? I often amuse myself by thinking Saw was originally meant to be called Th13teen, and then along popped Lionsgate with the Saw IP and the Th13teen name and brand was dropped and given to Alton in 2010. It always did strike me as peculiar that Dark Forest rather arbitrarily appeared at Alton... And Th13teen's theme could've easily slotted into Canada Creek...

[ramesessubterra]

But then Thorpe doesn't have sheep to graze the ride area to make sure nothing gets over grown

Thorpe Petting Zoo opening 2015!

[ramesessubterra]

a rollercoaster that stops and turns into a top spin!

THIS would be impractical, yet amazing. *cough* John Wardley...

[Ryan]

Thorpe have just posted on Facebook:

"A rollercoaster made of WOOD?! Would you?

"

Looking more and more likely now.

[EC!]

El Toro So they post a photo and a video of the same ride hmmmm.....

[Matt 236]

Yes! I would love to see a woodie at Thorpe park. I just hope they can market the ride in a way that it can be successful and appeal to their 'main' target audience. I also hope the structure and noise can also be justifiable as woodies are louder than steel ones.

[Ryan]

If they get one and it has a low height restriction, ala Wodan at Blue Fire, then it would be absolutely perfect!