Thorpe Park | Hyperia | Mack Hyper Coaster | 2024

[Swat]

I could be wrong here but didn;t Thorpe have to get special grant to build Stealth due to its height due to Heathrow and visiblity in the surrounding area which is why its white?

This goes back a very long time so could be diffrent now but I seem to remember they cannot build higher than Stealth? If that was the case, a B&M Hyper may not be the choice here?

 

[Nicky Borrill]

I could be wrong here but didn;t Thorpe have to get special grant to build Stealth due to its height due to Heathrow and visiblity in the surrounding area which is why its white?

This goes back a very long time so could be diffrent now but I seem to remember they cannot build higher than Stealth? If that was the case, a B&M Hyper may not be the choice here?

I can’t see height being too much of an issue, regardless of what may have been said in the past, the precedent has been set… surely? A coaster of a similar height, or slightly higher cannot be refused on the basis of height? There are much higher structures on the approach to Heathrow… Especially on the 27L and 27R final approach.

If you arrive via HON1H and the BNN transition it takes you right over central London!!! It’s stunning, but I digress…

I’m no expert, obviously, but would have thought it common sense, that if they were allowed Stealth, the precedent was set, and they could at least build that high and maybe a little higher in the future?

 

[Hixee]

I’m no expert, obviously, but would have thought it common sense, that if they were allowed Stealth, the precedent was set, and they could at least build that high and maybe a little higher in the future?

Yes - in short. Precedent is extremely hard to counter-argue from a planning perspective. The first time is always the hardest.

 

[JoshC.]

The height thing has also, in part, been a "visual pollution" sort of thing. That's why Stealth's top hat is white: to "blend in" with the sky line more. Also it's useful that there's minimal supports for the top hat.

When the park submitted the last MTDP and outlined coasters for behind Stealth, they stated there were specific areas that the highest points of any potential coasters could be, which were designed to minimise how easy they were to see in the local area.

Locals could certainly kick up enough of a fuss if the idea is to introduce a 200ft high ride with dense supports and lots of high moments. But at the same time, it's easy enough to work around if the park are clever.

Arguably, the main reason the park haven't gone near 200ft again since Stealth is because they wanted Stealth to be their headliner and specifically tower over everything else. Obviously, things change in 15 years though

 

[Matt N]

Queue times at parks with a hyper / mega (B&M or otherwise) and an RMC…

Obviously just my own personal experience, I don’t sit checking different parks’ apps or anything…

And of course the RMC usually has the benefit of being the ‘latest and greatest’ coaster in the park…

I suppose you could also look at various different rating and award schemes lately to see which type has been climbing charts, winning awards etc, and which type has been falling (I haven’t done this, just an educated guess )

In terms of queue times, there’s one important piece of the puzzle that dictates those that you seem to be missing, and that’s throughput. B&M hypers may often seem to have lower queue times because they usually have incredibly high throughputs; often 1,500pph or higher.

RMCs, on the other hand, while not poor throughput by any means, certainly don’t hit that height. I believe the highest throughput RMC is Steel Vengeance, hitting 1,200pph with 3 trains, and correct me if I’m wrong here, but I don’t think many of the others actually hit 1,000pph; based on RCDB, the only other RMC hitting 1,000pph is Zadra, narrowly exceeding it at 1,050pph, while the other 24-seat RMC coasters typically seem to lie somewhere in the ballpark of 900pph or so. So naturally, RMC coasters might typically have a longer listed queue time than hyper coasters, but that does not necessarily indicate that hyper coasters are less popular.

In terms of award schemes; I won’t deny that RMCs are very popular among enthusiasts, more so than B&M hyper coasters, but I think it’s only really enthusiasts that follow or are overly interested in award and rating schemes (at least, the majority of the voter base and fan base of many of these award schemes are enthusiasts). I’d argue that that wouldn’t really have too much of an impact on commercial success; while an RMC would almost definitely get enthusiasts flocking to a greater degree than a B&M hyper, I think enthusiasts ultimately have a fairly negligible impact on parks’ bottom line; rightly or wrongly, I think your average theme park visitor puts far less weight on “special” ride types than enthusiasts, so I’m unsure whether something being an “RMC” would have too much impact for your average visitor.

As a case study of this type of thing, I seem to remember that when Icon vs Wicker Man was a raging debate back in 2017 or so, when the two rides were under construction, many were convinced that the mere fact that Icon was a “Mack mega coaster” would make it a huge success compared to Wicker Man. However, while Icon was certainly the ride that excited enthusiasts more, it failed to make a splash within the wider market, and Wicker Man was generally viewed to have been a far greater commercial success for Alton Towers, in spite of it perhaps not being the most “enthusiasty” coaster compared to Icon.

I probably don’t have a leg to stand on in this debate, though; you’re older than me and have more experience, so I should concede that you’re probably right. I apologise for wasting your time.

 

[toofpikk]

The height thing has also, in part, been a "visual pollution" sort of thing. That's why Stealth's top hat is white: to "blend in" with the sky line more. Also it's useful that there's minimal supports for the top hat.

When the park submitted the last MTDP and outlined coasters for behind Stealth, they stated there were specific areas that the highest points of any potential coasters could be, which were designed to minimise how easy they were to see in the local area.

Locals could certainly kick up enough of a fuss if the idea is to introduce a 200ft high ride with dense supports and lots of high moments. But at the same time, it's easy enough to work around if the park are clever.

Arguably, the main reason the park haven't gone near 200ft again since Stealth is because they wanted Stealth to be their headliner and specifically tower over everything else. Obviously, things change in 15 years though

Josh, you'd know... Am I right in thinking at some point over the last decade Thorpe got some kind of planning grant for structures to around 300-350 ft? I'm sure I remember seeing it on TPM at some point but thinking at the time nothing would come of it. If that's already been granted once before though, precedent is already there in the planning office for it to be granted again..

 

[Nicky Borrill]

In terms of queue times, there’s one important piece of the puzzle that dictates those that you seem to be missing, and that’s throughput. B&M hypers may often seem to have lower queue times because they usually have incredibly high throughputs; often 1,500pph or higher.

RMCs, on the other hand, while not poor throughput by any means, certainly don’t hit that height. I believe the highest throughput RMC is Steel Vengeance, hitting 1,200pph with 3 trains, and correct me if I’m wrong here, but I don’t think many of the others actually hit 1,000pph; based on RCDB, the only other RMC hitting 1,000pph is Zadra, narrowly exceeding it at 1,050pph, while the other 24-seat RMC coasters typically seem to lie somewhere in the ballpark of 900pph or so. So naturally, RMC coasters might typically have a longer listed queue time than hyper coasters, but that does not necessarily indicate that hyper coasters are less popular.

In terms of award schemes; I won’t deny that RMCs are very popular among enthusiasts, more so than B&M hyper coasters, but I think it’s only really enthusiasts that follow or are overly interested in award and rating schemes (at least, the majority of the voter base and fan base of many of these award schemes are enthusiasts). I’d argue that that wouldn’t really have too much of an impact on commercial success; while an RMC would almost definitely get enthusiasts flocking to a greater degree than a B&M hyper, I think enthusiasts ultimately have a fairly negligible impact on parks’ bottom line; rightly or wrongly, I think your average theme park visitor puts far less weight on “special” ride types than enthusiasts, so I’m unsure whether something being an “RMC” would have too much impact for your average visitor.

As a case study of this type of thing, I seem to remember that when Icon vs Wicker Man was a raging debate back in 2017 or so, when the two rides were under construction, many were convinced that the mere fact that Icon was a “Mack mega coaster” would make it a huge success compared to Wicker Man. However, while Icon was certainly the ride that excited enthusiasts more, it failed to make a splash within the wider market, and Wicker Man was generally viewed to have been a far greater commercial success for Alton Towers, in spite of it perhaps not being the most “enthusiasty” coaster compared to Icon.

I probably don’t have a leg to stand on in this debate, though; you’re older than me and have more experience, so I should concede that you’re probably right. I apologise for wasting your time.

You always have a leg to stand on mate, most of this is just subjective and matter of opinion, you’re entitled to yours as much as anybody else!!! Don’t ever feel bad for expressing your opinion, certainly not with me!!!

A hyper sat waiting for passengers with one train on the tracks hasn’t got a higher throughput than the RMC sat on 2 trains with 30 minute queues though…

Nor has the Intamin Mega at Walibi got a substantially higher throughput than their RMC… The queues for SteVe get ridiculous, reportedly too… After that I don’t really have much of an idea… Especially about some of the poorer rated RMCs in the US.

Capacity may have an effect, but I think ‘new ride’ status has more of an effect to be fair, especially on the examples I’ve experienced.

People often play down the importance of the enthusiast community, I know a hell of a lot of people I wouldn’t call enthusiasts who watch TPW of all people!!! Sometimes enthusiast opinions do sometimes make a difference.

 

[TPoseOnTantrum]

I believe the highest throughput RMC is Steel Vengeance, hitting 1,200pph with 3 trains, and correct me if I’m wrong here, but I don’t think many of the others actually hit 1,000pph

Steel Vengeance 1200 pph is a pipe dream, just saying

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Steel Vengeance 1200 pph is a pipe dream, just saying

Does it even still run on 3 trains??? After it’s ‘incidents’

Most of those theoretical throughputs are pointless numbers, that require unachievable despatch rates… Unless you’re Europa Park with no fast track queues, ride access queues, or countless other areas of faff to manage…

 

[JoshC.]

Josh, you'd know... Am I right in thinking at some point over the last decade Thorpe got some kind of planning grant for structures to around 300-350 ft? I'm sure I remember seeing it on TPM at some point but thinking at the time nothing would come of it. If that's already been granted once before though, precedent is already there in the planning office for it to be granted again..

Not that I'm aware of.
Had a look through Thorpe Park Mania and there was an old thread from 8 years ago about a rumour that the height ceiling would be lifted to 300ft in 2018. Certainly nothing I'm aware of happening though.

There was a rumour of a sort of gentlemen's agreement that the park and the council had that after Stealth, they wouldn't build anything near Stealth's height for 10 years. But again, it was just a rumour and seems like some sort of arbitrary claim that was made up imo.

The only kind of details I'm aware of that are online related to heights and the park come from the park's MTDP, and the old Stealth mini-site. The MTDP is outdated now really. The Stealth mini-site said that as long as their structures are less than 500ft in height, they don't need to install aviation lights (though given that was 16 years ago, laws may well have changed).

In short: I don't know of anything like that. But Thorpe could probably still build that high if they really wanted and were able to keep the locals sweet.

(Side note: How nice was that Stealth mini site <3)

 

[Rob Coasters]

Arguably, the main reason the park haven't gone near 200ft again since Stealth is because they wanted Stealth to be their headliner and specifically tower over everything else. Obviously, things change in 15 years though

I like to visualise this kind of stuff. "If a hyper were to happen, what would the skyline look like?" and I think I found a way for the hyper and Stealth to coexist without the hyper dwarfing Stealth - for Stealth to be in the area of the hill's valleys.


(The colours are dark so it's easy to see, perhaps the real thing would be better with a Shambhala-type colour scheme)

Obviously there's an almost zero chance of this thing happening - construction will be a nightmare with general massive faff with accessibility for giant cranes. The list goes on - but if Grona Lund can do it, Thorpe can. Then comes the argument of having to close off certain areas of the park in order to do land clearing because they have to start doing big things before the off season even comes.

Another support issue - where are any supports going to be in the Inferno area? Where can any supports really go at all?

It would be an absolute dream. It would be absolutely incredible to see the hyper, but putting things into genuine consideration I'm starting to have my doubts on whether or not they actually can pull it off. But I'm no engineer, just a guy who likes roller coasters. Maybe they can do it.

 

[Matt N]

My thought about a hyper was; if Blackpool could do it with the Big One back in 1994, then surely it would be possible for Thorpe to build one now?

 

[rob666]

Blackpool didn't need planning permission though.

 

[Matt N]

Blackpool didn't need planning permission though.

I meant more in terms of space; if Blackpool could cram the Big One into their tiny plot of land, then surely Thorpe could fit a hyper in?
EDIT: I’ve just had a very vague look on Maps, and using Mako as an example, that ride’s leftmost point (the ending turn over the water) could fit around where Rocky Express is located at most (it could potentially go further into the site), with the turnaround going somewhere in Thorpe’s lake, roughly parallel with the middle of the Colossus ride area.

 

[Rob Coasters]

I meant more in terms of space; if Blackpool could cram the Big One into their tiny plot of land, then surely Thorpe could fit a hyper in?

My main concern with the hyper was the room for supports - Big One has pretty much vertical supports perpendicular to the track which allows for it to take up a ridiculously compact space.

Looking at existing B&M hypers I realised that their supports don't jut out as much as I thought they did and are actually fairly compact, which brings me back onto the "Thorpe can do a hyper" train. They can do it eaaaasy.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Not that I'm aware of.
Had a look through Thorpe Park Mania and there was an old thread from 8 years ago about a rumour that the height ceiling would be lifted to 300ft in 2018. Certainly nothing I'm aware of happening though.

There was a rumour of a sort of gentlemen's agreement that the park and the council had that after Stealth, they wouldn't build anything near Stealth's height for 10 years. But again, it was just a rumour and seems like some sort of arbitrary claim that was made up imo.

The only kind of details I'm aware of that are online related to heights and the park come from the park's MTDP, and the old Stealth mini-site. The MTDP is outdated now really. The Stealth mini-site said that as long as their structures are less than 500ft in height, they don't need to install aviation lights (though given that was 16 years ago, laws may well have changed).

In short: I don't know of anything like that. But Thorpe could probably still build that high if they really wanted and were able to keep the locals sweet.

(Side note: How nice was that Stealth mini site <3)

I think Thorpe sits in Heathrow’s inner airspace zone, just, which essentially means no pesky low flying VFR pests (visual flight rules / low flying small aircraft) most of the time… With the exception of helicopters… No IFR aircraft should be flying at 500ft, unless on final approach, climb out, or go around…

Their proximity to the airport, and precise location, could actually be beneficial to them… A little further out and they’d be in the outer zone, where VFR is permitted in more instances… A little further North and they’d be on the direct approach path for runway 9R / departure path for 27L…

Edited to add: One concern as far as the airport goes, could be interference with communications or navigation equipment. A new wind turbine in Derby could not be run for several months, as equipment at East Midlands needed to be ‘tuned’ for it, running it before tuning caused problems…

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Sorry for the double post, but thought @Matt N would like this…

Just asked my ‘none goon, but ‘enjoys’ coasters’ better half which she’d prefer between an RMC like Zadra or Untamed and a B&M Hyper like Shambhala or Silver Star (she’s done all of these) She said it was close but would prefer something like Shambhala…

Edit: I think I might know why…

If Cara ever finds out I posted these here I’m dead so

Her on Shabhala (on right)



Her on Untamed



I suppose it’s fairly obvious which she enjoys the most

 

[Matt N]

Great photos @Nicky Borrill; I don’t know what you think, but I think your wife certainly looked like she enjoyed Shambhala more based on those two pictures!

Out of interest, is the top 10 in your signature out of date? Or does your liking of your top 2/3 substantially outweigh your liking of the rest of your list?

I only ask because even though you talk quite negatively about B&M hypers, I couldn’t help but notice that Shambhala is listed as your #5 in your signature, ahead of some rides that I’d expect to be more up your alley based on what you’ve said about your coaster preferences.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Out of interest @Nicky Borrill, is the top 10 in your signature out of date? Or does your liking of your top 2/3 substantially outweigh your liking of the rest of your list?

I only ask because even though you talk quite negatively about B&M hypers, I couldn’t help but notice that Shambhala is listed as your #5 in your signature, ahead of some more RMC-style rides that I’d expect to be more up your alley based on what you’ve said about your coaster preferences.

It is out of date, considerably… I should fix that! Thanks

But Shambhala is special… No chance I’d trust Merlin and B&M to come up with something like that again… Or even by all accounts (including yours ) Mako!!! Even as good as Shambhala is, and it is bloody great!!! it’s not as high in my more up to date rankings unfortunately.

Also, to be fair, I have said I like them several times, and would be over the moon with one at Thorpe… Just not as much as Intamin Hypers / Megas, RMC, Intamin LSM (Taron / Taiga / Veloci etc.)

 

[roomraider]

Now this is entirely my opinion rather than a reasoned argument

The main reason I rate the RMCs I've ridden so low is the trains. I cannot stand the lap bars on Zadra (and Iron Rattler is just a poor ride sans the first drop) the layout was pretty good but the ride was ruined by those trains.

When I was at EG on a very quiet day I rode Zadra twice and that was enough (and this is coming from someone who's top 10 is almost all highly intense rides) where as I probably had 10 plus on formula and hyperion. And it was a similar story with Rattler. One ride on that and 5 plus on Superman and Goliath.

I'm sure one day when I ride some more RMCs (damn you covid) I might change my tune but so far I haven't got the hype.