Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Thorpe Park | Hyperia | Mack Hyper Coaster | 2024

I really fail to understand this whole narrative of "Be grateful you're even getting a hyper"??? It's not as if it's free to ride, is it. You still pay the park. There's a deal at hand, there is no concept of gratefulness.

Let the people say what they want their money to go to.
 
Project LC said:
First off that ride layout isnt going to change in any major way. Its an S3 drawing so "for review/comment" next is s4 stage approval. Almost no changes should be happening from now other than to accommodate feedback from the consultation and minor engineering changes.

Second the ride layout does not lend itself to spinner trains so highly likely to be normal mack forward or backward facing. Also highly likely to be mack given the consultation but I suppose intamin could be an option.

Third there is absolutely no way that "splash down" (trims with some water effects) will not be slowing down the ride in some way so the -1.8g will not be occurring on that last outer banked turn.

Over the top negativity isn't great I agree, but the criticism of this ride is earnt. Its clearly too short, I don't see how that can be up for much debate. What the ride layout is trying to achieve is up for debate I can see how some will like it and others won't. The amount of airtime this will give we won't know until we ride it.

To say we should be happy regardless would make this thread meaningless. The ride will have strengths and weaknesses which is what myself and others have been discussing.
Click to expand...
The plans haven't even been submitted to the council yet... Or did I miss something? If that's the case, they can change what they like, whenever they like, and submit the new version. Even if they have been submitted, they can change their plans. I've only just today been opposing such a change locally. A 300 year old pub close to us closed down. The new owner submitted plans to keep the main part of the building as a micropub, whilst pulling the rest down and building 5 houses on the land. That was welcomed, on the basis a pub of sorts will remain on the site, everyone was happy. Then the plans for the micro pub were later amended to become a B&B with an even smaller micropub, still it got passed, as they were keeping the original building within the hospitality sector. Demolition happened, construction of the houses began. Now he has changed his mind yet again, wants to completely transform the building into a retail unit (Tesco probably) with flats above!!! All whilst construction on the other part of the site is still currently happening.

Here's the story from the orignal planning application... https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/plans-approved-reopen-closed-derbyshire-4880490
Here's the latest change to it.... https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/local-news/plans-turn-well-known-derbyshire-6314782

I Agree it will most likely be Mack, and also that it's most likely a standard train... But you cannot possibly say that with any certainty, because 'you don't think the layout suits it.' You're probably right at the end of the day, but you can't be certain. Isn't the spinning on Mack Extreme's assisted by the Eddy system? Personally I'd be surprised to see an Extreme without a launch to be honest, it just works so well... But that's another matter.

Totally agree on the splashdown... The Artists Impressions actually makes it look like a scoop, with part of the track submerged!!! As opposed to brake and effect... But they are just impressions... Either way, I agree, it will slow. But I'd expect to see more than -1g, still more than you're average floater hill.

I wish it were a bit longer to be fair, but it's length doesn't make it any less exciting to me... I've always enjoyed Nemesis, Stealth, Oblivion and Red Force despite their lengths.
 
spicy said:
The track isn’t being submerged
Click to expand...
Did I say it was? I said the AI 'makes it look like a scoop, with part of the track submerged' As in, it shows a submerged track as if to indicate a scoop... And as opposed to showing a concrete boxed off area!!!

Edit: Plot twist, it's actually a Mack Water Coaster afterall 🙄
 
Last edited:
Nicky Borrill said:
The plans haven't even been submitted to the council yet... Or did I miss something? If that's the case, they can change what they like, whenever they like, and submit the new version.
Click to expand...

Whilst they can still submit whatever they like, it's highly unlikely to differ much from what we're seeing right now.

It's fair to go 'this isn't final, and it's early days, so it's jumping the gun somewhat to make sweeping statements'. But equally, it's very much clutching at straws to go 'this isn't final, so changes can happen, so let's wait and see'. Very much managing expectations at this point.
 
Moving from original consultation to final plans can generate massive changes.
Happens in industry and property development all the time.
Consultation plans are often used to test the water, see what seems acceptable to the locals, which is mainly the high stuff.
Low down, lots of changes can be made as they are not as contentious, they can't be seen or heard.
 
It feels like it needs to do another lap around the lake with a couple of good pure airtime hills and maybe a fast roll like that new Mack launched coaster at Suzhou.

Like I know Thorpe goers are conditioned to short coasters but IDK DC Rivals managed to have a long layout but still had a few big tall elements.

It almost reminds me of Goliath at SFGAm, like its by no means a bad ride and has good elements, but a hyper should have more than 4 elements imo.
 
Oh I just had a horrible thought, seeing the “x:\odus” logo that has been at the park.

Imagine if it went backwards as a ‘homage’.

Please don’t do this to me 😔
 
Nitefly said:
Oh I just had a horrible thought, seeing the “x:\odus” logo that has been at the park.

Imagine if it went backwards as a ‘homage’.

Please don’t do this to me 😔
Click to expand...
Or even worse, that stupid ****ing voting thing they have at Bobbejaanland.
 
Hixee said:
Or even worse, that stupid ****ing voting thing they have at Bobbejaanland.
Click to expand...
You can chose to go on the train which goes forward only... This kind of makes the vote train pointless as you only want to vote if you want the chance to go backwards right?

Fury is a great ride though and much better backwards
 
JoshC. said:
Whilst they can still submit whatever they like, it's highly unlikely to differ much from what we're seeing right now.

It's fair to go 'this isn't final, and it's early days, so it's jumping the gun somewhat to make sweeping statements'. But equally, it's very much clutching at straws to go 'this isn't final, so changes can happen, so let's wait and see'. Very much managing expectations at this point.
Click to expand...
rob666 said:
Moving from original consultation to final plans can generate massive changes.
Happens in industry and property development all the time.
Consultation plans are often used to test the water, see what seems acceptable to the locals, which is mainly the high stuff.
Low down, lots of changes can be made as they are not as contentious, they can't be seen or heard.
Click to expand...
This…

Whilst I am not exactly ‘expecting’ it to change much, if at all… I do not agree that saying ‘changes can happen’ is clutching at straws at this stage, as we do not even have final detailed plans submitted to the council. We have a few artists impressions and a very basic overhead layout that Thorpe Park themselves are saying ‘is not final.’

They’re not saying ‘it’s not final’ to piss off enthusiasts, or throw us off the scent… As others repeatedly remind us, they don’t care about enthusiasts. They’re saying that to cover themselves should the need or desire arise to make alterations after consulting the public.

It’s a strange project, in that usually public consultation is done after submitting, and as part of, the planning application. So we don’t really have much to compare it to, other than the Chessington project. I’m not ‘really’ following that project too closely, but I believe changes were made after consultation, not the layout, but changes were made, right?

We also have a history of Merlin revising plans ‘after’ submitting them to Staffordshire Moorlands at Alton Towers! Again, as far as I am aware, this hasn’t even been submitted yet?

tl:dr I don’t ‘expect’ it to change much if at all… But it’s far too early in the design and planning process to consider this anything close to final. We only have a few artists impressions!
 
Nicky Borrill said:
This…

Whilst I am not exactly ‘expecting’ it to change much, if at all… I do not agree that saying ‘changes can happen’ is clutching at straws at this stage, as we do not even have final detailed plans submitted to the council. We have a few artists impressions and a very basic overhead layout that Thorpe Park themselves are saying ‘is not final.’

They’re not saying ‘it’s not final’ to piss off enthusiasts, or throw us off the scent… As others repeatedly remind us, they don’t care about enthusiasts. They’re saying that to cover themselves should the need or desire arise to make alterations after consulting the public.

It’s a strange project, in that usually public consultation is done after submitting, and as part of, the planning application. So we don’t really have much to compare it to, other than the Chessington project. I’m not ‘really’ following that project too closely, but I believe changes were made after consultation, not the layout, but changes were made, right?

We also have a history of Merlin revising plans ‘after’ submitting them to Staffordshire Moorlands at Alton Towers! Again, as far as I am aware, this hasn’t even been submitted yet?

tl:dr I don’t ‘expect’ it to change much if at all… But it’s far too early in the design and planning process to consider this anything close to final. We only have a few artists impressions!
Click to expand...
I honestly hope they don't change what's already there as it looks like a winning layout. Would be gutted if people moaning lead to this being diluted down and having the strong ejector moments weakened. Wouldn't say no to a few hunny bunny hills to finish the ride though
 
Doublethink said:
I honestly hope they don't change what's already there as it looks like a winning layout. Would be gutted if people moaning lead to this being diluted down. Wouldn't say no to a few hunny bunny hills to finish the ride though
Click to expand...
It won't change because of enthusiasts moaning... But it might if local residents are overwhelmingly against the plans, and kick up enough of a fuss...

That's kind of the point of a public consultation.

Anyway... Moving on...

So what do we expect today???

  • Finally, we will provide a summary of our plans on this page so you can read and review our proposals at your leisure before providing any feedback you have. These will be available on this website on Monday 13th December 2021.
Click to expand...

Do we think it will just be the same information copied over from the consultation page to the Thorpe Park Local Residents page, or could we get more information within the 'summary of our plans?'
 
Drove down the M3 this morning en route to Kingston and this coaster is gonna look absolutely huge. Stealth is actually very subtle on the skyline and you wouldn't think it's a 200ft coaster, but this will really stand out next to Saw and Colossus.

Another thing I noticed is that I think we overestimate the size of that area. At least from my perspective you assume there's a lot of space because Loggers was such a long ride but in reality it's actually a very small footprint to work within.

Edit: regarding any changes to the current plans, was this not done with Wicker Man after the initial plans had been submitted? The first drop was re-profiled.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top