[quote=""fanm""][quote=""macny1""]Although i would love to see a woodie at AT if we are talking about a flagship ride i dont think that wood is the way to go as the general public see it as old and dated. a flagship ride has to be a world first or record breaker IMO[/quote]
Megaphobia at Oakwood is awoody and many regard it as one of the best roller coasters in the world. It's also the reason that most people visit Oakwood (that and Hydro). So don't say a woodie can't be a flagship ride.
Never say never[/quote]
I can kind of understand what macny1 is saying. And also the fact AT has so many world class coasters now, a woodie might not be the answer to a flagship ride. What is the main coaster for AT at the mo, Air?
New Flagship ride in 2007?
-
themeparkdude
- Member
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 11:23 am
- Location: What does location mean?
Visit www.thorpeparkinsider.co.uk
We have a froum, great ride veveiws, and special features which you can not find anywhere else!
www.tussaudszone.com
We have STEALTH TESTING COVERAGE!
We have a froum, great ride veveiws, and special features which you can not find anywhere else!
www.tussaudszone.com
We have STEALTH TESTING COVERAGE!
-
Anonymous
[quote=""themeparkdude""]
I can kind of understand what macny1 is saying. And also the fact AT has so many world class coasters now, a woodie might not be the answer to a flagship ride. What is the main coaster for AT at the mo, Air?[/quote]
I think you make a good point here. AT has got coasters that if placed in most other parks would instantly become their flagship ride. Oblivion, Air, Nemesis and now Rita are all excellent, top-notch rides.
In the 80s, Corkscrew was the flagship ride because it was by far the biggest and most spectacular ride there and it was used in all the promotion of AT.
Fast forward to 2005 and AT hasn't got a flagship ride as such, just a selection of great coasters and different visitors will have different favourites, so there is less in the way of one particular outstanding attraction.
To me, a flagship ride is the one everybody thinks about when they think about that particular park. In AT's case, everyone will think of a different ride from the next person. In my opinion, for AT to build a ride that would be seen as a flagship ride, it'd have to be either extremely tall, or extremely long and fast and the ultimate in white knuckle thrills. It would have to be visually stunning to look at and there would have to be one particular part of that ride that could be photographed, seen to be truly terrifying and used in the park's promotion. The proposed woodie could have had the potential to be all of the above (Although deep, rather than high), but the experience would have to have been true white knuckle rather than family orientated to gain respect over all the other coasters in the park.
Considering the calibre of rides at AT, I think no matter how great the next coaster is, it would be very difficult if not impossible for it to become a flagship ride.
I can kind of understand what macny1 is saying. And also the fact AT has so many world class coasters now, a woodie might not be the answer to a flagship ride. What is the main coaster for AT at the mo, Air?[/quote]
I think you make a good point here. AT has got coasters that if placed in most other parks would instantly become their flagship ride. Oblivion, Air, Nemesis and now Rita are all excellent, top-notch rides.
In the 80s, Corkscrew was the flagship ride because it was by far the biggest and most spectacular ride there and it was used in all the promotion of AT.
Fast forward to 2005 and AT hasn't got a flagship ride as such, just a selection of great coasters and different visitors will have different favourites, so there is less in the way of one particular outstanding attraction.
To me, a flagship ride is the one everybody thinks about when they think about that particular park. In AT's case, everyone will think of a different ride from the next person. In my opinion, for AT to build a ride that would be seen as a flagship ride, it'd have to be either extremely tall, or extremely long and fast and the ultimate in white knuckle thrills. It would have to be visually stunning to look at and there would have to be one particular part of that ride that could be photographed, seen to be truly terrifying and used in the park's promotion. The proposed woodie could have had the potential to be all of the above (Although deep, rather than high), but the experience would have to have been true white knuckle rather than family orientated to gain respect over all the other coasters in the park.
Considering the calibre of rides at AT, I think no matter how great the next coaster is, it would be very difficult if not impossible for it to become a flagship ride.
-
Anonymous
Are you all really expecting an amazing ride to be built, considering the amount of investment at the park in last few years, Air, Oblivion, Rita. Wheres the money coming from?
Is the Tussauds group really doing that well financially???
I'm not expecting anything for at least 5 years but i would love to be proven wrong.
Is the Tussauds group really doing that well financially???
I'm not expecting anything for at least 5 years but i would love to be proven wrong.
-
a.ndy
- Member
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:16 pm
- Contact:
We know that the original SW Projects were spaced by 4 years each, but now that pattern has gone. But now we know their if much more of a financial backing at the park (and tussauds) now (with recent business events). Therefore, surely that original "4 year time span" can now be pushed down to less than 3 years or so? Just a bit of logic, but i do understand there are obviously more reasons for this than just finance... 
-
Anonymous
That'd be great... but they are also lacking buildable land. The answer... Flats!!!
I think the should widden the coaster gap, and add heaps of flats, kiddie, family ride's, whilst revamping and ect. in the mean time, therefore the park has more variety and the coaster openings become a much bigger thing, therefore greater recieve.
I think the should widden the coaster gap, and add heaps of flats, kiddie, family ride's, whilst revamping and ect. in the mean time, therefore the park has more variety and the coaster openings become a much bigger thing, therefore greater recieve.
-
RCTFAN
- New Member
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 10:47 pm
- Location: UK
Surely the Towers are the flagship of the advertising? Becuase if it wasn't for the Towers then AT wouldn't be there..........that's what i think of when somewhen says Alton Towers
Perhaps they should actually invest in refurbishing the Towers to its former glory
Perhaps they should actually invest in refurbishing the Towers to its former glory
-
a.ndy
- Member
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:16 pm
- Contact:
"Perhaps they should actually invest in refurbishing the Towers to its former glory"...
They are (and have been for several years)
They are (and have been for several years)
-
Anonymous
[quote=""Phil""][quote=""Shockadelica""][quote=""Phil""][quote=""kylies_kitty""]The rumors of a £10m woodie/new ride for the 2006/06 season seems a bit cheep for a woodie dont it....[/quote]
Cheap??!! The propsed woodie had a simple out and back layout. 10 million would have been ample! I'm amazed you think 10 million quid for a rollercoaster with such a basic layout is cheap!
[/quote]
I have to agree with Kitty here. As well as the obvious cost of the actual ride, it would clearly be an enormously difficult coaster to construct, carrying the parts up and down the valley to put them in place would be (will be?) an absolute nightmare. Whereas previous coasters have been built on comparitively small areas where cranes and machinery have been easily able to access the site, can you imagine the headaches and planning involved in building this monster in a densely wooded area with barely any flat, accessible land?
And consider that Rita cost £7m and that's pretty much a figure eight in a reasonably small, flat space.[/quote]
I'm no expert, but i just thought this:
The track is so very simple with very few helixes/turns, but just large drops and airtimes hills. It is a basic out and back woodie as can be seen on the plans. This would therefore not amount to very high costs. So any costs which would occur due to the construction stratergy could be very high, but because of the simplistic layout, would still mean an overall, average figure.[/quote]
What makes the cost go up is how long the ride is not if it has a turn or not.
Cheap??!! The propsed woodie had a simple out and back layout. 10 million would have been ample! I'm amazed you think 10 million quid for a rollercoaster with such a basic layout is cheap!
[/quote]I have to agree with Kitty here. As well as the obvious cost of the actual ride, it would clearly be an enormously difficult coaster to construct, carrying the parts up and down the valley to put them in place would be (will be?) an absolute nightmare. Whereas previous coasters have been built on comparitively small areas where cranes and machinery have been easily able to access the site, can you imagine the headaches and planning involved in building this monster in a densely wooded area with barely any flat, accessible land?
And consider that Rita cost £7m and that's pretty much a figure eight in a reasonably small, flat space.[/quote]
I'm no expert, but i just thought this:
The track is so very simple with very few helixes/turns, but just large drops and airtimes hills. It is a basic out and back woodie as can be seen on the plans. This would therefore not amount to very high costs. So any costs which would occur due to the construction stratergy could be very high, but because of the simplistic layout, would still mean an overall, average figure.[/quote]
What makes the cost go up is how long the ride is not if it has a turn or not.
Last edited by Anonymous on Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
SW-Dave
- Member
- Posts: 875
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 1:21 am
- Location: YOU
- Contact:
I doubt that such a major project would take place in that area of the park for exactly the same reason that the previous woodie wa scrapped and thunder looper removed, The local population dont want it there, and that area of the park is much closer to the civilian population.
Gloomy woods, and the woodland between there and the forbidden valley (where the railway used to be) is far more likely because its alot further from the protests of locals, its secluded and theres a small valley so construction could be relitavly tall and its quite a large, unused area.
I see tyhis as being the future development area.
Gloomy woods, and the woodland between there and the forbidden valley (where the railway used to be) is far more likely because its alot further from the protests of locals, its secluded and theres a small valley so construction could be relitavly tall and its quite a large, unused area.
I see tyhis as being the future development area.
-
Satch
They cant build there because that area comes under the gardens. The railway was there before these restrictions came into play