Kent, England | The London Resort | Entertainment Complex

[Matt N]

I don’t think the point being made here is that the chosen site isn’t accessible from central London or some other parts of the country.

I think the point being made is that had they located it on the other side of London (North and/or West London would probably be ideal for most of the country), it would have maintained its advantages for central London and foreign visitors while also opening itself up more easily to the rest of the country. The stations on the North and West sides of London are more connected to parts of the country outside of the South East, which could widen the park’s appeal.

You can get from Birmingham to parts of North London by car in less than 2 hours. The chosen site? 3 hours from Birmingham. Ultimately, I think most people would want to drive regardless of how super brilliant its public transport links were. We are a very car-orientated nation, and I think few would actively choose to take public transport if they were able to drive.

If on the other side, foreign visitors could fly into Heathrow or Gatwick quite easily. The chosen site is 1 hour’s drive from Heathrow, and has no major airport overly near to it, as far as I can tell. The nearest is probably London Southend, but calling that a major airport might be a stretch given how few routes it runs.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Better pulling figures out of the air than from my arse.
3 changes is convenient is it?
Four trains to do a theme park day trip is beyond reason for most non thoosies.
Simple fact, it would be realistically impossible for me, even using taxis to the station, to do a day trip to this non existent park.
I have done a day trip to Thorpe.
I can't be arsed going through the half dozen transport reports over the years, from several sources, that claimed the park would increase pressure on already overcrowded services, and cause further gridlock around the M25, and the bleeding ferry that would never have crunched the peak numbers stated...
But they are all there in the references on the London Resort on wikipedia.
Feel free to look them up, I can't be bothered now the thaw has come.

And this is the main issue here... You're NOT 80% of the population.

But if we're doing the anecdotal thing, I live 170 miles away, and could have gotten there quicker by rail than I can get to Thorpe by rail or car... With just 1 change.

Like I said, your wasting your time with those reports, I've done my own research in respect of the simple point I was originally making, which was in regards to how well connected Ebsfleet is by rail. I've made no counter comment on road congestion, buses or even bloody rivers for that matter. The simple fact is that, by rail, Ebbsfleet is well connected to the rest of the country.

That was the point of my original post, you chose to rubbish it with stats pulled from the air, I was always going to call you out on that.

I don’t think the point being made here is that the chosen site isn’t accessible from central London or some other parts of the country.

I think the point being made is that had they located it on the other side of London (North and/or West London would probably be ideal for most of the country), it would have maintained its advantages for central London and foreign visitors while also opening itself up more easily to the rest of the country. The stations on the North and West sides of London are more connected to parts of the country outside of the South East, which could widen the park’s appeal.

You can get from Birmingham to parts of North London by car in less than 2 hours. The chosen site? 3 hours from Birmingham. Ultimately, I think most people would want to drive regardless of how super brilliant its public transport links were. We are a very car-orientated nation, and I think few would actively choose to take public transport if they were able to drive.

If on the other side, foreign visitors could fly into Heathrow or Gatwick quite easily. The chosen site is 1 hour’s drive from Heathrow, and has no major airport overly near to it, as far as I can tell. The nearest is probably London Southend, but calling that a major airport might be a stretch given how few routes it runs.

Nope, my only point for the last couple of hours is that the claim that it's inaccessible by 80% of the population is utter nonsense...

I've made no counter points to congestion, to car travel being difficult, to capacity limits on the rail network or to anything else... I simply stated that, by rail, it's well connected to most of the population of England, and thus, by public transport alone, isn't a problem for most, and certainly isn't an issue for 80% of the population.

(BTW Birmingham is 2:45 by road, maybe 3 in traffic, but inline with my original point on rail, it's only 2:08 - 2:20 by rail from Ebsfleet)

Of course, if it was on the other side, it would be much more convenient to drive to, and if we're honest, you're right, most would prefer to drive. But as a country we should be trying to encourage public transport. For many of us coming from the North, rail travel to the northern outskirts would still involve a change at either St Pancras, Euston or King's Cross, as it does when we visit Wembley.

Unless they were lucky enough to find a location close enough to a mainline station on the way in, and even then, it would only be beneficial to those who live near stations along that particular mainline.

 

[Tonkso]

I don’t think the point being made here is that the chosen site isn’t accessible from central London or some other parts of the country.

I think the point being made is that had they located it on the other side of London (North and/or West London would probably be ideal for most of the country), it would have maintained its advantages for central London and foreign visitors while also opening itself up more easily to the rest of the country. The stations on the North and West sides of London are more connected to parts of the country outside of the South East, which could widen the park’s appeal.

You can get from Birmingham to parts of North London by car in less than 2 hours. The chosen site? 3 hours from Birmingham. Ultimately, I think most people would want to drive regardless of how super brilliant its public transport links were. We are a very car-orientated nation, and I think few would actively choose to take public transport if they were able to drive.

If on the other side, foreign visitors could fly into Heathrow or Gatwick quite easily. The chosen site is 1 hour’s drive from Heathrow, and has no major airport overly near to it, as far as I can tell. The nearest is probably London Southend, but calling that a major airport might be a stretch given how few routes it runs.

But if Swanscombe does end up on Crossrail like the proposals want, it would have a direct train to Heathrow, all terminals, and one easy change at Farringdon for Gatwick and Luton, and one easy change at Liverpool Street for Stansted. So the airport one is baffling.

 

[Matt N]

Nope, my only point for the last couple of hours is that the claim that it's inaccessible by 80% of the population is utter nonsense...

I've made no counter points to congestion, to car travel being difficult, to capacity limits on the rail network or to anything else... I simply stated that, by rail, it's well connected to most of the population of England, and thus, by public transport alone, isn't a problem for most, and certainly isn't an issue for 80% of the population.

(BTW Birmingham is 2:45 by road, maybe 3 in traffic, but inline with my original point on rail, it's only 2:08 - 2:20 by rail from Ebsfleet)

Of course, if it was on the other side, it would be much more convenient to drive to, and if we're honest, you're right, most would prefer to drive. But as a country we should be trying to encourage public transport. For many of us coming from the North, rail travel to the northern outskirts would still involve a change at either St Pancras, Euston or King's Cross, as it does when we visit Wembley.

Unless they were lucky enough to find a location close enough to a mainline station on the way in, and even then, it would only be beneficial to those who live near stations along that particular mainline.

Ah, sorry... I think I misunderstood your point slightly. I guess Ebbsfleet is a pretty big, well connected station compared to the likes of Staines (Thorpe) and Chessington South (Chessington), and with HS2 well underway, I concede that the North will be significantly better connected to London once that opens (isn't Euston the London terminus for HS2?). Ebbsfleet is also well connected to the Eurostar, meaning that visitors from France, Belgium and the Netherlands could visit easily.

However, I do still maintain that drivers would likely make up the considerable bulk of visitors. Believe me, I totally agree that we should be pushing the country towards public transport, and as someone who is looking as though they may not drive long distances, I would love a park with good public transport connections. Ultimately, however, I think few would choose to take the train if they could drive, and it does boil down to people choosing public transport as an option.

But if Swanscombe does end up on Crossrail like the proposals want, it would have a direct train to Heathrow, all terminals, and one easy change at Farringdon for Gatwick and Luton, and one easy change at Liverpool Street for Stansted. So the airport one is baffling.

The thing is, though, many foreign visitors may not want to take public transport to/from the airport. I would not be at all surprised if many wished to hire a car, and if that option is picked, all of the London airports are the best part of a one hour drive away, possibly even over an hour in the case of airports like Heathrow and Luton.

Even if you take cars out of the equation, locating the park closer to a major hub airport like Heathrow or Gatwick would make the train journey even easier and quicker.

 

[Crazycoaster]

The issue I take is why would I pay £30-£100 per person for public trains when I could get there and back for less than a tank of petrol.

 

[FistedColossus]

Agree the site is fine for public transport. 20 minutes on a train from the capital city is not unreasonable.

It is however a horrific location for driving. The Dartford crossing already struggles with traffic as it is.

 

[rob666]

Transport for London and Network Rail still disagree.
Public transport in the capital is already at capacity, unreliable, and extremely congested at the times people will want to travel to the non existent park.
People would choose to travel by car, and that would cause further congestion.
And I never, ever stated that I was 80% of the population, and there is no need to shout.

 

[Thekingin64]

What noone has appeared to mention here is the cost of trains in UK, making it cost prohibitive for most. For example, this is what national rail enquiries suggests for 1st Feb from my local(est) station to ebbsfleet for 1 person one way:


Similar in time and fuel costs for 1 person driving. However, visiting a large theme park like this is a group activity for most. 4 people in the same car won't affect fuel costs too significantly, but would require 4 train tickets with no group discount available taking prices to this:

This is without considering the 2 buses required to get to the station, and the unfeasible operating times of both. This is just cost prohibitive for any group considering the trip...

In short, it would take people entirely reliant on public transport the best part of the day to get down there while emptying their bank. The connections in/out of London exist, but the rest of the country suffers.


Tldr: what @Crazycoaster said.

 

[Sandman]

Pubic transport in the capital is already at capacity, unreliable, and extremely congested

That's certainly an interesting method of transport

 

[rob666]

Edit made!
And Nicky...
"There are absolutely no issues with it's location in regards to public transport. "
Original comment that I challenged as wrong.
It still is, in my humble opinion, sorry.

 

[roomraider]

Transport for London and Network Rail still disagree.
Pubic transport in the capital is already at capacity, unreliable, and extremely congested at the times people will want to travel to the non existent park.
People would choose to travel by car, and that would cause further congestion.
And I never, ever stated that I was 80% of the population, and there is no need to shout.

Out of interest I assume the stats for this was done pre covid. Because it's not true now with tube usage still around 75% of what it used to be pre pandemic.

Not siding either side of the argument but just an observation.

Obviously eventually it will eventually catch back up but it could be a decade before that happens.

The fact it's unreliable stills stands though

 

[rob666]

Good point...they could be using information from a decade ago.

 

[Tonkso]

Another note regarding the Dartford Crossing, yes it is indeed horrendous, but the Lower Thames Crossing which is intended to remove the bulk of the long distance traffic from Dartford (which really should be the local crossing) has been approved.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

Transport for London and Network Rail still disagree.
Public transport in the capital is already at capacity, unreliable, and extremely congested at the times people will want to travel to the non existent park.
People would choose to travel by car, and that would cause further congestion.
And I never, ever stated that I was 80% of the population, and there is no need to shout.

Anybody who thinks that public transport is bad in London has not used public transport in many other UK cities. I personally love travelling around London, absolutely never drive into London for this reason, because the public transport is so good to me, an outsider. I often drive to Stanmore, or a similar northern tube terminus, park there, and use public transport from there on. Something I suspect myself and a lot of others would do if this imaginary theme park were ever to be built.

Sorry for shouting but you did use the 80% figure, for multiple different reasons actually... Which got me wondering if it's just your way of saying 'the majority' or 'a lot' rather than being an actual stat, and it was just lost in translation?

Edit made!
And Nicky...
"There are absolutely no issues with it's location in regards to public transport. "
Original comment that I challenged as wrong.
It still is, in my humble opinion, sorry.

Yeh, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on that then, as the way you've worded it there is subjective. Objectively speaking, Ebbsfleet has very good train connections to a very large proportion of England.

With new services, capacity and infrastructure already slated to come online in the area, with or without fantasy theme park, I see no reason why the park couldn't be well served by the rail network.

Obviously this is, hypothetically speaking, now and in the future. As pointed out, it may have been a very different picture 5-10 years ago. I have no idea.

Good rail connections also do not solve some of the other issues you mentioned, mainly that most people prefer to drive for days out, than spend time faffing around with public transport. But I've never denied that. They say they'll have parking for 10k cars, and a lengthy dedicated access road to alleviate any impact on local roads, but that side of London can be a drag to get to either way. Not too bad for us personally, as we have the M1 we can drive straight down, then onto the M25, it's almost a straight line route. But if you're located too far West for the M1 to be your main route into London, I can see why it'd be a ball ache.

For some additional context, this imaginary park would be as easy, if not easier for us to get to from the Midlands than either Chessignton or Paulton's. Both by rail and road.

 

[Matt N]

For some additional context, this imaginary park would be as easy, if not easier for us to get to from the Midlands than either Chessignton or Paulton's. Both by rail and road.

I think it depends entirely upon where in the Midlands you're coming from. The Midlands is a big area; somewhere in the South West Midlands, like Birmingham, will have a very different transport outlook to somewhere in the North East Midlands, like Nottingham.

Let me have a look at Google Maps and see how some different locations stack up from a driving standpoint. I went with the London Resort, Thorpe Park, Chessington and the Warner Bros Studio Tour (I know it sounds random, but it was the most north-westerly tourist attraction in the London area I could think of to give some idea of the effect a more northern or western site may have had):
Birmingham

• Thorpe Park: 2h 11m/120 miles
• Chessington: 2h 21m/134 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 1h 54m/101 miles
• London Resort: 2h 42m/144 miles

Stoke-on-Trent

• Thorpe Park: 2h 41m/161 miles
• Chessington: 2h 50m/175 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h 26m/141 miles
• London Resort: 3h 15m/185 miles

Leicester

• Thorpe Park: 2h 1m/109 miles
• Chessington: 2h 12m/123 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 1h 36m/85 miles
• London Resort: 2h 27m/129 miles

Derby

• Thorpe Park: 2h 23m/135 miles
• Chessington: 2h 33m/149 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h/111 miles
• London Resort: 2h 48m/155 miles

Nottingham

• Thorpe Park: 2h 26m/134 miles
• Chessington: 2h 36m/148 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h 4m/111 miles
• London Resort: 2h 51m/154 miles

So this suggests that in most cases, the London Resort site is further to drive from the Midlands than Thorpe or Chessington, and if using the Warner Bros Studio Tour as a case study, a site in North West London could have reduced drive time by close to an hour for much of the country. I used WB as a case study because even Thorpe or Chessington are arguably not the most conveniently located London parks for the Midlands and North (so the bulk of the country, really).

 

[rob666]

Now then our Matt...can I gently pull your leg and ask if you think it is likely that the nice PY Gerbeau will actually come back to us with a new, invigorated development proposal before the end of the year, as he promised?
If I remember rightly, he gave you a whole new dawn of optimism a couple of years ago.
Nasty man giving us Olympic hopes of a phoenix rising from the ashes.
The development rights to a large area of the site are up at the end of the year, after a whole decade.
Most local councils have removed all support, and the SSSI, together with the Tilbury dock changes, have really chucked the brown stuff into the fan.
Surely, as the crown prince of optimism, you must be the one to strike the gong of doom on this one.

 

[Matt N]

Now then our Matt...can I gently pull your leg and ask if you think it is likely that the nice PY Gerbeau will actually come back to us with a new, invigorated development proposal before the end of the year, as he promised?
If I remember rightly, he gave you a whole new dawn of optimism a couple of years ago.
Nasty man giving us Olympic hopes of a phoenix rising from the ashes.
The development rights to a large area of the site are up at the end of the year, after a whole decade.
Most local councils have removed all support, and the SSSI, together with the Tilbury dock changes, have really chucked the brown stuff into the fan.
Surely, as the crown prince of optimism, you must be the one to strike the gong of doom on this one.

Indeed you do remember correctly, Rob. 2020 and all of the positive developments it brought did give me a new sense of optimism toward the project, and at that point, I had genuine belief that it might become something and might open in 2024. It all sounded and looked so promising, and I was definitely 100% convinced that the project had turned over a new leaf. What can I say other than that I was bowled over by all those exciting pieces of concept art and planning applications and facts that made the possibility of a global scale theme park in Britain seem very real!

I may be close-minded at times, and I am truly sorry about that, but I am not so stubborn that I can't admit when I am wrong, and I have to concede that my belief in this project may turn out to have been one of those times. I like to believe that my opinions and beliefs are led by evidence, and as things currently stand, I must admit that while it has not been officially cancelled, so could technically still happen, the evidence does not presently point in the project's favour, in my view. The chances of it happening certainly seem far lower than they did 2 years ago. I must say that my faith started to waver when the site became an SSSI and some of the other bad things happened... the SSSI declaration in particular did seem like a pretty terminal setback.

There is a reason why I have remained conspicuously silent on this project's predicament as of late (before yesterday, my last post in this thread was on 1st January), and that's because, frankly, I feel embarrassed and ashamed at having been so stubborn and dismissive against all of your wise words in the earlier months. I know very well that this thread is one of the prime examples of how I have made a massive fool of myself on here over the years, and in hindsight, I am very sorry for not taking all of your evidence and arguments more seriously. I am an optimist at heart, and based on all of the positive evidence and concrete proposals emerging, I did genuinely believe that this project appeared to have a good chance of happening back in 2020.

However, I admit that while I am not dismissing the project entirely like some of you seem to have from day 1, much of my optimism from 2020 does, in hindsight, seem misplaced.

So there... I am truly sorry for having been so stupid and stubborn and dismissive of all your very valid counter-arguments against this project over the years. A proposed theme park in Kent is not the hill I want to die on, and with that in mind, I concede that there's looking to be a good chance that I may ultimately be proven wrong about this project.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

I think it depends entirely upon where in the Midlands you're coming from. The Midlands is a big area; somewhere in the South West Midlands, like Birmingham, will have a very different transport outlook to somewhere in the North East Midlands, like Nottingham.

Let me have a look at Google Maps and see how some different locations stack up from a driving standpoint. I went with the London Resort, Thorpe Park, Chessington and the Warner Bros Studio Tour (I know it sounds random, but it was the most north-westerly tourist attraction in the London area I could think of to give some idea of the effect a more northern or western site may have had):
Birmingham

• Thorpe Park: 2h 11m/120 miles
• Chessington: 2h 21m/134 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 1h 54m/101 miles
• London Resort: 2h 42m/144 miles

Stoke-on-Trent

• Thorpe Park: 2h 41m/161 miles
• Chessington: 2h 50m/175 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h 26m/141 miles
• London Resort: 3h 15m/185 miles

Leicester

• Thorpe Park: 2h 1m/109 miles
• Chessington: 2h 12m/123 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 1h 36m/85 miles
• London Resort: 2h 27m/129 miles

Derby

• Thorpe Park: 2h 23m/135 miles
• Chessington: 2h 33m/149 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h/111 miles
• London Resort: 2h 48m/155 miles

Nottingham

• Thorpe Park: 2h 26m/134 miles
• Chessington: 2h 36m/148 miles
• Warner Bros Studio Tour: 2h 4m/111 miles
• London Resort: 2h 51m/154 miles

So this suggests that in most cases, the London Resort site is further to drive from the Midlands than Thorpe or Chessington, and if using the Warner Bros Studio Tour as a case study, a site in North West London could have reduced drive time by close to an hour for much of the country. I used WB as a case study because even Thorpe or Chessington are arguably not the most conveniently located London parks for the Midlands and North (so the bulk of the country, really).

So it's really 20 minutes here or there, either way, between Chessington and NeverGonnaHappenland, by road... And easier than some of those by train.

Although I've never gotten to Chessington in less than 3 hours, ask anybody who travelled down from the North for last year's Ghosterforce!!! 5 hours it took us going that way around the M25!!! Heathrow area always seems to sting me going counter clockwise around the M25. (And sometimes clockwise too on the way home. ) Having said that, I concede that which direction is better or worse around the M25 at any given time is probably purely luck of the draw. As evidenced by the current times given on google maps, (below.) So it is conceivable that on a good day, counterclockwise to Chessington 'could' be quicker.

I'm not sure what was going on when you did that research, but given that from both Nottingham and Derby you'd pass Leicester on the M1, and the M1 is smack bang between Derby and Nottingham, it would normally be the same kind of differences between the 2 parks for all 3 cities... I'm guessing there was some issue on the M1 earlier when you were looking this up? (Like how it''s trying to take me down the M40 now for Chessington, most likely due to an issue on the M25 between the M1 and M40 junctions. I think this is contributing to the increased travel time currently to be fair.)

I actually live smack bang next to the M1, between Derby and Nottingham (remember the American Adventure adverts, haha.) So I'm lucky in that respect, easy access to the motorway network this end, makes issues along the route more palatable.

Derby > Ebbsfleet 2:47 (Used Ebbsfleet as the route would take you down the A2 to where the park's link road is planned.)



Derby > Chessington 2:50



And then Nottingham... Which has the unique advantage of being able to use the A1 further to the east if the M1 has issues.

Nottingham > Chessington 2:55



Nottingham > Ebbsfleet 2:49


Not going to bother with Leicester, as you pass right by it from Derby, (and Nottingham if using the M1)

Stoke and Brum are too far West to really take advantage of the M1, (or A1,) as I mentioned earlier. Almost definitely always be quicker for them to get to Chessington, but going on your figures, there's actually less in it than I thought there would be!

So as you can see, for much of the Midlands, (Plus South Yorkshire and beyond) it's neither hear nor there between Chessington and Swanscombe / Ebbsfleet.
Sometimes it's a shorter journey, sometimes longer, luck of the draw I guess. Either way it's a pain in the arse. But like I said, it's a pain in the arse for us to get to Paulton's and Chessington too. None of that was ever really up for debate. I know from lots and lots of experience how much of a pain it is to get to both the Elizabeth Bridge area and Chessington Area. But I seem to have better luck going clockwise. Will, for example, will tell you clockwise is cursed, and he always has better luck going counter clockwise... (although I wonder if he changed his mind after that Ghosterforce.)

I guess it's as much of a pain in the arse for us to get to these parks (and imaginary park) as it is for those in the South East and South West to get to Towers and BPB. Just ask Ian on that one haha.

 

[Nicky Borrill]

What noone has appeared to mention here is the cost of trains in UK, making it cost prohibitive for most. For example, this is what national rail enquiries suggests for 1st Feb from my local(est) station to ebbsfleet for 1 person one way:
View attachment 22310

Similar in time and fuel costs for 1 person driving. However, visiting a large theme park like this is a group activity for most. 4 people in the same car won't affect fuel costs too significantly, but would require 4 train tickets with no group discount available taking prices to this:
View attachment 22311
This is without considering the 2 buses required to get to the station, and the unfeasible operating times of both. This is just cost prohibitive for any group considering the trip...

In short, it would take people entirely reliant on public transport the best part of the day to get down there while emptying their bank. The connections in/out of London exist, but the rest of the country suffers.


Tldr: what @Crazycoaster said.

Some dates from Derby, with 1 change, are up to and over £120 one way at the minute... PER PERSON!!

Though some dates, actually the sooner dates weirdly, are only £35

Train prices are really weird at the minute, I can't make head nor tale of them. As recently as 2019 we used to be able to travel down to London from Derby for £25, regardless of when we booked, every day would have several trains with lower prices... Also, booking in advance used to be a sure fire way of saving even more money, I've travelled down for as little as £15, now it seems to be more expensive the further ahead you book. I really don't know what's happening, but I don't like it.

 

[Matt N]

So it's really 20 minutes here or there, either way, between Chessington and NeverGonnaHappenland, by road... And easier than some of those by train.

Although I've never gotten to Chessington in less than 3 hours, ask anybody who travelled down from the North for last year's Ghosterforce!!! 5 hours it took us going that way around the M25!!! Heathrow area always seems to sting me going counter clockwise around the M25. (And sometimes clockwise too on the way home. ) Having said that, I concede that which direction is better or worse around the M25 at any given time is probably purely luck of the draw. As evidenced by the current times given on google maps, (below.) So it is conceivable that on a good day, counterclockwise to Chessington 'could' be quicker.

I'm not sure what was going on when you did that research, but given that from both Nottingham and Derby you'd pass Leicester on the M1, and the M1 is smack bang between Derby and Nottingham, it would normally be the same kind of differences between the 2 parks for all 3 cities... I'm guessing there was some issue on the M1 earlier when you were looking this up? (Like how it''s trying to take me down the M40 now for Chessington, most likely due to an issue on the M25 between the M1 and M40 junctions. I think this is contributing to the increased travel time currently to be fair.)

I actually live smack bang next to the M1, between Derby and Nottingham (remember the American Adventure adverts, haha.) So I'm lucky in that respect, easy access to the motorway network this end, makes issues along the route more palatable.

Derby > Ebbsfleet 2:47 (Used Ebbsfleet as the route would take you down the A2 to where the park's link road is planned.)

View attachment 22314

Derby > Chessington 2:50

View attachment 22315

And then Nottingham... Which has the unique advantage of being able to use the A1 further to the east if the M1 has issues.

Nottingham > Chessington 2:55

View attachment 22316

Nottingham > Ebbsfleet 2:49
View attachment 22317

Not going to bother with Leicester, as you pass right by it from Derby, (and Nottingham if using the M1)

Stoke and Brum are too far West to really take advantage of the M1, (or A1,) as I mentioned earlier. Almost definitely always be quicker for them to get to Chessington, but going on your figures, there's actually less in it than I thought there would be!

So as you can see, for much of the Midlands, (Plus South Yorkshire and beyond) it's neither hear nor there between Chessington and Swanscombe / Ebbsfleet.
Sometimes it's a shorter journey, sometimes longer, luck of the draw I guess. Either way it's a pain in the arse. But like I said, it's a pain in the arse for us to get to Paulton's and Chessington too. None of that was ever really up for debate. I know from lots and lots of experience how much of a pain it is to get to both the Elizabeth Bridge area and Chessington Area. But I seem to have better luck going clockwise. Will, for example, will tell you clockwise is cursed, and he always has better luck going counter clockwise... (although I wonder if he changed his mind after that Ghosterforce.)

Fair enough... there could well have been congestion or an accident when I looked, but the distances to the London Resort were always longer than the other parks, for what it's worth. I should also note that I went to "Swanscombe Marshes" (the closest I could find to the actual site of the park) rather than Ebbsfleet International.

I guess it's as much of a pain in the arse for us to get to these parks (and imaginary park) as it is for those in the South East and South West to get to Towers and BPB. Just ask Ian on that one haha.

Try living in Gloucestershire, less than 10 miles from the Welsh border, where pretty much no major UK park is less than a 2 hour drive away...

As for how the London Resort site stacks up for me; it's around 3 hours away on a good run (Maps suggests that it would be closer to 3.5 hours on a bad one), and I wager that if a park were to be built in that location, it would fall into the Blackpool Pleasure Beach-style category of "don't visit regularly because it's so far away" for us.

Thorpe is significantly closer, at only around 2 hours on a good run (it's one of the closest major parks to me), and even Chessington is only around 2h 15m on a good run.

I do concede that the train appears a little easier... Ebbsfleet International is only around 2.5 hours from Bristol Parkway, which is actually less time than it takes to get to Chessington South (that's nearly 3 hours). Staines and Chertsey (Thorpe's nearest stations) are both closer, at only around 2 hours or slightly under from Bristol Parkway.

That would involve a good 30-45 minute drive to Bristol Parkway in the first place, however, so it would ultimately take no less time than driving.