Fast & Furious: Supercharged (Closing August 2026)

[Tbad556]

In all of the back-and-forth about the past decade, I do want to emphasize one additional thought. They've done an incredible job with additions for thrill-seekers. They've done an okay job with children. However, they've really robbed the average adult who isn't into high-intensity coasters. This has been the past decade for my wife, for reference:

- Fallon: Absolute skip for her (based on quality)
- Supercharged: Absolute skip for her (based on quality)
- Hagrid's: May one day force herself to ride, but currently too afraid
- The Bourne Stuntacular: Enjoys this
- Velocicoaster: Absolute skip for her (based on fear)
- Minion Blast: Will do it, but only if it's a walk on (based on quality)
- Dreamworks Land: Nothing for her
- Hollywood Drift: Likely a skip for her (based on fear)

She has an annual pass and frequently questions why. An average trip to USF for her is Men In Black, Gringotts, and E.T. I personally adore coasters, but there is quite a disparity in terms of offerings and new additions for thrill seekers & scaredy cats. Because of this, it makes it impossible for us to share many Universal experiences together.

 

[Andysol]

On the cancelled rides and projects, this is probably Disney's biggest annoyance in recent years. Beyond Poppins we have the Play Pavilion, the Future World update which they butchered, the cancelled World Showcase addition (though if memory serves me correct that didn't get an official announcement)

The biggest miss for a cancelled attraction, by far, is the Main Street theater.

The fact the most popular theme park in the entire world doesn’t have a world-class show and theater space is ridiculous.

But, I would just say that they’ve had notable chances (in this very decade) to start working their way out of it, and they’ve (thus far) declined.

Exactly. I can’t get behind the “hey, they’ve been trying. Give them a chance to fix it” when they have shown us zero attempt to fix it even though they’ve had numerous chances and triple down on redundancy.

Villain con is unforgivable in that space.

Re-using the screen tunnel here would be them (in my view) declining to do that once again.

Going to disagree here. Re-use it.

Tearing down supercharged and starting fresh is number 3 on my list of tearing down attractions. If we’re keeping FFL for its stage and HHN- otherwise, supercharged would drop to #4.

And it’s number 3 with a large gap between it and number 2- Springfield/animal actors.

And number 2 has a chasm between it and number one- villain con. That mistake and atrocity needs to die and they need a two story dark ride there. The ride is crappy enough as it is but fine in a vacuum. But it makes the whole park flat out worse.

No villain con but a dark ride?
No Springfield but a new dark ride and coaster there?
Then a Twisters attraction not only is fine in that space; but I think it compliments the park. If and only if they do other replacements will the 360 tunnel attraction be ok.

But if villain con still exists even after a supercharged tear down; the entrance is still fully broken. Nothing fixes that without fixing it.

No offense, but I think that’s being too optimistic that Universal could resurrect any of them. It’s been years since they all closed, and there’s always a new and bigger IP.

BTTF is in Universal UK concept art. Now could that just be fan service? Maybe. But considering they built another flippin’ waterworld in their brand new Beijing park; I could totally see it.

You can argue they haven't moved fast enough or disagree with the choices they've made, but saying they've had opportunities to start addressing these problems and have simply "declined" to do so?

Going to have to disagree with the basis of argument here. The problems he has are the problems many of us have; and clearly are the problems that the general public and annual pass holders have as well based on attendance numbers.

They could have built a SLoP-like dark ride in the villain con space. They didn’t. That was a cognizant choice. Be honest with yourself- how can you possibly argue that wasn’t a prime example of them declining to address the problems of the park?

They have done absolutely nothing to provide confidence they are attempting to address said problems of the park.

But F&F is going to be mindblowingly good. So there’s that, at least. But no one ever had any questions if universal was going to build a kickass coaster replacement. That they have provided us the confidence they can and will do.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

So we lost the original Twister to welcome in Jimmy Fallon and corporate synergy. To then only create a Fast & Furious ride that is so bad that it will be replaced by the Twisters reboot of that franchise.

Fascinating times. Theme parks are even rebooting themselves now.

 

[Tbad556]

Exactly. I can’t get behind the “hey, they’ve been trying. Give them a chance to fix it” when they have shown us zero attempt to fix it even though they’ve had numerous chances and triple down on redundancy.

I have a lot of qualms with the past decade myself at USF and don't love the concept of Twisters if it's just reusing the 360 tunnel. However, is Hollywood Drift not a direct attempt to fix the whole "HRRR is an atrocious, painful, ugly, unreliable, unthemed abomination" complaint that we've heard for years on end? That feels like fixing at least one problem to me.

 

[Alicia]

I have a lot of qualms with the past decade myself at USF and don't love the concept of Twisters if it's just reusing the 360 tunnel. However, is Hollywood Drift not a direct attempt to fix the whole "HRRR is an atrocious, painful, ugly, unreliable, unthemed abomination" complaint that we've heard for years on end? That feels like fixing at least one problem to me.

And the “fast and furious ride here isn’t fast” complaint too

 

[DragonSlayer]

And the “fast and furious ride here isn’t fast” complaint too

I agree with this, but this is the company that got flamed for building a slow-moving F&F ride and then followed it up with a slow-moving Mario Kart ride which has sometimes faced much the same criticism.

I do worry at the prospect of a Twister attraction with no actual twister and no actual rain storm, etc.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

And the “fast and furious ride here isn’t fast” complaint too

Get ready for “The Twister was only on screen” complaints

 

[Andysol]

I have a lot of qualms with the past decade myself at USF and don't love the concept of Twisters if it's just reusing the 360 tunnel. However, is Hollywood Drift not a direct attempt to fix the whole "HRRR is an atrocious, painful, ugly, unreliable, unthemed abomination" complaint that we've heard for years on end? That feels like fixing at least one problem to me.

If that’s the principal reason they replaced HRRR, sure. But it was, at the very least, nearing end of life based on usage similar to other retracked coasters.

So it was more likely a “2 birds, 1 stone” situation.

Regardless of that, it doesn’t address the principal issue with the park.

A subpar coaster for a great coaster and a terrible simulator for a (hopefully) average simulator is great and all- but still addresses nothing at the core of the parks issues. Until they do something that addresses the core; I’m not really willing to give them their flowers. Once the bulldozer hits a simulator, we can start the conversation again.

I’ll refrain from commenting further about the state of USF because there is a thread for that and I don’t want this thread to drift too far away from the core of supercharged being replaced.

I do worry at the prospect of a Twister attraction with no actual twister and no actual rain storm, etc.

Get ready for “The Twister was only on screen” complaints

You were 30 seconds too late for that prediction.

Everybody was wanting a water ride at USF. Time to crank up the water sprayers and fans and let’s start selling some towels in the exit gift shop!

 

[Columbo]

Going to be a bit both sidesy here, sorry:

In the list of reasons that Supercharged was bad, the ride layout is not very high up. The ride system itself was a poor fit for the IP, but just because they keep the general show building doesn't mean they can't put more effort into what surrounds the vehicle or make updates. I mean, we could see them re-contextualize the screen tunnel and change it from being the finale to something earlier on. Hard to know what they will do with this building

They could absolutely deliver something ranging from decent to maybe even good if we're lucky. If they have to focus on where they're really spending versus the smaller additions, I'm fine with this being a smaller one in the end

All that said, while I do not think making a minor improvement to this ride instead of an overhaul is indicative of the company further regressing: I also do not think it gets to be seen as the true revitalization of the park until we see them follow through with something larger afterwards. If nothing big follows this and they keep making similar bad decisions, a patch up job will just be remembered as one

 

[Brian G.]

They could have built a SLoP-like dark ride in the villain con space. They didn’t. That was a cognizant choice. Be honest with yourself- how can you possibly argue that wasn’t a prime example of them declining to address the problems of the park?

They have done absolutely nothing to provide confidence they are attempting to address said problems of the park.

But F&F is going to be mindblowingly good. So there’s that, at least. But no one ever had any questions if universal was going to build a kickass coaster replacement. That they have provided us the confidence they can and will do.

They tried to make the park's entrance more cohesive, rather than the hodgepodge of Minion Mayhem, Shrek, Monsters' Cafe, and Rockit, while also addressing complaints that there weren't enough things for little kids to do (especially as Shrek was getting ripped for being an experience you can watch at home).

Could they have done it better? Yes. But it was an attempt to address said criticisms. I think rebranding the theme to "Minion Studios" would be a good start, while maybe updating Villain-Con to better reflect Minions & Monsters (that's a taller ask).

Same with Supercharged's complaints: "It was not Fast nor Furious," so Universal said, "Ok, here's a new, badass coaster."

Universal tends to address its criticisms pretty well (Which I think is fair game to come back with, "well, they shouldn't be making those mistakes to begin with!".

Going to have to disagree with the basis of argument here. The problems he has are the problems many of us have; and clearly are the problems that the general public and annual pass holders have as well based on attendance numbers.

The problem with this argument is that it's down year over year, not a decline year after year. If there were a problem with USF's core structure, attendance would've been in the toilet for years now.

To clarify, I'm not saying there aren't issues. I mentioned the four big ones in my initial post. I'm just saying there's a difference between "USF has some problems that need to be addressed" and "USF needs a massive overhaul."

I think we're jumping from the former to the latter way too quickly.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

In all of the back-and-forth about the past decade, I do want to emphasize one additional thought. They've done an incredible job with additions for thrill-seekers. They've done an okay job with children. However, they've really robbed the average adult who isn't into high-intensity coasters. This has been the past decade for my wife, for reference:

- Fallon: Absolute skip for her (based on quality)
- Supercharged: Absolute skip for her (based on quality)
- Hagrid's: May one day force herself to ride, but currently too afraid
- The Bourne Stuntacular: Enjoys this
- Velocicoaster: Absolute skip for her (based on fear)
- Minion Blast: Will do it, but only if it's a walk on (based on quality)
- Dreamworks Land: Nothing for her
- Hollywood Drift: Likely a skip for her (based on fear)

She has an annual pass and frequently questions why. An average trip to USF for her is Men In Black, Gringotts, and E.T. I personally adore coasters, but there is quite a disparity in terms of offerings and new additions for thrill seekers & scaredy cats. Because of this, it makes it impossible for us to share many Universal experiences together.

I get that, but also there's tourists who think anything that isn't a coaster is something they don't want to ride. They exist! I don't think in order for Universal to compete they must copy Disney! Also if you're including Hagrid then why not include Epic rides?

Going to be a bit both sidesy here, sorry:

In the list of reasons that Supercharged was bad, the ride layout is not very high up. The ride system itself was a poor fit for the IP, but just because they keep the general show building doesn't mean they can't put more effort into what surrounds the vehicle or make updates. I mean, we could see them re-contextualize the screen tunnel and change it from being the finale to something earlier on. Hard to know what they will do with this building

They could absolutely deliver something ranging from decent to maybe even good if we're lucky. If they have to focus on where they're really spending versus the smaller additions, I'm fine with this being a smaller one in the end

All that said, while I do not think making a minor improvement to this ride instead of an overhaul is indicative of the company further regressing: I also do not think it gets to be seen as the true revitalization of the park until we see them follow through with something larger afterwards. If nothing big follows this and they keep making similar bad decisions, a patch up job will just be remembered as one

I think there's a serious lack of imagination on what they can do here. There are two preshow rooms, a large load area, a transition tunnel space, a full set show scene, first act pre-tunnel room, and then the 360 tunnel. I could see several solutions to this from Twisters to Jaws and more.

 

[Tbad556]

I get that, but also there's tourists who think anything that isn't a coaster is something they don't want to ride. They exist! I don't think in order for Universal to compete they must copy Disney! Also if you're including Hagrid then why not include Epic rides?

More power to Universal if that's the party they choose to indulge. I'm fortunate enough to benefit from that. I'm not stating Universal has to copy Disney anywhere. I'd just love more of the dark rides that they already excel at that are a bit more accessible to the chickens that like theme parks as well. Secret Life of Pets could've fit that mold perfectly, for example.

 

[MAC]

I know we’re of very different minds about USF, so I won’t push that disagreement further again!

But, I would just say that they’ve had notable chances (in this very decade) to start working their way out of it, and they’ve (thus far) declined. Re-using the screen tunnel here would be them (in my view) declining to do that once again.

Eventually, we have to be done with "Oh, they'll do something good next time." Next time is now.

Money isn't infinite. If you're spending a ton on new parks and experiences, something is going to take the brunt, unfortunately. The rapid pace with which we saw UO operate in the 2010s was a result of money being next to free and basically infinite. Money (and materials) became more expensive after 2020 and hasn't seen much relief (especially the former). If COVID never happens? We probably already have the expansions at Epic, as well as Zelda/Pokemon/whatever else.

The 2010s should be treated as an anomaly, not the standard.

The biggest miss for a cancelled attraction, by far, is the Main Street theater.

The fact the most popular theme park in the entire world doesn’t have a world-class show and theater space is ridiculous.

Disney, for some reason, has been notoriously cheap when it comes to Entertainment. It makes no sense in the least bit, but they didn't put the theater there because they'd either have to actually do something with it or let it sit empty in a park that is always needing every available square foot.

 

[Evan]

I get that, but also there's tourists who think anything that isn't a coaster is something they don't want to ride. They exist! I don't think in order for Universal to compete they must copy Disney! Also if you're including Hagrid then why not include Epic rides?

I don't think anyone is saying copy Disney. But Universal's portfolio has certainly lacked variety as of late (ignoring Epic of course, which is a massive expansion).

 

[DOOMBOT]

Lots of totally fair points. I've got a good bit of disagreement as well, but mostly within the realm of contentious personal taste.

I was going to cut this section from my post, cause I know a lot of people will disagree and argue about it, and I really don't care to defend it. But since the points keep being brought up - here's my broad opinion on UDX's output, including Epic, if anyone is genuinely interested and not just going for Gotcha's. Read at your own discretion.

Spoiler: Personal Taste - UOR VS. WDW

I believe that even with all of the cut projects or whiffed executions - your Kitetails, Starcruisers, Poppins, or what have you - the Disney parks have largely gone in a direction that I personally find to be strictly superior to UDX's Orlando output - and that includes the bulk of Epic Universe.

I've not been ignoring the new park. I was largely let down by a number of Epic's heavy hitters and smaller offerings. Untrainable Dragon, Racer Rally, Mario Kart, Yoshi, Werewolf, Ministry, Carousel, the Power-Up Challenges; none of these have challenged my beliefs regarding UDX's lack of consistently quality output. They're not all "bad", but they underdeliver hard, and each have their own set of issues; operational, developmental, budgetary, or otherwise.

Stardust, Mine Cart, Hiccups, Unchained, Cirque; they are actually really well-done and I do enjoy them quite a bit, but Stardust and Velocicoaster are largely equivalent to each other. Same with Hagrid's and Hiccup's, Forbidden Journey and Unchained. So even within the peak of UDX's output, there exists a very similar issue to their screen-based valleys - lack of variety.

Cirque and Mine Cart are different! but I've only ridden Mine Cart maybe three times ever because of its' astronomical wait times, operational issues, and horrible queue; and you can only burden Le Cirque Arcanus with so much before the cracks start showing there too, and for me, they have.

I would take Smuggler's Run, Journey of Water, Runaway Railway, Tiana, Flight of Passage, Slinky Dog Dash, new Test Track, Soarin, Country Bears, Star Tours, Muppets RNRC, or most any other contentious Disney attraction over the bulk of Epic's lineup any day.

You really have to start getting into the dredges of those parks' recent output like Navi River Journey, Awesome Planet, Toy Story Land's ASS, or the Beauty and the Beast Sing-Along before I start prefering waiting 55 minutes for Dragon Racer Rally or Yoshi's Adventure.

---

I acknowledge that Disney has a tremendous foundation to work off of, and that's why even larger whiffs don't impact my enjoyment all too much. There is so much to enjoy in those parks already, that if something doesn't work out, that's okay.

The fifth or sixth whiff at USF, though? It's like jumping into a foam pit with only a few cubes in it. There's no foundation to land on so you just end up hitting the pavement real hard. MiB, Diagon, E.T. are solid, and I know a lot of you like Mummy too. But that park needed help back in 2017, and each addition that goes by without that status-quo changing is just maddening.

After a pre-requisite "I acknowledge that Hollywood Drift exists.", I'll just ask this: When do we think USF will get a big high-budget new redevelopment? Something at the scale of a Hagrids, Unchained, Velocicoaster, Diagon, or Rise?

Will it be another five years, ten years from now? Even the big new Epic and IoA additions seem nearly half a decade away at this point. "This just means that Simpsons is next on the docket!" I thought Simpsons would've been gone by now! Obviously, COVID impacted them real hard, and "world events" are getting in the way now. They banked on certain ideas working out that didn't. It all makes sense, but I can't act excited about any of this.

 

[belloq87]

I think that's an extremely narrow POV because it basically boils down to "they haven't done the specific projects I want them to do."

On one hand, yes, of course my opinions are based on what I want them to do. As everyone's here should be. I want my enjoyment of USF to increase.

On the other hand, I was under the impression most of us were in general agreement that USF has too many very same-y kinds of experiences and needs more variety.

You can argue they haven't moved fast enough or disagree with the choices they've made, but saying they've had opportunities to start addressing these problems and have simply "declined" to do so? Absolutely not.

Again, we just fundamentally disagree on what the park's "problems" are.

Get ready for “The Twister was only on screen” complaints

I mean, I think you’re saying this in jest... but Ride It Out materialized a “real” tornado. So it will be more than fair to point out the difference in quality and ambition between that, and looking at CGI tornadoes on screen walls.

(If that’s what it would be, etc.)

 

[Parkscope Joe]

More power to Universal if that's the party they choose to indulge. I'm fortunate enough to benefit from that. I'm not stating Universal has to copy Disney anywhere. I'd just love more of the dark rides that they already excel at that are a bit more accessible to the chickens that like theme parks as well. Secret Life of Pets could've fit that mold perfectly, for example.

Then people will complain that SLOP has restraints and a height requirement. The goal posts will be moved.

I don't think anyone is saying copy Disney. But Universal's portfolio has certainly lacked variety as of late (ignoring Epic of course, which is a massive expansion).

Yeah if you remove the largest expansion on property in the past 25 years with over a dozen new attractions it does make your argument look better! What some people in this thread want are the sensations and feelings of their childhood recreated now. It's impossible to do that. Wheter this is wanting the 90s USF to come back or remembering what Disney was to them, the complaint is the same: why isn't [Insert Universal Park Here] more like [insert my memory or another park].

 

[Brian G.]

On one hand, yes, of course my opinions are based on what I want them to do. As everyone's here should be. I want my enjoyment of USF to increase.

On the other hand, I was under the impression most of us were in general agreement that USF has too many very same-y kinds of experiences and needs more variety.


Again, we just fundamentally disagree on what the park's "problems" are.


I mean, I think you’re saying this in jest... but Ride It Out materialized a “real” tornado. So it will be more than fair to point out the difference in quality and ambition between that, and looking at CGI tornadoes on screen walls.

(If that’s what it would be, etc.)

Of course, we all have things we personally want them to build. My point was more that "working their way out of it" can't only count when Universal makes the specific moves we want. Closing Supercharged after 8 years and replacing it with a major coaster absolutely counts as addressing the problem, even if the rumored next step isn't what you would've chosen.

As for what happens with Supercharged... remember, there are 3 very large rooms before you even get to the 360 scene. If they end up reusing the 360 tech, that doesn't mean they can't get creative with the ride experience and blend physical and screen elements, even within that room. But again, we really can't say much beyond hypotheticals right now.

And while USF absolutely has a screen-heavy presence, and I agree more variety would help, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd biggest problems with Supercharged weren't that it used screens. Hell, when it opened, I even said Supercharged would mark the end of the "screen era." The fact that they ditched the 3D glasses at the last minute only further reinforced where things were headed.

Supercharged was just a bad attraction. Reusing some of its technology doesn't automatically mean repeating the same mistake, especially if it's meant as a bridge.

 

[Tbad556]

Then people will complain that SLOP has restraints and a height requirement. The goal posts will be moved.

I mean, I'm only here to speak about my wife, who I can say would not do that and would be thrilled to have additional options to get her money's worth. You can always find silly complaints if you're looking for them. It doesn't mean that there aren't also valid concerns that co-exist amongst all of the nonsense online.

Lots of totally fair points. I've got a good bit of disagreement as well, but mostly within the realm of contentious personal taste.

I was going to cut this section from my post, cause I know a lot of people will disagree and argue about it, and I really don't care to defend it. But since the points keep being brought up - here's my broad opinion on UDX's output, including Epic, if anyone is genuinely interested and not just going for Gotcha's. Read at your own discretion.

Spoiler: Personal Taste - UOR VS. WDW

I believe that even with all of the cut projects or whiffed executions - your Kitetails, Starcruisers, Poppins, or what have you - the Disney parks have largely gone in a direction that I personally find to be strictly superior to UDX's Orlando output - and that includes the bulk of Epic Universe.

I've not been ignoring the new park. I was largely let down by a number of Epic's heavy hitters and smaller offerings. Untrainable Dragon, Racer Rally, Mario Kart, Yoshi, Werewolf, Ministry, Carousel, the Power-Up Challenges; none of these have challenged my beliefs regarding UDX's lack of consistently quality output. They're not all "bad", but they underdeliver hard, and each have their own set of issues; operational, developmental, budgetary, or otherwise.

Stardust, Mine Cart, Hiccups, Unchained, Cirque; they are actually really well-done and I do enjoy them quite a bit, but Stardust and Velocicoaster are largely equivalent to each other. Same with Hagrid's and Hiccup's, Forbidden Journey and Unchained. So even within the peak of UDX's output, there exists a very similar issue to their screen-based valleys - lack of variety.

Cirque and Mine Cart are different! but I've only ridden Mine Cart maybe three times ever because of its' astronomical wait times, operational issues, and horrible queue; and you can only burden Le Cirque Arcanus with so much before the cracks start showing there too, and for me, they have.

I would take Smuggler's Run, Journey of Water, Runaway Railway, Tiana, Flight of Passage, Slinky Dog Dash, new Test Track, Soarin, Country Bears, Star Tours, Muppets RNRC, or most any other contentious Disney attraction over the bulk of Epic's lineup any day.

You really have to start getting into the dredges of those parks' recent output like Navi River Journey, Awesome Planet, Toy Story Land's ASS, or the Beauty and the Beast Sing-Along before I start prefering waiting 55 minutes for Dragon Racer Rally or Yoshi's Adventure.

---

I acknowledge that Disney has a tremendous foundation to work off of, and that's why even larger whiffs don't impact my enjoyment all too much. There is so much to enjoy in those parks already, that if something doesn't work out, that's okay.

The fifth or sixth whiff at USF, though? It's like jumping into a foam pit with only a few cubes in it. There's no foundation to land on so you just end up hitting the pavement real hard. MiB, Diagon, E.T. are solid, and I know a lot of you like Mummy too. But that park needed help back in 2017, and each addition that goes by without that status-quo changing is just maddening.

After a pre-requisite "I acknowledge that Hollywood Drift exists.", I'll just ask this: When do we think USF will get a big high-budget new redevelopment? Something at the scale of a Hagrids, Unchained, Velocicoaster, Diagon, or Rise?

Will it be another five years, ten years from now? Even the big new Epic and IoA additions seem nearly half a decade away at this point. "This just means that Simpsons is next on the docket!" I thought Simpsons would've been gone by now! Obviously, COVID impacted them real hard, and "world events" are getting in the way now. They banked on certain ideas working out that didn't. It all makes sense, but I can't act excited about any of this.

I don't agree with some of those attractions takes, but nothing wrong with that haha. I'm certainly not going to argue personal taste. I agree with the concerns about the multiple whiffs as well as the concern for what happens with Simpsons. I don't see any change there before 2030 myself, but what do I know.

Whether I agree with 100% of what you say or not, I always appreciate the thorough takes you provide. It's a pleasure to read.

 

[belloq87]

And while USF absolutely has a screen-heavy presence, and I agree more variety would help, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd biggest problems with Supercharged weren't that it used screens. Hell, when it opened, I even said Supercharged would mark the end of the "screen era."

I think my ultimate point is that, at USF, we’re still in that era. The balance has not shifted away from that stuff in any way yet.

And I think the fact that Superchaged used screens is at least the third biggest problem with it!

1. IP is a bad fit for the ride experience.
2. 360 tunnel a redundant gimmick with (the highly superior) Skull Island a short walk away.
3. One more simulator in a park becoming oversatured with screen stuff.
4. Lost two (physical) attractions for one (simulator) attraction.
5. It's just... not good! Even on its own terms.

(I am genuinely curious what your rankings of its problems would be!)

Then people will complain that SLOP has restraints and a height requirement. The goal posts will be moved.

I think we can all take it as a given at this point that when anybody talks about wanting SLOP (or something like SLOP), they also mean something with more accommodating ride vehicles. It's been caveated plenty in conversations about it.