Leaderboard

Are you aware that you're calling them out for something completely bullshit that you made up?

Worlds most recently relocated

Removing the smoking area entirely would be a welcome improvement.

When @Dean Barnettthinks of the perks TPWW received. 🤣

The QLD regs are easy to find - so I should have checked them first - the regs state it is actually FIVE metres from building entrances. The wording is pretty straight forward: within 5 metres of non-residential building entrances Clearly the regulations would regard the standard dictionary definition of a non residential building. A building is defined as "a structure with a roof and walls, such as a house or factory." and it is clearly not residential - so I would suggest an Operator's booth does qualify, the ride structure does not. Its semantics at any rate - based on the pics so far, the operators booth will be more than 5 metres from the currently designated area.

It doesn't take 3-4 days - it also doesn't take 2-3 months either. @New display name probably hit the nail on the head.. cost cutting.

Could have been? It WAS the wooden Wild Mouse capital for a long big time when we actually had FOUR units available with Aussie World’s unit. Again I reiterate the Hopkins Wild Mouse that went to Indonesia should never have been allowed. What is such a rare model could only have resided in Australia. That’s why LPS’s unit is so important and historically significant and why enthusiasts will travel to add this rate coaster credit.

I never found SR to be forceful enough, to make me sick. /s

I can’t even think of a low tier park on the whole planet that does has much maintenance periods as ours. You can’t go to our parks during peak periods because the lines are way too long, but you also can’t go in off peak because half of the rides are closed. 😕

are Huss Topspin’s normally as unreliable as Vortex? It seems like besides Batwing, Village make really poor decisions when choosing flat rides… Doomsday is down more then it’s not, Vortex seems to have an issue every second day, Trident can’t even operate in high winds even though it’s right next to a beach while also having horrendous operations… it’s a shame

Yep, good place to start, and finish. All down hill from here People would be annoyed, but so they should be when you are talking about a park makings millions of dollars a week owned and run by a company worth tens of billions, with access to basically unlimited funds, a population pool of over 250m people to hire skilled workers from, and with the manufacturers of your rides not a 20+ hour flight away, or potentially months away when parts are needed

Go with a cheaper manufacturer.. have lots of issues. Or pay a little bit more... and have a ride that more than likely wouldn't have as many issues. Hmmm... I know what I would have picked. Such a shame as the StarFlyer was a perfect fit, even the travelling model they had as a temp attraction is a better ride than this one.

I honestly think the only reason they went with SBF for Trident is SBF offering Village Trident at a discounted cost when they purchased Cosmic Boom, and as it was a cheaper option they decided to opt out of the 60m Funtime star flyer to save some money. If operations continue being this bad while the ride is always down for wind or technical issues, i don’t think the ride has a very bright future at the park.

That Australia is starved for entertainment options and operators can and do get away with lots of things they shouldn't simply because there is no competitor?

I thought it was a requirement to be 4 or 5 schooners in before posting in here.

No not at all. To clarify, you are sort of correct but not entirely. The whole park is not heritage listed rather there are items within the park that are placed on the state heritage listing and together they form the Luna Park Precinct. These include ( from the Conservation Management Plan Luna Park December 2019) Further more, these items withing the precinct are also on the State Heritage listing and collectively appear on the National Trust of Australia register In discussing Wild Mouse's historicial aspects , it is considered of significant value , as can be seen by the below heritage analysis. As can be seen, this does not leave much room for it to be altered or changed intrinsically in any significant way. Of course, safety will always trump heritage and there may be some future safety items that may needed to be added to ensure its ongoing operation. These will always be enacted with complete regard for heritage issues and its value- much like how the Scenic Railway currently operates at LPM The heritage values of Luna Park Sydney are protected under a range of legislation, both state and local. Below provides an overview of the pertinent legislation. The below shows that the Wild Mouse MUST stay in its current site and cannot be ammended or significantly added to. There are areas within the parks where attractions can be added/removed ( hence how we just had 9 new rides added to the precinct , but this does NOT include removal or altering of the heritage signifcant items such as Wild Mouse or Rotor) The below snapshot of the site shows exactly what can be done with each area , including Wild Mouse and Rotor. This shows where new attractions and indeed any attractions can be located within the park and quite clearly states that Wild Mouse and Rotor may be moved within the park boundaries and can have fabric replacement BUT they must remain Luna Park rides. So to summarise- Wild Mouse cannot be altered or intrinsically changed. It MAY be moved with the park and can have new fabric replacement added to it to ensure its operation.( which being a wooden coaster is going to have to happen) Undere the CMP, it MUST remain a Luna Park ride which means that anyone holding the lease MUST maintain it and ensure of its future operation. I would urge you to track down the Conservation Management Plan to study as it is a very interesting read. This should quell any calls of the future of Wild Mouse into question and any speculation of its removal and finally any overreactions or "excitement" calls being elicited.

Haha! There's your cut and dry answer!

So something I’ve noticed lately on various theme park podcasts and discussion groups is talk about the difference between regional “action/amusement parks” and theme parks. One notable example is a recent podcast episode I listened to that spoke about Gumbuya World’s new coasters. The hosts claimed that “Gumbuya has transcended it’s action park status and is now a proper theme park” with the addition of these two new attractions. I disagree with this statement. In my view, Gumbuya has always been a well themed park with dedicated “lands” and areas just as any legitimate theme park would and I’ve always classified it as such. I don’t think simply adding one type of ride should suddenly change the entire category the park is labeled under. Meanwhile, I’ve also seen other people claim that Gumbuya needs at least 4 or 5 more major attractions before it can be classed as a true theme park. So that’s got me thinking, what truly makes a “theme park” a proper theme park and at what point does a park like Gumbuya cross-over to become universally regarded as a theme park instead of a simple action park? Is it when a certain level of theming is installed? When a certain amount of rides and attractions are brought in? Does it matter what kinds of attractions the park has? Does layout have anything to do with it? There are parks like Adventure World and Funfields which have fantastic theming and story telling in their rides and tick a lot of the “theme park” boxes for me, yet I’m sure many still see them as action/amusement parks. At the same time, there are other parks that have coasters and big attractions but are widely regarded as simple amusement parks. To give my opinion, I see parks like Adventure World, Adventure Park, Funfields, Gumbuya World, Aussie World, Magic Mountain and Jamberoo as a unique “Australian style” of theme park (similar to how Europe and the US have distinctive styles of theme parks) as let’s face it, it’s what the majority of our parks are like and isn’t really replicated the same way anywhere else (particularly the wide open spaces and mashup of dry rides and water rides sharing the same space). I’m interested to hear your thoughts and opinions on this matter.

This comes up periodically and there's never been a cut and dry answer, and there ever will be. I think the answer is both personal and contextual. Aside from that it ultimately doesn't really matter. For our purposes, there are 3 theme parks in Australia, all on the GC. After that it's either amusement parks or water parks (or combinations) and beyond that its tourist attractions. If you want to split hairs and be all 'DW was a theme park now it's an amusement park' or 'SW is a marine park with rides' or 'Luna Park Sydney is a theme park because it has seperate lands' knock yourself out, but know you're wasting your breath with me. What's the threshold to move from one categpry to another? There isn't one, stop over thinking it. I'll give you one rule though, if lots of guests bring Gazebos or similar, it's not a theme park.