Richard

HussRainbow, "u's" isn't a word, and neither is you's for that matter. Please read and take note of the Communty Guidelines in their entirety and ensure you follow them. Suspension or banning will follow.

HussRainbow, don't know who you think you are, but sometimes people just need to learn when to shutup.

To my knowledge, Dreamworld doesn't have any policy which disallows riding after drinking. After all, what's wrong with having a beer in the afternoon to cool off then hitting some more rides? Very common situation too. There's a slighty difference between drink driving and "drink coastering". One of them isn't responsible for hundreds of deaths every year in Australia and the other is. I think that's actually a fairly inappropriate comparison, but whatever. Who's going to get drunk at a theme park, and even then, what's riding a coaster going to do aisde from make a bit of a mess in the worst situation?

http://www.roller-coaster.com.au/article.php?aid=8 It is very very sad news. I know I haven't seen her in the exhibit in quite some time - it's often just Ping Ping alone out there or the two cubs. The situation really is unfortunately inevitable. Apparently a lot of people are contacting the park with support, and many offering weird and wonderful remedies and ancient family recipes that are supposed to help the conditon. Sadly though, the condition really is inevitable. The park's seeking out a new bear to fill the gap that Kanook will leave. These bears are fascinating. They're one of the most interesting animals I've ever seen the way they interact together and play nonstop.

The Royal Show Mouse in Melbourne does have blocks. At least it was originally built with blocks and their locations on the track are painfully obvious. The idea Wittingslow have cut corners to make the ride cheaper to operate has always been my suspicion, because these rides were designed with blocks and they can be seen clearly on Mad Mouse. There's no way what happened could have happened if Wittingslow hadn't somehow modified the block system to their own suiting.

Well, as has been said in other threads, it is Wonderland's intention to sell the ride. You'd be absolutely insane to buy anything on this ride other than the mechanical components or the trains for spare parts, but there's no harm in trying. It's the hand rails along the course of the ride. The ones that accompany the maintenance/inspection walkway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/3630577.stm More than likely rider error - there is absolutely no way a rider of suitable proportions could slip from a properly fastened Intamin lapbar. The ridiculous restraints were forced upon the park by the state. Intamin didn't want them, Knott's presumably didn't want them, but some bureaucrat decided that it was the only way it be resolved.

As you'd guess I put my vote in for keep it but upgrade it. There are a range of things I'd like to see happen to it. At the very least clean it all up and make the theming cohesive. Dreamworld's found that they don't need to make runs to the dump once a year if they just stick all the old junk to fill up some empty corners of existing rides. As much as I'd love to see a Perilous Plunge type ride at Dreamworld, capacity is one thing which has always concerned me about this type of ride, but now that as of last week both models out there have caused a death each, I wouldn't give this ride too long before Intamin decides to pull it out of their catalogue. Even though they were not situations to do with bad design, but rather bad judgement on riders' or operators' behalf, it doesn't look good nonetheless. If this sort of ride could be operated efficiently I'd love it, but there's not much proof of that at Knott's, a park that is generally quite efficient. Flumes haven't really progressed that much since their beginnings about thirty years before Rocky Hollow was built, so a replacement wouldn't really justify itself unless it were remarkably different, such as Ripsaw Falls at Islands of Adventure, but I wouldn't want to see the pricetag on that sort of ride, even without theming (if that's what you call the cardboard cutouts on that ride). I think unless Dreamworld wants to have a go at something on the scale of Wild West Falls, Rocky Hollow is fine as a water ride. It still operates fine, I can't imagine it's too costly to run or maintain, it is very valuable in terms of capacity and family entertainment. Just keep it operating, give it a good cleanup and it's fine.

The Faller Models are HO scale, same as the standard model train systems, so naturally they are reasonably small. It's 1:87 if I remember correctly.

Maybe if we do want to continue to talk specifically about Rocky Hollow, someone should create a new topic in the Dreamworld forum as per thunder001's suggestion. I'm happy to keep talking about it, but if we go much further with it, we'll have taken this topic well off track.

I went to Dreamworld on Anzac Day two years ago. That place was packed beyond belief that day. It was weird, a heck of a lot of APers, plus a seemingly abnormal number of tourist coaches. They don't open as late as the WVTP parks, only until 5:30, but I remember getting the last ride of Cyclone for the day. The sun was set but it was still barely light. I'd have to say it rated as one of my favourite rides on Cyclone ever - front seat on that thing and it passed off as a decent coaster for that ride. I still want to check out Movie World after dark an Anzac day some time. Riding Lethal Weapon in the dark would be pretty cool... but that park needs to offer a little more before I go back there again.

What they've said is that there will be greater emphasis on low-capital attractions in future. This is not at the cost of major attractions coming every few years. They've also made it quite clear that they will still keep their title as a "thrill park". Don't be worried, but at the same time don't expect rides ever year. One major ride ever three or four years is sensible from both the park's perspective and our own. As for Rocky Hollow Log Ride being removed, I'd have to disagree. It's a very different ride from Thunder River Rapids in terms of how it acts. Most parks have multple water rides - Movie World has Wild West Falls and Looney Tunes, Sea World has Viking's Revenge and Bermuda Triangle, and I can't think of any major parks elsewhere that don't have multiple water rides, aside from Disney parks (no Disney parks have more than one true water ride for some reason). The log flume/river rapids combo is so common around the world, clearly some people out there believe that the two rides are different enough. The fact is, Rocky Hollow is a reasonably high capacity ride and needs minimal staff (it can be operated at full capacity with one person). It remains popular year-round and isn't a half bad ride.

The idea of opening late on Anzac day is not so much a thing of respect as it is a law. I believe it's State legislation, and I know for a fact that in Queensland and Victoria, with the exception of necessities (essentially food and medical businesses/shops), you can't open until after 1pm. I'd assume that carries across the nation with fairly consistent similar restrictions. As heartless as it sounds, the Gold Coast parks aren't doing it out of respect (I'm sure the respect is there of course), but because they have to. I'd assume that Wonderland is the same, and I'd be a bit disappointed if Wonderland did open normally because of how it is in NSW or something.

Regardless of whether you pay $10 or $20, people who go are paying customers. As paying customers they should expect the most efficient operations possible. It is inexcusable for Dreamworld to operate the park inefficiently during the day, let alone when the major selling point of the three hour event is to be able to ride their major rides in the dark. If queues are overly long then you have every right to be angry or disappointed. The whole park is decked out to be able to cater for night events. There would be no reason to rope off any section of the park, other than cost-cutting. Eureka Mountain is practically a giveaway there. If it takes ten people as you say to open Thunder River, then that's what, $450 on top of the operating costs? When they made $30,000-$60,000 from entrance tickets alone, that's fairly insignificant. How'd they get Tower of Terror running? It was listed as closed on Friday outside the park, and it was raining all night where I was (Burleigh). Unless weather was better up at Coomera it seems pretty odd.

I wasn't too crash hot about the SeaWorld Adventure Parks' Wild Arctic, which had their beluga whales, polar bears and that sort of stuff. The problem was they tried to make it too interactive and exciting, and made it a simulator ride in a helicopter to the Arctic (for those who didn't want a motion ride, they went on a special helicopter fitted with "gyrostabilisers", i.e. they pulled the plug on the motion base). Aside from being the absolute worst simulator I've been on (and yes, I've ridden Batman 2 at Movie World), it meant you had to queue, often for an hour or more to see a few fish. Promise me you won't go that route (given our parks do send people scouting every now and again overseas, and the way they tend to be impressed by less-than-stellar ideas I wouldn't be so surprised), and I'll gladly go along with the arctic thing. I'd love to see an Orca or two, but they need a lot of room and a lot of depth, and I can't imagine that the pricetag on a full-grown killer whale is too inviting. If one day they decided that Corkscrew was to go to make way for more animal exhibits, this is about the only thing I say would be worth it.

The aquarium under the Endeavour Cafe's fine, though it is looking a bit shabby. I say that give it an overhall. Nothing major, just replace all the carpeting, replace the well-and-truly aged description signs and add some more dramatic lighting around it to make it a little less dark and dull. I agree that it is fine as it currently sits, though the idea of expanding it and perhaps making it a larger and more pleasant is a very valid one. Give it the Sea World trademark environmental concern and smack on a trendy name which features the prominent animal followed by a coastal geographical feature and you've got a killer marketing campaign. I'm thinking "Clownfish Blowhole" right now. The dream would be to remove both buildings (the aquarium and Reef Discovery) and build a bigger "world-class" aquarium in the space of the two. There's a lot of dead land that they could utilise in this area by combining the two, plus all the pathing and gardens between them, into one attraction. Replace the Endeavour Cafe with something a little more modern atop this bigger aquarium. You'd then have a reason other than Ski Challenge and Corkscrew Chicken to go back to the front half of the park. I see this as being a realistic sounding attraction, not short term though. Given that we've got two demi-semi-comfirmed attractions "on the way" (seals and crocs, and there's even a few more aren't there?), and Sea World's average of one new animal attraction every four years, I'd be looking at 10+ years before they try and tackle this front area of the park. Still, with Shark Bay covering so many bases in the aquarium department, they'd have to find a different sort of theme or climate for the attraction. Sadly, "Plankton of the World" probably won't have the same effect on people as the brightly coloured fish or playful bears or "killer" sharks or intelligent dolphins of the other most recent attractions.

No it's not, it's the look of Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World. It's a stolen design and totally unoriginal. As much nostalgia or childhood memories it evokes for anyone, the fact is it's stolen. That to me is enough to warrant a completely new, original entrance. I'd love to see the Main Street area redone to be original. It's also largely stolen from Disney, but it's been Dreamworldised over the past 20+ years enough to make it relatively unique, so to me it's not as much of an issue.

Thunderbolt's removal is not a downside. It was dated and needed to go sooner or later, to be replaced by multiple bigger and better things. That's a positive to me. Wild West Falls was put out of action for all of about a month and it wasn't a "fire tragedy" - no one was hurt and the damage was relatively minimal and easily repaired. If you miss Thrillseeker that much then go find one of the many clones out there. It too was removed to be eventually replaced with new and far more significant attractions, allegedly. What we've lost with Wonderland closing, we've essentially gained with Luna Park reopening in terms of numbers and ride quality. I'll gladly say that it's a bad thing that Wonderland is closing, but that still doesn't discount all the positive things that have happened. Add up everything, you'll find that the positive progress in the Amusement industry far outnumbers those negatives probably two or three to one.

Tower of Terror wasn't operating during the day on Friday, but I just realised it was because of the weather, which meant it wouldn't have operated during the night either. Tell me how they didn't know how many people were going to turn up, despite selling out? They knew how many people were there and based on how they were marketing it, they would have known that they would more than likely sell out weeks ago. The thing is, nothing is ever perfect at Dreamworld, or even remotely close to it. Are you trying to tell me that an average of around one ride per guest for the evening is anything but a joke, when they paid $20 for the event? They had a small fraction of the rides they could open. Eureka Mountain, Rocky Hollow, Thunder River, Nick Central don't seem to be coming in anywhere. Regardless of whether it was the first time or not, doesn't at all make it any less of a pathetic attempt on Dreamworld's behalf. Hopefully they'll learn for next time, but I'm doubtful, because how this event went in terms of capacity and efficiency is nothing out of the ordinary for Dreamworld.

It sounds like nothing short of a big joke what they did. I didn't go - I had no intentions of going because it doesn't sound all that interesting to me. Did Tower of Terror run on the night? It's been down for maintenance but it was on the list. If it operated, then why is it down for maintenance? If not, then why did they advertise it as one of the rides open. There's no good answer there. You're saying they sold 3,000 tickets on the night. With all the rides and attractions operating, the park would have had a combined capacity of around 800-1000pph IF they were operating efficiently, which is a very rare thing with Dreamworld. That means each guest in the park would have averaged under 1.3 rides in total on the evening. That's a joke. You pay less for rides at your Royal Show. Why can Wonderland do the same sort of thing, open more rides, charge less and not charge guests already in the park during the day? What Dreamworld/Macquarie Leisure are trying to do is essentially milk it for everything it's worth. No surprise - they've been saying for a few years now that they'll be trying to maximise profits with minimal expenditure. However, it's evident that what they've done has really come at the cost of satisfaction (is anyone genuinely satisfied after queuing most of the evening to ride one ride, maybe two if you're lucky?), which goes against everything a well-run theme park should stand for. I agree that they should make it a regular event, which is obviously what Fright Night was leading to. Fright Night was obviously a test, and based on how they feel it went, expect to see them happening again anywhere from every holiday to monthly or even more frequently.

If you're that desperate to get in the last word on the whole loose articles debate then the topic's here. If it actually does need to be brought up, that's the place, but it seems to be coming out of no where. This thread is for the Sydney Easter Show.

I think we can safely disregard anything Nightshifter says. For what it's worth though, Sea World was actually the first theme park in Australia, and Movie World has been operating for around 12 years. Neither are anywhere near new. How do you mean nothing new has happened in Australia in recent years? In 2001 Luna Park in Melbourne closed to have a lot of work done on it. This same year Sydney's Big Dipper was relocated to Dreamworld. Adventure World opened Rampage. In 2002 Scooby-Doo Spooky Coaster opened, and is debatably the best coaster in Australia. Nick Central opened at Dreamworld, meaning we got a total of two coasters in this year. Adventure World opened Powersurge. In 2003 a Reverchon Spinning Mouse was added to the traveling circuit. Adventure World added a new kiddies coaster. 2004 has seen Shark Bay open at Sea World, Luna Park finally reopen in Sydney and there's more to come with Dreamworld later this year. Really, not a bad run. The four years prior to 2001 weren't any better.

If you want to discuss Scenic World or Orphan Rocker, do a search for those things and find an appropriate thread to talk about it. Here in the Dreamworld forum isn't the place.

The Master Plan doesn't make mention of specific rides. "Thrill rides" doesn't mean "flat rides". This plan isn't meant to give an exact play-by-play of every major development at Dreamworld over the next however many years. It's a general and purposely vague list of what's to happen. Don't cross off roller coasters too soon. They come under the category of thrill ride, do they not? The fact is that research for specific rides won't begun until a year or two before they debut. How could anyone possibly predict what teenages ten years from now will enjoy, or what will even be available out there in terms of rides? I'm not saying that they're getting a coaster, but I'm saying don't cross it off the list because RCT calls flat rides thrill rides or whatever the thinking might be. It's funny that most of the things you mentioned were mentioned by us six months ago in a thread about what we thought Dreamworld should do. Are we just so in-tune with what Dreamworld needs, or did Dreamworld just find a way to get development ideas for free?

About a week late, but Shark Bay is now open at Sea World. There'll be some reviews, articles and galleries and whatnot coming to the site in coming days. Some very interesting stuff, especially if you're interested in marine life. As far as entertainment goes, it's not nearly as interesting as say Polar Bear Shores to watch, but I think it's equally as fascinating. The strange part is that the most interesting part of it is not the sharks. Based on where most people are in the attraction, you'll find that the sharks are actually the least popular part of the attraction. Most people are either around the touchpools, inter-tidal pools or in the underwater viewing area for the reef lagoon, not the shark lagoon. There are a few problems. Firstly, they've built a single tiny entrance area to get in, which means there is a lot of bottlenecking around this area. There is a serious lack of signage. You simply don't know what you're looking at. There also seems to be a bit of an algae problem, which I'd like to think will work itself out as the attraction settles in, though I am doubtful. Given that the soundtrack narration is largely about how great Sea World is at developing filtration systems (yeah, you'd think it'd be about sharks), there's a touch of irony going on. I don't believe it's built as well as Polar Bear Shores and others either, but that sort of stuff is only noticeable if you're actually purposely looking for it. It's still a fairly interesting attraction. I don't think it was executed as well as it could have been, and perhaps a shark exhibit looked better on paper than it does in real life, because the brightly coloured fish of the reef are a much bigger crowd-pleaser than the sharks.