AlexB

Parkz Crew
  • Content count

    7,980
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    191

AlexB last won the day on May 31

AlexB had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,168 Excellent

About AlexB

  • Birthday June 24

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Brisbane South
  • Interests
    This field is required.

Park & Ride Stats

  • Favourite Ride
    Space Mountain
  • Park Count
    31
  • Ride Count
    147

Recent Profile Visitors

3,226 profile views
  1. less to build, but more to maintain. I'll be honest - Dreamworld's record on maintaining things after they're built isn't that great - so its probably not the best way to go for them, but if they could keep the upkeep on it, it'd be a no-brainer. You've got to remember, Wonderland had two wooden rollercoasters, and they were the only coasters they had for almost a decade. They operated Bush Beast for almost 20 years before they closed - and no, coaster maintenance wasn't the reason for their demise.
  2. there's also the concern of the increased traffic on the local roads, but being honest, i think those concerns aren't really founded.
  3. Even if it's bigger, i think if they were to put a hyper in, it would just scream copycat. they need something that really says 'i'm different to whats down the road' without being a one-trick pony. A really nice woodie or hybrid would suit this perfectly.
  4. I think a lot of it is media twist. I didn't read too much detail, but when Ardent was talking the 'citywalk' type of precinct, they did reference the downtown disney \ universal citywalk as their aspiration\inspiration - i think the media then twisted that to say 'dreamworld to be Australia's disneyland'.
  5. Surprised nobody has mentioned it yet, but really getting sick of the media taking every park proposal \ expansion and turning it around to say <locality> answer to Disneyland! I silently scream at them. FML.
  6. Article is credited as a Dreamworld press release - can I check - was this a direct copy paste? there are a few typos in there that makes it look quite sloppy. In other news (and probably more appropriate to the site issues threads) but this is pretty damn obnoxious: Top left: standard parkz header bar (just visible out of screen) as it usually appears, once scrolling down the article. Top right: massive obnoxious header bar with logo obscuring much of the title content - which has occurred ONE SINGLE SCROLL CLICK later. Bottom: ongoing obnoxiousness obscuring article content and imagery.
  7. Yeah, but that's kind of like saying that the first stock factory camry off the production line is the sleekest fastest biggest and roomiest 2017 Camry in the world... however - that argument also works that it's the slowest, shortest and only hypercoaster in the southern hemisphere.
  8. Although the image made it very obvious what direction the promo was heading, my first reaction to the title was this: Which also would have made perfect sense, since Dreamworld has hosted many of Lynton's attractions previously.
  9. The title of the video indicates that the testing was observed on 18/6 after hours - so probably separate, but not altogether unrelated to the rest of this topic. 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍
  10. @Luke, you're absolutely right on the 'jurisdiction' point, but if it were a local law or regulation - Aussie World would also be modifying the funnel web, which was the original question @djrappa asked. The response he got was Dreamworld choosing independently to increase the 'level of safety' by adding the additional restraint (which I note you covered in the last part of your post). Now here's the problem - If a regulatory authority has identified it as an issue, then choosing independently isn't an option - its a mandatory upgrade. If a manufacturer has identified it as an issue, then choosing independently isn't an option. If neither the regulatory authority or the manufacturer has identified it as an issue, then choosing independently becomes very dangerous, because that then suggests that the park has implemented this from some invented, non existent, fanciful risk, and then chosen to manage it by adding additional restraints. Assuming that the manufacturer isn't involved here (otherwise it isn't choosing independently) - what if this negatively impacts the ability to evacuate the ride in an emergency? What if this additional restraint negatively impacts on somebody in some situation, and they suffer spinal injuries because the restraint prevented them from the range of motion the manufacturer permits in the factory fitted restraint? going it on your own in the theme park business is dangerous - as you only have yourself to blame if something goes wrong.
  11. they're considering it? Or it's necessary? There really can't be any grey area on this particular issue. No further explanation is needed from me - just see below:
  12. But what accent will they use?
  13. ...Furthermore to the above, in the interests of guest safety and security, Dreamworld will soon be implementing 'simulated cycles', so, instead of actually despatching the ride, the operators will blindfold* you, and then explain to you what WOULD have happened if the ride was actually moving, before removing the blindfold and releasing the safety harness, and directing you towards the exit. *blindfolds cost $400 per ride. You must purchase to ride. You cannot bring your own. Blindfolds are not reusable, refundable, transferrable, or sanitary. Note that blindfolds may not be used on Flowrider, so we've just turned the water off instead, so it doesn't matter. For safety reasons, all animals will wear blindfolds too. If you find a blindfold in a burger patty, it didn't come from a kangaroo, and now that you've eaten it, that will be another $400 too.
  14. Tim Allen, John Travolta, Martin Lawrence and William H Macy of course...