DaptoFunlandGuy

Which website? Even Parkz could tell you: https://www.parkz.com.au/parks/US/Vallejo/Six_Flags_Discovery_Kingdom/ride/1616-Boomerang_Coast_to_Coaster/stats

Not until they pour some it isn't.

This was my first thought reading the article. I'm sure they paid him for the work, but surely a flight to Brisbane, a room at Sea World Resort, and front seat on (one of) the first rides would have been a given? His rendition was also "submitted" after the coaster went vertical, so it doesn't count (and his previous rendition wasn't spot on as we've discussed ad nauseum - although it is yet to be seen whether his first creation was the closest, as judged by the Parkz staff - guess we'll just have to wait and see for Richard's announcement?)

Residential development Residential development I appreciate that you don't see the doubt. This is a community that has been actively following theme park proposals and developments across the country for over 13 years (probably 14, but i can't remember the exact date) - the fact is we have seen SO MANY of these proposals come and go, that skepticism is par for the course. If you don't understand the doubt, you need to spend a few days trawling through the back catalogue of announced-and-never-heard-of-again proposals that have been discussed on Parkz and its predecessors. Off the top of my head I can recall a chinese proposal for some sort of park near port macquarie, and another near newcastle. I never heard of either of them again. We've seen stuff all up and down the east coast of Australia that never reached fruition. Sure, they do great with residential developments - however there are also some changes afoot to the foreign ownership laws that may change that - and you may not see such great successes there - but I HAVE seen developments with proposals for "entertainment precincts" and "parks" become paved paradise, where they put up a parking lot. As for objections - my wife is the construction administrator for the largest residential builder in Queensland. i know a lot of objections are bullshit. Hell, I read every single objection lodged to the VRTP carpark proposal, and laughed my ass off at a lot of them - however buried within them were grains of truth, people who cited town planning rules \ guidelines and restrictions, and raised (some) legitimate concerns. The local council member when he announced the official refusal by council was very careful to say that during the litigation that inevitably follows - that VRTP will have the opportunity to counter the concerns raised (and they'll likely win, but not without a fight). But some concerns are fatal. If this mob were to raise the entire site to be above flood level - what does that do to the surrounding areas that are lower? where does the water go - someone elses BackYard - which is a genuine NIMBY concern. I fucking hate NIMBY reactions, but some are legitimate and justified. If council simply ignores objections, why then are VRTP taking them to court over their carpark? I would be very interested to hear of how many chinese led recreational \ entertainment \ theme park developments there are on the coast at the moment...?

buys land to build 'theme park' makes half arsed attempt at theme park that nobody likes residents, enthusiasts, et al, all lodge objections etc. proposal denied by regulatory authorities makes alternative proposal which cashes in on land value - ie: industrial zone or residential estate ... profit. @locke - you do seem to be very firmly in the Songcheng camp here - any conflict of interest? I'm with Slick here - when they break ground on an approved DA for a theme park, then i'll get excited.

*facepalm* I can't believe I didn't make that connection. Stupendous @docoaster, well done and kudos to you!

I got that vibe too @Reanimated35, although I took your 'we sat elsewhere' as advice to others who may prefer to be in the centre of the action.

Am I the only one reading it as 'just want the best tits'?

Small lavalier (lapel) style microphone (it just has a very large wind cover\shield\screen\poffle). Probably all they have to work with their equipment - but when you have two people talking, they have to share it, so that would be why he's holding it - she moves away a couple times and you can see him move closer to her throughout to keep the levels right. If they plan to do more things like this in the future, it probably wouldn't hurt them to invest in a handheld wireless microphone. Love that they're doing this, albeit late by our standards, to keep driving the hype(r) train. My only critique (because I wouldn't be a fan boy without picking something to whinge about) I'd have loved to have them give a bit of a comparison with the lift hill - Greg said over 60 metres \ just higher than batwing - but batwing wasn't in the shot so it was impossible for people to do a good comparison - i'd have loved to have him say either 'twice as high as green lantern' or otherwise 'almost twice as high as those supports you currently see' I do however think it was great that they shot it just as the NIL was being capped off. a few minutes earlier and they might have caught it lifting into position, which would have been cool to see. I wonder which piece will be the last one in?

The cost of shipping in the correct timber in a huge pallet, as opposed to shipping containers with supports stacked inside (leaving lots of empty space). More workers on site (carpenters) versus less (riggers) - but zero pre-manufacturing (mostly) versus high tech industrial machinery - robot welding, cutters, then painting - labour costs might be less, but the sheer cost to purchase and use the machinery to manufacture steel parts (and the cost of the steel) greatly outweighs a delivery of lumber. In most places (Australia can be a little different with wage costs), the labour component of construction is one of the smaller pieces of the pie. Pretty sure chippys get paid a bit less than steel riggers too. Not convinced? Don't really care - the evidence is already out there that the cost to build is cheaper with wood.

'general australian retail sizes' are really a myth. although there are 'acceptable' measurements, different manufacturers can make what they like, and call it what they like. in the grey parkz shirt I got XL. its a slim fit but comfortable. In the white 'the worlds' shirt, i got 3xl and it is loose and airy, but quite comfortable. I'm sure though that if you get the wrong size, @Richard will be more than accommodating to swap you the right size. I won't presume to know the situation for postage etc, but he's more than friendly and willing to work things out. I'm not sure if there is a size chart for the merch, but worst case scenario, I can't imagine you'll be 'burnt' by Parkz.

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.

there's also the concern of the increased traffic on the local roads, but being honest, i think those concerns aren't really founded.

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.

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'.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍 👍

@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.

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:

But what accent will they use?

...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.