DaptoFunlandGuy

But this is not a demographic you're describing - this is just your own diverse group of ... well... group of people who can stand you enough to tell you what they do when they're avoiding you. This is at best - 30 odd people that you're talking about and isn't representative of the broader population. Canberra was about 4 hours from Sydney, but none of my family (who lived in either of those cities) just up and decided one day to drive to the other city for a day trip... that's FOUR hours... By your logic - that Melbourne doesn't need a waterpark because there is already 3 waterparks on the east coast (WNW, WNWS, WWW), then by that logic - Melbourne doesn't need a theme park either - being that there is already 7 major parks on the east coast (LPM, LPS, Jamberoo, AussieWorld, DW, MW, SW...)

Yeah, I hate it when they put in noisy theming!

As for Coffs, whilst I realise it's relatively small, Big Banana already has a 'water play' area next to the toboggan slide up the back. They've got a great hill there that would really suit expansion a la Jamberoo style slides. Agree with Newcastle - just as Jamberoo is far enough south to not really have major concerns about WnWS - Newcastle is just enough far north to be suitable, with a decent population base thats just far enough away from Gosford to attract that entire catchment.

In summary.... 'NIMBY'

Oh, The humanity!

We did discuss this earlier - earlier photos of it showed random coloured pieces all over the shop - perhaps they've started correcting it and haven't gotten to all of it yet - there does seem to be a lot less 'mixed' pieces to what there was a month or two ago...

I think its a good idea too... problem is you'll end up with them segregating themselves into the new living quarters that will inevitably spring up, and it will get a place known as 'little asia' in the town. It's kind of what happened in Coffs Harbour - Woolgoolga is well known for it's ethnic background.

Wouldn't shoot across the trench. Everything has to be fail safe. What if the fire across the trench fails to switch off at the right time?

4 hours and 14 minutes... who are you... the flash? How was the dippin dots? Meanwhile reanimated.... how was lunch?

for the first part of it's life... then they'll replace it with cheap ropelight...

So I guess your first impression of Disneyland in 1955 would have been the same? Anyone who tries to go live with a fully fledged, fully featured app, website, business etc needs their head read. Its foolhardy and asking for trouble. Build it slowly, test each part as you add it and make sure it all works seamlessly. For older members - i'm referring to Dreamnova.

For those not following the running commentary on facebook, the site owner administrator has announced his intentions to form a 'historical society' which is essentially the co-operative mentioned earlier. The organisation will be legitimised on paper and have a much better 'formalised' standing within the community. So if you were hesitant chucking in a couple dollars to some unknown random, once established this society will be a formalised committee capable of issuing receipts and essentially legitimising the purpose of the donation. I don't think it gives them any 'tax deductible' status - you wouldn't be able to claim it or anything, but it would be a non-profit organisation, and a good cause. Once established, I fully intend on making a donation within my means to do so.

today? No.... but Walt's Circus had many animals inside the park once upon a time... so - no more than Dreamworld is... I guess i'm just saying that it could have gone either way with the publicly available information out there. The information not publicly available gave insiders the knowledge that it would be live animals from day dot - but a layperson wouldn't have known either way, and using Dino Island as a guideline, an animatronic 'jungle cruise' could well have been on the cards.

22/08/13... so we have a date? (Well... that would be the date they start 'scare school'... i'd say it'll be open for september holidays or maybe a soft open a week earlier...)

I guess thats the big difference though - both concepts share a lot of similarities, but this idea, as opposed to your bar is different in that your bar has an expectation of profit, and has to be able to show how you will make one, to repay your creditors. THe people funding this exercise are 'donating' as such, for a common cause. there isn't an expectation of profit from it, and people are throwing in their own assistance (in whatever manner they can) to realise it. A big difference in the two is also demonstrated by what you're saying about getting the trains moved - sure, commercially, contracting a transport company to crane them onto a flatbed, drive them to the site, and then crane them off would be costly, but in reality - someone who supports the cause and owned a truck with a crane already fitted offered up their services to achieve the goal. I still think a formal plan with a structured organisation is the way to go, and you (like me and others) have every right to withhold our own investment into the concept until we can see the benefits to be had, but you are holding them to a 'commercial' standard in some of your examples and questions, when its more an 'enthusiast' group with no expectation of commercial gain. Sure - they may not succeed, but i'm reminded of a crackpot idea on these very boards once raised by someone we don't see very often anymore - called Zordmaker - you may recall he lobbied (unsuccessfully) to have the bush beast heritage listed, to prevent the bulldozers. His intention was for it to continue to operate, and therefore continue to generate an income, and his lack of planning in that respect was his downfall. This concept on the otherhand doesn't intend on trying to generate income, only to receive donations to cover costs... and this is a very big difference.

Having just returned from a trip to the USA, I feel compelled to respond... Sure - the theming on JTA is sparse, but given the attraction I feel like it is a simple theme that is done extremely well. I don't think i'd call it a disaster - and to put on the hat of a 'non-enthusiast' (i travelled with two), it was a nicely themed job. very pretty, nice little touches - such as video screens in the 'scooby' type lift to simulate being underwater. Sure - it's no Disney attraction but I feel it was nicely, if simply done. The coaster section COULD have used a little more to it, but that was more about the thrill (and drying off) than it was theme, with a second nice little splashdown at the end just to get you wet all over again. The 'bystander operated' water cannons was also good, although I don't think i'd pay for the privilege. If we get a similar level of theming (i'd expect a 'little more' given the indoor nature of the stationhouse) i'd be extremely happy with this as an experience.... and I wouldn't call that a disaster either... take a look at Jet Rescue for example - simple, plausible theme - not immersive, but carried very well on a relatively low-end budget consisting mostly of landscaping... and nobody called that a disaster.

Actually, they were 'research probes'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungle_Cruise ?

To be fair Ben, you've received some quite reasonable replies as well as those that you quoted above. I totally get where you're coming from - Despite being very involved with Chris and his ideas for the site and the 'museum', I myself haven't donated to this cause, despite my hope that they will be saved. Although not a 'formal' plan, Chris has answered your questions already (you might have missed it amongst all the other garbage), and it sounds like he's got a fair idea of what he's going to do. As for the location - the place that the trains are housed is private property owned by a family who are 'collectors hoarders'. They themselves collected several wonderland pieces (including the front entry sign) when the park closed. They share a similar passion for the park and were willing to house the trains and open their property for the fans. I think they've already demonstrated that kind of goodwill. I would like to see some sort of agreement in writing - the establishment of a cooperative society (basically a non-profit type thing) where a person can buy a share in the co-op entitling them to use the facilities. I'll have a chat to Chris.

Just to back up RWC's assumptions - we have all seen the pictures of the boats that are supposedly intended for use on Storm - and they are themed as coast guard. Although CG may assist in animal rescues, their primary function is maritime safety and navigation of waters, so i'm inclined to agree that it won't be an animal rescue. I don't necessarily agree that it will be 'educational' but the story will revolve around those lines. I don't think the message will be polluting our waters with containers is bad, more just that the story is a container ship struck by storm lost it's load and has to be rescued. We already have our animal rescue and research story with Jet Rescue... mirroring that theme on an attraction next door doesn't really appear to be a smart move. So long as it's themed to the 'Sea' its an appropriate fit for 'sea' world.

thats about as much info as i've seen them release publicly to date... but it would seem they've finally admitted they will be live animals... well done to those who were guessing in that direction...

i'd have liked to have seen them invest in the second train - arkham has breathed new life into this ol' girl... sure it's popularity isn't anywhere near what it could be, but i feel like much of that is the closure of the chinatown alleyway - which used to channel most people to it's entrance. It's now hidden behind SE (hidden in plain sight), and nobody sees it. At least when you came down chinatown alley, you'd see the track at the end, you'd hear the roar of the train and the screams of the riders. SE does a very good job at blocking most visible parts of Arkham, and the wall-wrapping they've done, and the batman tower doesn't look like a ride, just a backdrop facade for Batwing JL. Arkham needs to be made more visible, and IMHO - the only way they can do that is to reopen chinatown (rethemed of course).

That's some of the best research i've seen in the past 9 years. Of course - having a slight inside channel doesn't hurt...

In all honesty, i think they've reached limits with RCT. theres a lot more that they can do as computing power increases, but they've got a pretty realistic product as it stands, and other than development of new rides to insert into the existing platform, there isn't really much left to do.

Statistically speaking - it IS more likely - as more components in use increase the risk of component failure, not because there is more, but because there are more... ok so that doesn't make a lot of sense - but my meaning is that the more complicated a machine is, the more chance there is of something going wrong (and i'm not implying a safety issue here). To break it down another way as I realise i'm not explaining myself well - say the manufacturer tests the wheels on the train, and determines that they all have a life of 10,000 cycles, however 1 in 50 wheels will delaminate earlier than expected due to the manufacturing process. Now - assume that each train has 40 individual wheels (i'm not counting, just using it as an example), with 40 wheels in play, you've potentially got no wheels on the train that will fail early. Put two trains on the track and you've potentially got 1.6 wheels out there that will fail. Overall it's still a 2% chance of failure, whether theres one train or two, but when the percentage is less than 1, there is the potential that you don't have any on the track that will. Disclaimer - i'm not saying the wheels will have a failure, or even that the percentages and lifespans of the components have this risk. I'm just using it as an example to explain the logic. All manufacturers have a failure rate on their products - a percentage that they expect won't last the lifetime they recommend or guarantee on the product. Whilst the failure rate and percentages for a particular product mean that it is just as likely that each component will fail earlier than expected based on the percentages, the less of that component in use means a decreased likelihood of failure. You could have all 80 wheels fail early, they may just be the 1 in 50 out of 4000 wheels.