DaptoFunlandGuy

No... it's been there at least as far back as Vista.

I've experienced a 3 hour journey at six flags... and that was just a queue house with little theming at all. Just because Disney and Universal can pull it off, doesn't make our parks 'poor' by comparison. Most parks around the world would be 'poor' by comparison to these two. I agree that a lot of the magic has gone out of the parks, but at the end of the day - they had to do this to survive. Although Gremlins and Bermuda and Looney Tunes were a great story with great magic, the general population wanted thrill rides - roller coasters and the like. In order to survive this is what the parks give them. It was too costly to maintain the nostalgic greats of yesteryear when the ridership was slowly dwindling into nothingness. Simplistic theming that is cheap to maintain is the way of the future for these parks. they cannot afford to spend so much on annual refurbs as they used to. As for the people in the park, if they capped the numbers lower than they do, they could not afford to offer the attractions that they do now. Would you rather all attractions ran on a 1 hour on, 1 hour off cycle to save on staff and running costs, but have less people in the park? No - because although there would be less people, there would be less rides to soak them up too. I'm with Alex on this one.

Roof damage is potentially the area where the volcanoes overlapped the roof edge??? that would explain that... the walls missing have been that way for several months - almost since the demolition began...

Holy Crap! Bussy - where have you been?

Unfortunately, I have to agree with RWC on this one Lemmit - a water park with a cohesive theme throughout would be considered a theme park. If it were just bare steel towers, with plain slides leading to a plain splashdown pool, with sunlounges and grass - that'd be a plain water park... But once you give the area a theme, landscape it, give the slides names with a relevant theme also... then you're a theme park... Take WnW for example - H20zone is their extreme thrill slide area - with Kamikaze, Tornado, Black Hole etc. Whitewater Mountain - which is four slides... oddly enough, on a mountain... And White Water World - with slides such as the B.R.O. (which is themed to look like a Blue Ringed Octopus)... Now if you compare this to say - the old Mt Druitt WaterWorks - they were all a bunch of slides that led to splashdown pools, and that was about it... THAT is a waterpark. WnWS is most definitely going to be a themed water park. At the end of it all though, what you intended to ask was whether we would see any themed amusement parks in Sydney, rather than themed water parks, and most normal people would take your meaning from that and discuss your intended topic. Your fault for not being specific enough, and RWC's fault for being a nitpicker.

I wouldn't say 'taken over'... more like 'emulated'.

It also only vibrates on the 'physical' targets. The on screen targets don't vibrate...

My 'real phone' comment wasn't directed at Android users... just Windows Phone users. Street view is nice, but in a way - dated. Are they going to roll out the street-view car every time they change something update a ride theme the park? Ideally - they'd want to have a separate set up for fright nights and white christmas too. More of a gimmick than anything really useful. Agree that a solid mobile site would be preferable to an 'app' for any platform...

All I can say is - Apple apps have been around longer than android, and android longer than Windows phones. So Android users should be patient... and Windows users should get a real phone.

there is an extension to the building on each side that appears to be the run out, and the lead up to the first and final drops respectively.

An interesting point Jacob - but the biggest thing that a Disney-owned park has going for it is the 'Disney' brandname. To open a 'marvel' park, that most people wouldn't know was associated with Disney... it'd just be viewed as any other park, rather than part of the hallmark of theme parks - a disney park. Gazza - I disagree with your views on the government input issue. Wonderland was funded by the NSW state government (they invested in it by using their employee pension fund), and Hong Kong Disney is also part owned by the government. I'm pretty sure Resorts World Sentosa is a similar set up as well. I'm not talking about our government paying to install infrastructure, or sweeten the development and approvals process, i'm talking about them owning (or part owning) the product... sharing in the profits. This would (in the short term) cost the (statefederal) government money, but long term, it would bring in a big asset, and a reliable revenue stream. A viable park with conservative projections would be a good investment - one only has to look at the development and expansion of our 4 (and a half?) existing parks to know that this area as a tourist destination isn't going anywhere soon. Again - I reiterate that we don't have the population to sustain a disney park (yet), what i'm saying is when Disney comes back, considering a park down under, and the projections suggest it would be a viable park - the relevant local, state, and the federal government should open their wallets to get a piece of it... thereby assisting making the development happen. The only reason we have a HKDL, is because the government of hong kong did just that... in fact it was a condition of Disney's to commit to building.

I don't have a source, just a memory. 5 was a rough guess based on what we've seen discussed here on the forums. We know they've considered gold coast. We know they've considered Perth. We know they've considered Sydney and we know they've considered Melbourne. This is just my recollection of over 8 years on these forums. I don't think we can say 'never'. It is possible that with population growth, we'll see a Disney park - but that may be 10-20-30 years down the track. Bottom line is - Disney will always look at new markets - they are in USA, Europe & Asia - large population areas - hell - the Asian area has several parks - Japan has two in a geographical area not much bigger than the coastline of New South Wales (albeit - a much higher population). They haven't built in Aus for the same reason they haven't built in Africa - not enough local population to support it. Many will say 'if they build it... people will come' but a park needs a local fanbase to support it through off peak times. But this doesn't mean that Disney aren't always looking for new locations, ideas and concepts that would work. I'm sure they'd love to have a park 'down under'.. it just has to be viable, and i'm sure that they'll keep looking at options as they present themselves and consider each one on it's own merit. I think though that the governments (state and federal) need to be much more receptive, willing, and able to open their pockets before they commit.

I remember a long time ago (circa 1994), Sea World did have paper straws for drinks. They did get phased out for a while, so it's good to see them back. Agree the show building resembles an 80's K-mart (or even older), but that is similar to the age of the show building, so not entirely beyond believable comparison... The fish food feeder returned a little while back, not long after the update that cited it's removal, so perhaps just a temporary issue with that at best?

Well his first isn't possible... so i doubt it - the second, perhaps... thats all.

*At least 5 occasions.

The other issue with having 'some of each' on the one cycle means that the 'gentle' gondolas would generally take less wear and tear than the 'extreme' gondolas. Low speed operation generally doesn't have as much impact as high speed... I personally think (as already stated) that it will just be two queues - one gentle, and one extreme. Rides alternate between the two (unless of course one of the queues is empty in which case they can cycle two three in a row). The only thing necessary here is for the operator to be able to manually choose which cycle type is used, rather than have the computer programmed to do one extreme, one gentle, one extreme - because if there are no 'gentle' riders in the queue, and everyone wants extreme, they'd have to cycle it empty to get it to the next program. Something i've just thought of there though - how many families stop and watch a ride to see whether it would be appropriate for children? How many would see the extreme cycle and walk away thinking it's too much? And how many would see the gentle cycle, queue up expecting to get a gentle ride, and be put on extreme instead? The signage would need to be EXTREMELY clear on these points if the ride was to alternate cycles. A greeter would probably need to be out the front too, to explain it to those who don't read signs (99.9% of guests) and ensure they entered the correct queue.... and we all know how great Dreamworld is at running rides on minimal staff...

The idea of a Disney park in Australia has hung around for more than a decade... so i'm sure we'll see them break ground soon... Theres a resort golf course on the sunshine coast that was just announced as going ahead - and thats been in the planning and proposals stage for 7 years... a year in terms of planning a major park is a drop in the ocean. People were talking about WnWS at least 4 years ago, and they're only just cutting the site now...

isn't it obvierse? their all praying mantises. Your all so stoopid. I new it weaks ago becawse sum gai on facey told me, sew it must be trew!

Side thought - the Volcano backed onto Jet Rescue rather nicely, and gave the impression of a rocky outcrop in the 'sea' that you were racing around. I'm hoping that when the new ride is established, they give thought to that side wall, and theme it appropriately for both, so that JR has suitable theming on it's side, and the new coaster has suitable theming on the other, or something cohesive that works for both... If they put up theming for this new coaster without thought to how that will impact on JR, it will be very disappointing.

It's on Wikipedia. it must be true. There does seem to be a shift across the country of many organisations renaming the sport. FFA (obviously) has used 'football' for quite some time, however the cultural shift means this change isn't going to occur immediately. Next world cup, our national team, the footballeroos will replace the socceroos? I don't think so. I think theres an argument for the use of either or both phrases, so RWC isn't wrong, but I don't believe that I am either. I've always known the game as Soccer, (as I'm sure most people over 20 would agree), and I'll continue to call it soccer. I don't imagine many people will become confused, whereas calling it football will confuse others who know many different 'football' codes, and may not know to which I am referring.

I should point out (i received the email also) that the subject line is somewhat misleading. It claims "up to 25% off a VIP pass" and then lists the price as $89.99. This would make the pass $119.99 - however their website currently lists a VIP pass as being only $99.99. The fine print at the bottom of the email (left off by reanimated) states: "*Saving based on peak pricing increase December 2012" So in my opinion, this is somewhat deceptive and misleading advertising. By purchasing now, I will save 25% off when compared to purchasing in 2 weeks time, but in reality, the discount off the CURRENT R.R.P. is around 10%... not 25% as claimed in the email subject line. Putting all that aside, can I say i'm glad to hear after prostituting the VIP product for too long, that (based on this email) it is their intention to raise the price to $119.99 as of December.

I am aware that the majority of the world calls it 'football' however, as I am Australian, I call the game Soccer. The game I call 'Soccer' is played in South America... of cause.

Arguebally? Isn't that south american soccer?

The fact that they have removed the top part of the volcano doesn't definitively stated that mattcrombie's original post was 'bullshit'. They may be creating more of a 'mountain' than a volcano, and would prefer the rounded top. Consider it this way - if they volcano was going... COMPLETELY... wouldn't they just have dozered the whole thing? It doesn't make sense that they would carefully strip the outer skins, and then crane the head section off cleanly and intact, if they just intended on scrapping it. With regard to their age, the volcano did not yet have it's skin in february 1994, however, wasn't lassiters using a similar construction prior to that?

Unfortunately, AW doesn't have ticket 'booths' - they have a counter, inside a glassed in foyer, with a gate leading into the park... Sort of how you enter WWW in the late afternoon...