wikiverse

Members
  • Content count

    90
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

105 Excellent

Park & Ride Stats

  • Ride Count
    1
  1. My comment was about the government imposing largely unnecessary regulation. Literally tens of millions of riders have cycled through the RHLR in it's 34 years of operation. There has only been one incident of a person 'falling out' and that was entirely because he stood up as the boat entered a lift hill. The government (and Ardent's insurers) made absolutely NO recommendations for ride modification after that incident happened, and it remained open until the TRR incident. It was only after TRR occurred - almost 12 months later - that suddenly, despite being a completely different ride with completely different physics and mechanics, RHLR 'required' modifications to prevent people from standing. Based on the successful operation of RHLR, assuming 20 Million riders across 34 years with only one incident that was specifically caused by their own stupidity, the actual chance of a similar incident happening is 0.000005%. As far as we know, the TRR incident was caused by a failure in the ride. The RHLR incident was caused by rider stupidity. The govt. assessors correctly assessed the risk of another incident on RHLR occurring as minuscule and allowed it to continue operating unmodified. The deaths on TRR did not increase the chances of an incident RHLR anymore than they increased the chances of injury or death from someone standing up in a bumper car or jumping into the cassowary enclosure. There was no increase in risk to riders of RHLR that would necessitate government mandated mechanical changes to the ride.
  2. It doesn't look like it was added for structural reasons. It looks more like it was added to fill the big gap at the back of the boat to prevent small people (kids/teenagers) from sitting up on the rear backrest and leaning out the back of the boat while holding onto the frame. Interestingly, after those original photos were posted here, a few people commented that stupid teenagers would do exactly that... and then the design was changed to add this additional bar. So, maybe @Richard has a point about the track record thing. This whole design just wreaks of trying to appease government regulators.
  3. Theme Park Maintenance Schedules 2017

    This old promo photo from the launch of the ride would suggest that you're correct.
  4. Scooby Doo Spooky Coaster refurb in Nov/Dec 2017

    The movie the ride is themed to wasn't filmed at the studios. It was filmed in Vancouver. The original 2002 movie was filmed at the studios, but 'Monsters Unleashed' was filmed in Canada. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0331632/locations?ref_=tt_dt_dt
  5. VTP Annual Pass Changes

    I'm just going to leave this here.
  6. WhiteWater World/Dreamworld Merger

    Wet Dreamworld is catchier.
  7. Movie World's website

    They have a new website. But you have to go to the photo booth and purchase a $19 single-use pass to access it.
  8. I think we can all agree that Movie World don't need a new ride, they just need to get rid of the sour garbage smell near the drink re-fill station at the front of the park.
  9. Scooby Doo Spooky Coaster refurb in Nov/Dec 2017

    There is a brand new Scooby-Doo CGI animated film in production right now. It originally had a 2018 release date, but WB pushed it back to May 15, 2020. It will be the first movie in the 'Hanna Barbera Cinematic Universe' which will include The Jetsons. As a film franchise, Scooby Doo is about to be refreshed and renewed by WB.
  10. Cementing Movie World

    The park is literally called 'Warner Bros. Movie World' though. Also, their slogan is still 'Hollywood on the Gold Coast'. They don't need to constantly be building/retheming rides based on recent big film releases, but it's not really a 'Warner Bros. Movie' themed 'World' if it doesn't have any attractions actually themed to WB movies. The attractions need to at least tie in with the overall theme of the park.
  11. @AlexB They don't usually let fast-track riders get the front seats (on JetRescue or Superman Escape) so it would only be 18 seat options, but they may give front seats for this ride given the price. I don't really have a problem with Theme Parks charging a bit more for things like VR or Fast-Track either. Fast-Track is usually used by people who only have a day-pass to the park and want to experience everything and usually have a negligible impact on actual wait times for people. In an hour-long queue, it might push you back 1 ride cycle. But just to break down some of the numbers for people complaining, if you assume the ride will be closed for around 1 month/year for maintenance (with 5 other cumulative 'day' closures due to storms etc.)... $10 Backward seating * 2 seats per train * 20 cycles per hour * 8 hours of operation * 330 days = $1,056,000 per year. $15 Fast Track * 20 sales per day * 330 days = $99,000 per year Sure, they won't hit those numbers everyday (although some days they will sell a lot more fast track), but generally speaking the combination of those two things will bring in about $1 Million per year in additional revenue - more than enough to cover maintenance and staffing costs for the ride. Given that most of us have only paid about $100 a year (on average) for our annual passes, I think that these amounts are a fair price to pay for having a ride like this built in Australia. I think the wasteful printing of entry photos at SeaWorld, and charging up to $25 for a photo with a character are more worthy of complaint.
  12. There is a really simple solution to this problem - Movie World should make a better POV video (or several) and release it/them. People want videos of this ride because it is new and scarcity makes the videos more valuable encouraging idiots to do things like this. The best way to prevent people from doing things like this is to provide a better alternative. This is something that Movie World may have planned after (or as part of) the official launch, but the solution is to make the risk greater than the reward. After all, this guy's video is now posted on this forum and will get a lot of views as a result, so the reward will have been worth it for him.
  13. I really don't think it's that.
  14. DC Rivals HyperCoaster - new trailer/TVC

    Hypercoaster as a word was created by Arrow Dynamics for Magnum XL-200 and is the actual industry-wide generic term used to describe coasters with a highest point of 200 - 299 ft. A coaster 300-399 ft is a Gigacoaster, and a coaster 400ft+ is a Stratacoaster. 'Hyper Coaster' as two words is Bolliger & Mabillard's term specifically for their 200ft+ coasters (including ones that would generically be called 'Gigacoasters'). Intamin calls them Mega Coasters, and I think RMC has a name like Hyper-Hybrid Coaster or something. I agree that 'DC Rivals' is sufficient (even just 'Rivals'), but it is definitely a 'hypercoaster' and not a 'Hyper Coaster'.
  15. Because when the axis of rotation is below you, you are forced sideways into your seat. When you only have a lap-bar restraint your body will flex at the lower back during the sudden change in direction. The faster you are going through these elements, the greater the forces placed on your body. You'll notice I specifically didn't mention the S-Bend, because the rotation axis is at chest height. OTSRs absolutely limit the impact of those forces on your body by restricting your range of movement. That is why OTSRs are used - to hold your body in place. On a ride like SE they exist pretty much only for the brake run and they are what prevent you from smashing your face against the seat in front of you during the sudden stop. Excessive forces on a ride don't always make it more fun. Do you have any actual evidence to support this claim? Because it seems to me like the ride was designed for trims to be added in two very specific places, and they have only added them in one of those places. In addition, they haven't slowed the chain on the lift hill, which would instantly reduce the speed across the entire coaster without the need for trims and would also reduce the maintenance costs (on the train, track, chain and motor). It almost seems like they want the coaster going as fast as possible over the top of the lift hill to maximise the speed, which runs counter to your assertion, given that the most wear and tear would occur during high-speed and high-force elements like those situated before the trim brakes on this coaster, but after the other mounting point where trims were not added. And the amount of speed reduction from the trims would have just enough impact to make the ride more comfortable, but a negligible impact on actual ride maintenance costs.