Movie World Maintenance Schedule 2025

[Naazon]

Did Road Runner increase throughput when its trains were replaced?

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I'm not sure - but given it has individual harnesses, each one would need to be checked, wouldn't it?

[Brad2912]

Mon 15th Dec looks like re-opening date for both Superman and Flash which is great for school holiday capacities 

Also, yikes...

[New display name]

Wicked Witch has come out of maintenance early too.  

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I think you meant to say Wicked Witch has come out of Maintenace.

[Levi]

Batwing was also constantly testing most of today as well, with it sometimes not even having a break between cycles and from what i counted launched 4 times within 7 minutes. they just have needed new air compressors and need to do a certain amount of tests before it can reopen.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

12 hours ago, Levi said:

launched 4 times within 7 minutes.

Geez that thing must be really broken. They're going to have to work all night on it to bring it back into Village operations standards.

[themagician]

Despite the hiccups earlier in the week, it seems they’ve managed to get everything back open that wasn’t already closed

[Spotty]

On 19/11/2025 at 1:20 PM, Naazon said:

Did Road Runner increase throughput when its trains were replaced?

Given back in the day when roadrunner had the original trains, myself and one of the supervisors actually managed to beat the capacity that the ride was stated in the manual (700 a hour with 2 trains) I very much doubt it. I was pretty much running down the platform to check those lap bars and doing our best to make sure that by the time the train was coming into the brakes we would be dispatching the next train.

Was certainly a work out back in the day lol. It was even funnier when the ride then faulted because we were dispatching too fast and the computer crapped out lol.

[mba2012]

On 19/11/2025 at 6:15 PM, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

I'm not sure - but given it has individual harnesses, each one would need to be checked, wouldn't it?

Each one needs to be checked, but it's done by the attendant and the supervisor in parallel, so in theory it wouldn't have an impact. I never noticed much difference between operating it pre and post refurbishment.

1 minute ago, Spotty said:

I was pretty much running down the platform to check those lap bars and doing our best to make sure that by the time the train was coming into the brakes we would be dispatching the next train.

You'll never see that happening now; the procedure changed several years ago and now the supervisor can't leave their panel to check the harnesses until the other train is stopped in the brakes.

[Spotty]

4 minutes ago, mba2012 said:

Each one needs to be checked, but it's done by the attendant and the supervisor in parallel, so in theory it wouldn't have an impact. I never noticed much difference between operating it pre and post refurbishment.

You'll never see that happening now; the procedure changed several years ago and now the supervisor can't leave their panel to check the harnesses until the other train is stopped in the brakes.

The supervisor didn't leave when I was there, they stayed behind the panel. I was the second loader on the exit side, this was back in the days of the single lap bar. Many good memories, back in the early 2010's when IMO operations and the overall park was probably at it's peak.

[jjuttup]

@Spotty i'm curious, how much do you think these changes to load times are because of management vs post 2016 safety laws? And to add to it enthusiasm working with friends (like your story above) vs i guess the i don't want to be here days everyone has.

[Spotty]

On 22/11/2025 at 3:17 PM, jjuttup said:

@Spotty i'm curious, how much do you think these changes to load times are because of management vs post 2016 safety laws? And to add to it enthusiasm working with friends (like your story above) vs i guess the i don't want to be here days everyone has.

100% it would have caused some changes, however to what extent I wouldn't be sure. I'd say right after the incident things would have been very strict for a while before loosening off a little bit. However I feel that the parks are still being a bit over the top, how much of that comes down to corporate (and staff just not caring) or procedures enforced by over-cautious insurance is hard to say.

I'd say it's a combination of both, but also possibly due to workplace culture. When you have management that actually cares it shows, because staff want to actually be there if they are being treated well and respected. Something that the Dreamworld management seem to be very good at (And having worked at MW during the time that they were running things, they actually really do care about their staff)

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Sounds like efficiency has gone down if the supervisor performs harness checks but can't leave the panel until the train reaches the brake run. You might as well just run one train.

So yes, the dual harnesses would reduce throughput as the supervisor needs to check their side.

[Spotty]

2 hours ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

Sounds like efficiency has gone down if the supervisor performs harness checks but can't leave the panel until the train reaches the brake run. You might as well just run one train.

So yes, the dual harnesses would reduce throughput as the supervisor needs to check their side.

Yep, when it was 2 trains with the old ones the supervisor had to stay behind the panel while the train was on the lift (to stop it if needed) but the second the train left the lift, they would leave the panel to allow people to get behind the gates while the operator would check the single lap bar harness. It worked very well TBH. To run it really efficiently with 2 trains now you'd basically need 2 loaders and the supervisor but that won't ever happen.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

41 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Yep, when it was 2 trains with the old ones the supervisor had to stay behind the panel while the train was on the lift (to stop it if needed) but the second the train left the lift, they would leave the panel to allow people to get behind the gates while the operator would check the single lap bar harness. It worked very well TBH

And it makes absolute sense - there is no MCBR. As soon as the train leaves the lift hill, there is absolutely zero you can do to prevent any mishap or accident until it hits the final brake run, which is automated and failsafe - The train will stop no matter what (and if it doesn't, nothing the operator does will change that).

Some genius who has no idea about efficiency decided that the supervisor should stay at the panel 'just in case...' without ever finishing that sentence. They probably got paid thousands too.

See - the seatbelt thing at Rivals - I don't agree with it but the liability issue makes sense - physically plug in the seatbelt, do it in front of your co-worker, and you've both witnessed a proper push-pull check of the main restraint lock, and then attached the seatbelt. You've got two people who will testify the harness was down, locked, and the supplementary restraint was engaged. It's why if one loader stops because there is an issue, the other one doesn't keep going.

Taipan takes this further - the RFID swipe proves the operator was present for the seatbelt locking and the computer records it. 

These examples both make absolute sense from a liability standpoint. 

Keeping the RRRC op at the panel until the other train parks is absolutely pointless.

[Levithian]

In this day and age, regardless of how the control system works, there is NO chance of being able to get away with the ride operator leaving the control panel. Just the notion of there not being a person there to respond in the event of an emergency, even if they can't actually do anything other than hit an estop that makes no difference until the train reaches a brake run opens you up to being crucified if another accident happened, especially if it made it to an inquest because of a death. It really brings question to how you operate everything, people start making judgements on if something would have been different if you were at the panel and could respond quicker, even if that's just you being able to generate an e-stop and immediately radio through a code for attendance. The old adage, seconds matter, can actually ring true, plus it also brings in a level of confusion when something actually happens. I've seen people walk right past responders in the event of an incident because they were overwhelmed, so trying to locate someone that by nature is a fluid position (ie, they are moving), it's just another one of those things that can make matters worse. Basically, it's just a slippery slope that nobody wants to die on (argue against) when being put before investigators, so the person in control of the ride is going to stay at the panel. 

The laws introduced say nothing at all about operations and or how you run a ride. Rightly, they leave that up to the ride manufacturer and trust that the operator (the park) is following their guidelines and knows what they are doing. The accident was just the catalyst to go a bit over the top.

Previously, operational procedures basically came from the ride manufacturer and that was largely how things were run. Then, during the mid to late teens, people within management culture thought they knew better, despite none of them actually having any qualifications to support this and started implementing their own controls above the ones specified by the manufacturer. Then it completely snowballs to the point where additional control measures are required above existing devices, and new procedures are invented despite everything being monitored to within tenths of a mm, in addition to which everything has double or triple redundancy. 

Now its to the point where evacuations are pretty much mandatory any time a safety fault occurs, no matter if its just a protection fault and can be reset fine. Some of the newer procedures put the members of the public at greater risk than trusting the ride control system to be reporting correctly and utilising the judgement of multiple trained/skilled people to make an assessment on the situation and return the train or cars back to the station with people still firmly within their seats. Climbing out of seating or vehicles, walking along catwalks, climbing down ladders, all these things open people up to greater risk of injury than if the ride was still under control. But it is what it is. 

When you get down to it, there is a lot of contradictory statements/opinions floating around in procedure documents, what's right in one situation is no longer good enough or completely overlooked in another. Ultimately its entirely down to risk avoidance though. If you keep that in mind any time you question why, you start to see it making more sense. Well, maybe sense is a strong word, how about you start to gain some understanding of why things are done the way they are. 

It's been a progression over the last 10 years. It actually frustrates ride manufacturers because there have been instances where control systems had to be modified or reprogrammed because additions wouldn't function correctly. 

But it's the village way and nothing is going to change that now. 

Edited yesterday at 12:36 AM by Levithian