DaptoFunlandGuy

it depends on what 'length' you're talking about. RCDB measures length being the physical track length, and duration being the ride time. I'm not sure what measurement you're suggesting, but It doesn't sound right.

Well for one, because you now posted it to point it out - it'll probably happen a lot more. (Admit it - it was you, wasn't it?). Probably a flaw in the database, but probably something Richard isn't too worried about. On that note, I think it's time we need to give it some reviews and rankings, so that it can beat MDMC before it even opens... because you know it should...

ah... No. Don't go to Adelaide then...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swimsuit Regional dialects differ. Boardies refers to specific items worn - quick dry shorts - bikini is obvious - but for example, if you were talking to a bunch of teenage boys, you wouldn't say 'bring your bikini' - likewise, most wouldn't presume to tell a bunch of teenage girls to 'bring their boardies'. If you were talking to a mixed group of male\female\other - you'd be less likely to say 'bring your boardies or your bikinis' (also because some girls wouldn't wear a bikini and feel self conscious or pressured that they have to), so the above highlighted terms are more general, less specific @MaxxTheMonster I grew up in Sydney, and we referred generally to either 'cossie' or 'swimmers'. (*At this point, can I suggest the swimwear related posts be moved to 'let's talk shit' or similar please admin?) As for regional dialects and language, here's a few more to pique some discussion: Sizes of beer glasses. What some call a schooner, Adelaide calls a pint, despite it being only 425ml - What Sydney calls a Middy, Brisbane calls a Pot, Darwin a handle, Adelaide a Schooner. Fascinating! Try this link to be sure you always get the beer size you want (i'm looking at you @joz) Small hotdog frankfurts. In Sydney, and perhaps an old fashioned term - they were called 'little boys', but to my amusement, Brisbane call them 'Cheerios' (which I consider a breakfast cereal) whilst others (and most manufacturers) simply call 'Cocktail Frankfurts' I've always been amused how Castle and Dance (and various other words) are pronounced around the country too - I think mostly this applies to Adelaide, who say "CASSLE" and "DAHNS" whereas in Sydney we said "CAH-SEL" and "DANTS" What others are out there we're missing?

A common abbreviation of board shorts - what about those who wear DTs, ladies who wear bikinis or one piece costume?

Since there's a few people who know the answer, and they could easily share that information privately and put a huge bet on the correct answer, I doubt it. Centrebet would only run a book on something where the outcome was not yet known.

I'm fairly confident the CCTV would not be publicly released, but I do think we will see 3D modelling come out in any inquiry or inquest. This would probably be easier to 'stomach' and would still show the physics involved.

I find that implausible for a couple of reasons: I highly doubt the pump would be able to start again of it's own accord. It would have required someone to take some sort of action. If this is the case, I would like to think that the ride would not have had people on it. depending on which pump it was (there are two) this 'gush' would be unlikely even if it were to have occurred - the first pump - north side of the conveyor contributes most of it's effort towards the ride channel - given it's location and the downward run, little of it would flow toward the conveyor, as there are several baffles, guards and rails in the way (see below). The second pump contributes most of it's flow to the load channel. If this is the one that failed, I would suggest that the water level would have been too low to keep rafts above the guide rails below the water - which would cause frequent bottoming out. Now - i'm aware that the 'front raft' in this incident had done exactly that, but if it had been off for a while, I doubt they'd have been able to operate. If it had momentarily failed, and then restarted, there would be insufficient drain to warrant a 'gush' strong enough to tip over the raft. Again - looking at the picture below you can see that most of any 'force' provided by the pump outlets isn't directed in such a way as to be 'focussed' on the conveyor exit. All of the structure in the area would dampen any impact a surging pump would have. If the raft was 'caught' in the conveyor', a sudden gush of water would have the opposite effect - instead of tipping it, it would have righted it \ pushed it out of the conveyor. Remember too that these rafts are built to stay upright through the turbulent waters of the ride. The tube (not the fibreglass seating area) provides the flotation, and remember that these things are built to house 6 adults plus baggage, meaning their weight capacity above the raft itself should be more than 700kg. Given there were two children on board, it would be safe to assume it had no more than about 500kg onboard - so even if another 200kg of water hit and flowed into the raft, it should still have floated. Conversely, 200kg of water would be unlikely to have enough force to tip the raft over, given many of these rides load 'in channel' without causing serious 'rocking'. Wonderland's model is obviously different. I believe that Intamin were the manufacturer of the WS model. I don't know what the specs are of the pumps, and how they compare, but the stationhouse setup and flume size is relatively similar. Assuming that the pumps are similar in size, I doubt the ride could have operated with one pump shut down. Wonderland had problems with the age of its pumps in its last 4 years, and the ride could not operate if one was completely out of service. I am firmly of the belief that it is the mechanical action of the conveyor itself that has pushed the back end of the raft under, lifting the front end and causing a capsize. Just my 87 cents.

Here on the east coast it is more common to say 'swimmers' 'swimming costume' etc.

I can agree with everything you said - except the blood sucking property investors bit. Not true.

Thanks for offering your experienced insight @Bussy. My thoughts exactly.

Ahhhhhh regional dialects amuse me. LOL

???

doubt it

What you need is a bit of chinese whispers... you get them, remove identifying information, and pass them to someone else, who passes them to someone else, who posts them. plausible deniability...

Agree - even if you don't work for the reo company, the Park will know which company that is, which may be evidence enough to get them on breach of contract for confidentiality. Per Skeet's post above though - a few here have seen layout and concepts, but as employees of the park would be far more tightly controlled. What we need is someone who gets the plans anonymously, removes all content that identifies where it came from (logos, company names etc) and then posts them. We're still at grain of salt terms here, but if the confirmed details later released match what you've just said we'll all be suitably impressed. I must admit the first thing I did was check the length on the run you suggest as the lift hill. It's about 130 metres from the back end of the JL building to the driveway\entrance road. Assuming a 200ft height, and cutting 30 metres off the length for turns, you've got about 330ft, which would give you a lift hill of 385 feet or about 117 metres. I didn't think they'd fit a lift hill in this space, and thought the lift would run parallel to the entrance road, reserving the JL laneway for 'just a stationhouse' - but it does fit. I guess this gives us one thing - we are looking at a lift, not a launch... or are we? edit: I had thought someone had mentioned very closely spaced piles drilled along the entrance drive - which suggested to me that is where we would see lift\launch... but i can't seem to see any pictures of this section of construction. If anyone is stopping by anytime soon, it would be great if you could get pictures of the construction areas closer to GL, with particular attention to the piles \ footings, both down by JL and along the driveway leading away from GL.

*adds grain of salt* Welcome. What you've said about the specifics - load\unload, going out and turning right is fairly easy to surmise just from the aerial shots from Nearmap posted in this thread. I'm keen to discover how you've seen the actual plan and layout... and what further you can share?

*whoosh* 'went down the abyss' (the bottomless chasm) as opposed to 'went down to abyss (the ride)'

No, but you have @joz! Not a bad idea either considering the lego store construction - its a question of whether they'd want to take over a brand suffering so badly with its reputation right now...

Holy shit - is everyone ok?

Whilst the park may not have made an official announcement @Theme Park Girl, I think we're quite safe to say a hyper IS in fact confirmed - by the fact that construction companies are referencing that in their tenders and other related documentation.

What are you talking about? You pointed to that content as evidence that future expansions would be postponed. I saw nothing in that to suggest your conclusion?

I had heard that their ticket sales were pretty light for that event. I figured the cancellation may have been a very convenient excuse. Am I mistaken, or when the dates were first released, they didn't have an event set for 31/10?

The topside of the flume has water for flotation, and momentum. Too much water flowing down the drop would result in a backup at the bottom of the drop. If the boat hits too high, it would aquaplane, potentially causing issues. By allowing most of the water to drain away before it reaches the bottom, the water level at the bottom can be controlled.