Scott.

Ships are designed to flex and bend, Bulkheads act like shock absorbers and can pretty much expand and contract if needed. as seen in the video below. This would make attaching any ride with a decent footprint ridiculously expensive if possible at all. Also the fact some rides wont even work unless the ship is perfectly level, any listing at all and it will not go. Case in point, the carousel on the Oasis of the Seas, specially designed and super reinforced because a standard carousel wouldnt run at a 5 degree list. http://youtu.be/NE_ri8PkihE Then you get the problem of corrosion, very few metals are corrosive proof. Even stainless will corrode eventually. Moving parts and such on things like planes, and helicopters no problem. Try and find one thing on a helicopter thats exposed and is made of steel. Mostly all aluminum or titanium, steel is just too heavy for aeronautical purposes. Then you start adding all these different materials you get electrolysis problems. HUGE problem on a ship that size, the huge surface area just builds up energy moving through the water. In the case of the large aluminium ships ive built we had to search every inch of it to make sure no dissimilar metals were not protected against electrolysis, even something the size of a 10mm washer left in the bilge would burn a hole in the hull stupidly quick. And the paint, ships hulls arnt painted using normal paints, any part near or under the waterline will be anti fowl and thats some thick shit, then anything above that is expensive stuff but even that wont last, go look at any ship even brand new ones or ones like the qm2 where image is everything, they start to rust almost immediately after leaving the yard. Trying to keep rides from corroding on a ship would be near on impossible no matter if you painted the damn things everyday. Then the biggest problem of all, Even the best ships in the world dont have a huge lifetime. Something of this nature would have a lifetime of 20-30 years if its lucky. Not worth the HUGE amount of money it would cost to build and run. Cool idea, yeah, feasible in any possible way even if money wasnt an issue, no way.

It wont be a woodie. the footprint/area they need to clear would be far too big. Its not like a steel coaster that can have supports every now and then, every bit of wood needs to be supported. Its certainly doable but highly highly unlikely for a place like dreamworld.

You don't understand. You can make any ride into those, that's purely the theme. Are you saying if they put in an all out insane roller coaster with that style theme you'd would think its a suitable replacement? I'm guessing they don't choose new attractions by choosing the theme first then the ride after, other way around guys.

Neither of which are wb films.......

yes i must know absolutely nothing, i never claimed to know electrical, mechanical, i said i knew about the structural because i do, theres a shitload of crap boilermakers out there but grouping us all as the same is just ignorant of you. Unlike many others i do everything to standards even if involves having a whinge for my super to go get me the standard to read up on. Ive often had to work to 0.5mm tolerances so i know my shit. All bob tan said was the car is lighter, for all you know it could be 20kg lighter. i have no idea who the guy is and i said one comment about most gms knowing shit all, because in my experience they dont. i never then went on to say hes wrong and an idiot. Now djrappa if anyone else here would like to provide a correct statement about construction of the cart id very like to here it because in this thread all ive seen is incorrect bullshit, i bet noone of you so called ride experts could tell me what series of steel coasters are made out of and why. But whats that i hear neither do i? im just a simple boilermaker and cant understand anything to do with design even though its part of my job!

i may not be a ride designer, but im a qualified boilermaker and guess who builds the structural part of the cart? a boilermaker, guess who has to understand why they build something a certain way? i do. I need to know what forces act where so i know why i have to gusset or brace it, i need to be able to calculate the exact weight or a structure to allow for movement. I may not know everything but i sure as hell know a shitload more then most of you. Oh well you can go back to bullshitting it up like one thread i saw where they claimed a flaw in lethal weapon was x-ray welded. Enjoy your mis-information.

Yeah but the ride isnt going to be that much lighter, thats what ive been saying all along the weight difference is probably only a couple of hundred kg max. And i know the ride has a preset setting it uses instead of getting up to a certain speed or input, it would take 3 launches to dial in a new preset setting to a slightly more powerful one to launch a slightly heavier car which would travel further anyway so you can use a even lower setting again. Yes its a new ride experience, yes its an improvement but dont claim is all the work of a brand new car instead of telling everyone the launch mechanism has been stripped down and rebuilt, something which they waited how many years to do?

im not complaining about the seat. i dont care about having to wait in line for 1 more rotation, i bitch in this thread because some people seem to like to talk shit they have no idea about and i thought some of you may need a bit of a reality check you dont know everything. Ive seen it before on this forum and giving wrong information is just crap, if you dont know what your talking about no point opening your mouth. Now back to the Thread i like the new car, i like the idea, although im still adamant if they made the top of the tower go over-vert it would be so awesome.

so they claim is a new lighter car but they have to reduce the seating to reduce weight? ffs dreamworld your bloody ridiculous, a heavier car would go higher when launched at the same speed anyway, a little thing called inertia you learn it in year 9 science........ and in my experience general managers know f all about what they manage, my gm at work has never worked a day on the tools and really has no clue about construction.

no because the ramp at the front forces air up and over the seats in a bubble. So by the time its reached the second row its already being forced over the top, same thing with convertibles. So they only put 2 seats in the front because thats not inside the bubble, put 4 seats in that row and its just trying to push something with a straight up and down front at speed, would take alot more force and the cars inertia would be greatly reduced

the beams are either being used as a jig (unlikely) or for some reason they think its easier to attach beams and the framework in one then put the beams on separately which would be a million times easier. good job contractors! id like to see them lift that in one go, that frame would just bend itself over!

Is it concreted in or anything? from the shape of the ellipse on the north end it looks like they are assembling it on the floor to crane up to sit over the end of the tunnel for theming.

well someone described it has a little house type thing, i have no idea what it looks like so i was just putting it out there. instead of the onride picture being taken on the launch i was saying it might be taken when the car comes back down the tower so you can actually see people.

Probably has something to do with wind resistance, why was there only 3 in the front of the old car? probably the same reason, im guessing wind going into the back of seats isnt very aerodynamic, so they have maximised the seating while keeping the wind resistance at an acceptable level, i dont know what the additional structure is like but my guess would be a camera housing and the picture would be taken when the cars coming back down which is then shown on the plasma like sea vipers.

Well we all know the launch system was very capable of hitting the top with the old car, it does seem to be a bit hit and miss these days i guess it depends how long it has to build up after each launch too.