franky

Hasn't Dec 26th been the expected opening date the whole time?

They'll have to put a net under the track. Can't have people throwing stuff at the train or parts flying off into guests. It's been done with rides like the Velocicoaster and Ice Breaker (Ice Breaker was testing before they installed the nets, they were using portable umbrellas under the ride on pathways)

I would find myself unwell after a single ride too, but if you really rode it 11 times, than it's no wonder

I thought that's all this was? Why so serious?

That makes two of us (you know who you are). And if other ppl know the exact details for this ride, well, nice, me same. Holy quote inception Batman

I only just picked up where this tunnel is going: Looks like this feature entry is going to be next to Sky Voyager, so closing BuzzSaw on Aug 31 will allow them to hoard this whole area off and allow the construction of this to start.

Sad to see yet another ride go, but looking forward to what's to come. Like TOT2 they can start saving the expense of maintaining the ride for new things. Only been on BuzzSaw a couple of times during a visit, just before the TOT2 closed. It was enjoyable but not a very long ride. Kinda hurt my neck the first time we got grabbed on the lift hill at the end of the ride because I wasn't expecting it. I guess this would mean the last of the Rocky Hollow rustic theming too right?

It feels like they're were powering through up until DW announced Steel Taipan's opening date goal, and just went "oh well, no need to rush, we've got til December to get this all finished now"

If you look at his address in the footer of his page and it's vicinity to LP, it speaks volumes toward his motivations.

So, do we think the demo crew are going to take down the old water park on their way out after finishing up with the Log Ride demo?

Couple of issues: 1. Even if they did go for this (why would they?) they would still need to remove the tunnel to install the new track, so they tunnel would need to be demolished anyway. 2. Intamin don't sell hydraulic launched coasters anymore, LSM's of that caliber would cost more to operate in power consumption than TOT did. 3. For them to get the longest life (and best ROI) out of a new ride, it'd be in their best interest to build a completely new structure, as you don't want to have to factor in the replacement of the tower in 10 (or whenever) years time when it reaches the end of its serviceable life. The track location was always an issue in the middle of the park so they'd be better off relocating it to the edge of the park if they could. "To make way for new attractions" was the official reason wasn't it? Though I've heard the following reasons mentioned: Power costs to run Upkeep costs Age of ride Dwindling ridership Location in the park Noise When you think about it, it kinda makes sense. Why would you keep shoveling money into an old, dated ride that everyone complained about being noisy and broke down a lot, when you could be better rolling that money into a new experience that costs less to run? As much as I ended up liking TOT it's time had come unfortunately. I wouldn't say their current version is even in the same class as TOT, it just looks smaller, slower, and boring (to me)

You're not wrong. I saw a tiktok with some drone footage of ST on the weekend, and the comments were just full of everyone spreading frankly wrong information about the accident. They don't know what actually happened, they just know it happened, and don't appear to want to give Dreamworld another chance.

I doubt they'll selectively remove any, they'll just cut it up along with the rest of the tunnel when the demolition eventually happens.

Do you know if this includes the old water park being that it can be seen from the new coaster?

I think you'll find that the section you've circled is at the same level as the station, so there's no 'gap' to get caught in, but definitely a trip hazard due to the increased height of the center section of the carriage. ...unless I'm missing something else?

I disagree. The tunnel is in the plans to be just before the loop. Greg even mentions this in his interview. I've done some dodgy mspaint work to try and illustrate my take on the perspectives of the photos. Colours match where I think they appear in the photo VS plan

Of course. What I meant to infer was that I was going to hit up Dreamworld in the same trip and hopefully ride the new coaster.

My lovely wife bought us a 7 day pass to use at whatever the MW park collective is referred to these days, that expires just prior to Christmas this year, so I'm hoping this will be open in time for that. I've seen a couple of mentions on the FB group about it looking like Boxing Day opening, which would be disappointing, but if the theming is done right than so be it. I was thinking, would it not be better for them to aim to open along side or close to the Leviathan's opening so they can use both ride openings as a draw card?

I've noticed a lot of the older rides (coasters in particular) are getting full strip downs / repaints. Is this just that new 10-yearly complete strip-down maintenance rule following what-shall-not-be-mentioned that's essentially due immediately, due to many of them being over 10 years old?

I'm curious, can someone explain why all these new rides have a 'temporary' look to them? They're all built on metal bases sitting atop concrete pads instead of being bolted down on piers (like other Roller Coasters for example). Is this just a look LP likes to maintain (like a temporary carnival ride)? Or could it be due to the proximity to the harbour (can't put deep piers in)? Or something else altogther?

Lets be fair here though, ToT is still in all the plans/renders too, and the plans only say 'proposed'. I don't know if this means they're not in-scope of the current works, or just for the current contractors (and that DW will contract someone else to fix up the rail). My thoughts though are that if they were already set on removing the train for good, it would not be sitting outside adjacent to the construction works.

I'm not sure it's that simple. I was having a dig through the announcement today and found the following excerpt from their ASX Release https://secure.weblink.com.au/Clients/webchartclient/clients/ardentleisure/article.asp?view=21282944 (Page 20) To me, this means they can't take money from the US side of the business to prop up Dreamworld if they needed to. Edit: I'm not a finance guy, but I'm assuming this is good being that they have repaid the loan from the QLD govt. so they won't have that burden into the future.

Wouldn't they just be doing the 'in-depth' 10 yearly maintenance where they strip the ride back down to bare bones and rebuild it? (Similarly to what has happened recently with Green Lantern, Jet Rescue, soon to be Road Runner etc.)

Butting in here, but potentially here (I recognised the Atco demountables)

Scooby is a wild mouse though