Levithian

The last 12-18 months represent the first time weve really seen ticket prices and passes increase sunstancially in over a decade, which is honestly about time. A race to the bottom benefits nobody and the sales tracking data supports that regardless of how cheap you make the entrance price, it wasnt resulting in significant increases in retail sales. Locals scream about things like cost, plus things like wait times, but then they include big overseas parks in the same statements. Really? Tell me about the time you went to one of the parks and had to pay more for entry because it was busy or during a peak period.

It was always scheduled for a major control system upgrade. Previously relied on a barcode system to keep track of car counts, with no specific car positioning available during the ride. Everything is left up to establishing car order at the start, then relying on proxy sensors to do all the hard work as part of the block system. I hope while they are in there replacing the track they link the high zone catwalks. Will make it easier for all.

Time to employ a falconer.

A thread about arena shows at movieworld and not a single mention of the western action show? Old man Johnson will be turning in his grave!

They look like GIS data/survey marks for underground services. Water, power, etc. Could you see anymore away from the ride? Might not have anything to do with the ride at all, but the location of something underground they have to work on.

Yeah. A stripped out shed forms such an integral part of the new themed land that it really should have been bulldozed and built a new just so that it could be grammatically accurate to all the anoraks of the world.

You're like a broken clock, only you're not right twice a day but completely useless instead. You have absolutely no regard for reality. They could remove superman and reinstate the studio tour and movie magic stage show. What has been changed can be changed again right? The reality is your idea is fundamentally flawed. Come up with a new one grounded in reality of not being able to utilise any of studio grounds. I know. They could fill in the swamp and build on top. They do it for housing estates all the time....

This is not part of the park area anymore. It is fenced off and part of WB studios. No direct access at all from the theme park. You can actually see the dividing fence from the overhead image you posted. And despite what lots of people think, the theme parks and the studios are two separate entities now. They don't share space and access is restricted, plus and they don't give up space from the studios. Simply because studios generates more actual income than the parks do. Want evidence of this? have a look where they created site access for the new area. Storage across the road and road access down a gravel driveway along the boundary fence and around past facilities instead of straight through any choice of 3 nice, paved entrances from studios.

The reason the carts are stored in back of house here is because food and bev have their warehouse and offices for retail sales in the park. You would have to build infill walls that partition off access to the various departments now in this area which would narrow this space further. Im not sure if you could reclaim the space against the superman building. There are false walls on the left side of the alley with a pretty large cavity behind. Hides things like the old HVAC units from the movie magic sound stage show that used to be in the building. There isn't as much space to that alley way wall as you might think. It also has emergency exits from the ride. There are a lot of services on the left side of the alley way too. It's not just so clear cut. The new area is honestly in a poor position where it is. Ideally you would like to be walking right through the middle of the scooby building straight up to the new land, but obviously that doesnt work. You can't really go around the back of scooby too as it further reduces back of house access during the day, not only to the rear of scooby but retail/merchandising have offices in the old petrol station building too. Plus, when scooby doo shuts for annual maintenance, access is needed to the lift and the high areas through the back of the building, so the whole access would be closed off any time scooby doo is down for work. I think we are just going to have to settle with a number of average entry/exit points as nobody is going to start tearing down walls or buildings to provide increased public access. Afaik, it hasn't been recommissioned and has experienced substancial upgrades while it was closed which haven't been fully implemented. So the long shut times could likely be a combination of having to implement changes, test and report with the aide of intamin, then submit to the government for approval and registration. It would have come under the new laws regarding 10 yearly maintenance too, so there could be a number of things that need to be done or changed to meet their requirements. And that's all before they might consider things to make it look pretty like theming, or even the notion of training staff. Plus, we know what village are like, if they can't make a show of it during a holiday period they are likely to wait until the next one for an opening even if the attraction is ready. So christmas holiday period might be too close, which makes easter holidays in april the next one in line.

A big part of the issue is the launch distance. With current technology you need a longer launch area than compared a hydraulic launch. Something compact like superman would likely require a track redesign.

There actually appears to be a little more space reclaimed than just the footprint of Arkham. Looks like they cleared everything right up to the old commissary building and across to the road. There was a bit of a grassy hill there before and some parking/storage.

Where will you place it? Doesn't matter what it was in the past, it's what it is now. There's like 4 departments utilising the space. The maintenance building isn't big enough/tall enough for parade storage and everything that goes with it. It's a tiny building and isn't anywhere near as tall as the toons building.

There is more than just storage in that half of the building. Its not easy to split these facilities up and move them away from maintenance departments.

You have to understand that Movie World only has a connection to Warner Bros. because they licence the name for use. Warner Bros. don't have any control or share in the park at all, they don't own anything. So every single IP usage you see is under licencing agreement. Now there are all kinds of agreements that licence their use for all kinds of things. Just because you have the image rights to use a particular character for live action characters or statues, doesn't automatically mean you can build an attraction or sell their likeness of merchandising. It's all negotiated upon. The more you want to use, the bigger the $$$$$$ You are forgetting about the yogi bear 3d movie and recent Tom and Jerry usage too. Plus the use of characters in the park and in merchandising. It's not like they haven't used any at all. It's pretty simple really. You want to pay for things that are current and relevant in the public domain in order to get your best return for the investment. There is a lot of HB stock that really isn't known to the current generation (even the previous generation) of kids. So you have to be careful about where you put your money.

Maybe you should understand there is a national practice in place regardless of state rules? Do me a favour and post some of the requirements on inspections and log book requires from worksafe. I'll wait. Amusement Devices - Information Sheet for Annual Inspections and Records - Updated September 2022.pdf (safeworkaustralia.gov.au)

The same requirements apply to all operators whether you meet the requirements for an amusement park licence or not. The new regulations apply to all rides and amusement devices above a certain class, that is what they were developed for. Doesn't matter how many rides you operate or large your company is, you could operate one single class 2 ride and still have to abide by the same regulations. It covers all instances of operating these devices, so fairs, fetes, shows, etc. For reference, an example of a class 2 ride is a red baron style kids ride or something like a mini drop tower. It's basically the minimum class you'll find for pretty much any actual moving ride. Worth noting that the intention is actually to develop a national code of practice, even though, as pointed out, other states have similar requirements from worksafe.

We see it all the time project managing building projects like this. Everything grinds to a halt when there is a dispute about money/costings. I would not at all be surprised if either their builder failed to notify them of the additional cost the second level is going to incur because of the existing dwelling next door being so close; or the owners were notified of this cost and it's in their agreement, but they failed to realise/understand this when the builder notified them of what was happening with the top floor. The fact that the build has stalled when there are a number of solutions available to be able to finish off this side of the building says to me there is an ongoing dispute with the builders and the owners want someone else to blame.

Notice that the hatchet job done by ACA go to great trouble NOT to show the left rear of the new property and how close their second story is to the existing property on the left? You don't comprehend things do you? You can apply to council to build within the limit, it's only a guideline. I guarantee it was applied for and was approved as Greg said. You don't make your house 2m wider and apply for retrospective approval, that is not a minor change. The article even says the building was approved that close. A minor change would be the top floor/front looks like it might have originally been exposed/open area as it appears to be an alfresco/deck. They've added a privacy screen by adding cladding (the strips of timber) around the open area. You can see the facia only extends around the side of the house maybe 6 or so meters and stops. This has extended the width of the front section of the property by the width of the cladding and the facia and is what the application is likely for. Not the whole second story. That would make absolutely no difference at all as the building still has to be within the boundaries of your property, not over it. The addition is still within the boundaries of the existing dwelling that was there before the new build was started. Probably before it was even planned. More evidence of this being the case is they offered to remove the siding to allow them access to finish the building on the second story of the new house next door. The Yong's have no requirement to do this, only simply trying to avoid problems given you have to live next door to these people. It's within their best interest to keep things civil and it shows council they are willing to work with them if they have objections to their addition. None of this at all changes that the new property was positioned and/or designed with the flawed assumption that they would be allowed access to the neighbouring property to errect scaffolding. The didn't have the same problem with the other side because the build is set back further from the property, and the second story is further setback again to provide them with styling features of an overhang/soffit. If you look closely, the new building is offset heavily to the left at the rear of the property to the point it looks like it nearly touches the existing property too. So by their reasoning, they are basically guilty of doing the same thing they are calling the Yong's out for. Not providing enough space. Talk about being hypocrites. The firewall would have been a requirement of the new dwelling long before the build even got started and it's 100% their cost to be able to build within the envelope. It's just a cheap shot trying to leverage the Yong's, to what reason, I don't know, because there isn't a council around that will make someone remove part of a dwelling that is still within their boundaries, so they aren't getting any space back to make it easier for them to finish the new build. The council would just make the owners of the existing dwelling jump through a lot of hoops (and fees, plenty of fees) to achieve the retrospective approval. It would have no impact on the building next door and will be sorted long after the new building has been completed. It sounds like someone complaining, then dobbing the neighbour into council in the hope that it will cause them issue/cost because they are unhappy and want other people to be unhappy too. Yeah. But remember when we didn't build houses on 300sqm properties too? Developers have been reducing the size of blocks to maximise their profits and councils have been allowing it to happen. It's really evident over the last 20 years. It's not like houses have changed in area, if anything they have gotten bigger because everyone wants a 4th bedroom, 3 bathrooms, a media room and a second lounge for the kids to make a mess in. So every bit of available space is being taken up and previous building limits have been amended/changed over the years to allow greater land usage per sqm of the vacant land and jam more houses in. It's complete crap, but it's what happens with urban sprawl. The density goes up as the land size decreases.

You don't need access from anywhere near the old arkham area/new oz precinct to even completely gut and replace the entire ride. There are two large access (roller doors) in the high zone building that provide more than ample access. It's how they completed the rebuild last time. All the themed areas are just boxes built inside of the shed. It's just open expanses above the ceilings. If it wasn't for the track you could drive a bulldozer through everything and end up with a clear box right up to the queue line inner castle. It's quite a big area inside to house/allow machinery access and skip bins to cart all your trash away without the track being in the way. Just speculating, but the track structure is very old now, and unlike other rides with solid columns for foundation, scooby doo is a large mad mouse and uses a lot of turret like supports that allow a lot of movement in the structure. It might be a permanent install now, but it's built with cones and tapers bolting the fixings to the supports and the track sections are flanged, so it can be dismantled relatively easy (compared a a rollercoaster with multiple permanent fittings) and transported. My guess is perhaps they found something wrong, maybe with wear or fatigue that required intervention now, either as a temp measure to keep going until the planned later closure, or potentially due to the cost wastage, bringing forward the closure and start of any future works as a possibility instead. This is largely what happened with the last renovations/upgrades. It was just because they decided to keep the ride open with everything removed that we were spared the immediate, long shutdown period too. Whatever the reason, sometimes the unforeseen forces your hand or at the least gives you cause to revaluate your plans and things change. Can't do anything at all about it other than make your decision and move forward.

Culture? Money? Training? Money? Time? Money? Investment in their staff? Money? Did I mention money? Provide staff with more than 1 day of introductory training then stop throwing them straight in with existing staff in a buddy training system to learn plenty of their bad habits would make a difference. Ohh and operate rides with a full compliment of trained, experienced staff instead of short changing your guests by running with the absolute minimum you can. Trained, experienced and full compliment being the key words here. For example, something we have all experienced; What is the point of having a sorter if they don't do their job and dispatches routinely leave with empty seats? Ultimately it has to come down to management. They could look into how effective their procedures are in relation to load/wait times and improve upon the standards with training and even possible incentives, but the long and the short of it is, they don't seem to care enough about people like us critiquing their processes and/or want to put the money into labour hours for both additional, more indepth training and extra staff to make a difference. Until that changes (and we have yet to see any evidence of that in a very long time), it's going to be more of the same and everyone is going to keep seeing the 2-3hr wait times during peak periods.

It's had a major overhaul though including the ride control/drive systems as part of the new requirements qld government introduced to operate an amusement device. I don't think it has even been run since this has happened, so for all intents and purposes it's a new ride, so age shouldn't be a problem with a view to it only being temporary before its too old and worn out and is removed again.

40cm? With certain building requirements you can build right to the fence line with no space between houses at all. They should be slamming their builder and architect. The Yong's property was existing and they have no requirement to allow access to their property to allow builders to erect things like scaffolding or to provide site access anywhere, let alone make sure they leave space along a boundary for future access to a neighbouring property. It's not preventing them from building the property, the size and alignment of your property is not providing enough space to allow the builder to actually build it within your boundaries.

The additional safety systems were in place long before dreamworld incident happened. It's no secret a number of rides in Australia were supplied with these fitted at the request of the operator and were not originally designed for by the manufacturer. It's 100% one of risk management, wanting an additional physical restraint or control measure in place to achieve at minimum double redundancy on every safety system/device. Some people here might not be old enough to remember when public liability crisis happened in the late 90's, early 2000's. Liability insurance experienced monumental increases to premiums, largely driven by uncapped potential for damage claims when being sued and the unsustainably low premiums being charged vs risk being exposed to. Businesses were forced to close because the cost of finding insurance was so high that it wasn't profitable, they couldn't actually find insurance to cover their operation, or the hoops insurance companies forced businesses to jump through in the name of minimising risk meant it was not actually possible to continue operating or offering whatever service they were providing. For the industry (not just theme parks), the exposure was considered too great and many operators were unable to find insurance coverage, effectively running them out of business or having to cease operations until underwriters were available. Quite a bit changed due to this period, not just physical changes to equipment and devices, but also running procedures and methods of operation. It's still occurring today 20 years later.

People click headlines though, and people watch news updates. Ultimately you want them to stop happening at all because its not worth their time when the cheap shots don't work anymore. How much stuff goes unreported by the mainstream news outlets because they think its not a big enough story? What you really want to see happen is people to click/watch, know/think its a pile of BS having formed their own opinion and either react negatively so journalists get the point or respond positively that you are doing the right thing/good job so the information spreads. That shows that the public is engaging and getting your message about safety across. All it leaves is media outlets to post news items based on the situation as it happens, you know, those stories that portray some sort of realism? I'd even go so far as to say these people have been getting away with spouting untruths for so long it's about time parks went on the front foot and threatened them with legal action to force them to print a retraction or apology when they are just outright lying. Being more open with members of the public would give them greater ability to call out the BS as just completely incorrect and unfounded. Especially when much of their processes surrounding operating and maintaining amusement rides come direct from the manufacturers, so there is a credible, ready made source to use in your defence. Lol. That went way over my head until you posted eltororyan. I was thinking, wtf tag is ETR? Sorry for the long post then. 😅

The tide is changing with members of the public too. You can see comments from a number of people that support the parks decision and are glad they are focusing so heavily on safety. Some even recognise that rides are doing what they are designed to do (stop when something occurs) and maintenance staff are being vigilant in their inspections. Go back 5 years ago and the sky was falling anytime any mention of a ride stoppage occurred. It was pretty much exclusively negative comments in response to media articles like this. The parks should really be capitalising on the change in sentiment from members of the public and drive home the message their safety is paramount. It would absolutely squash alarmist reactions to publications and articles like this. The best way to do this is to demonstrate to the public just what goes on behind the scenes so they can physically see what is involved daily. There are videos on youtube explaining as much, but it's pretty simple in design if you want to read about it ill post for you. I've simplified it as much as possible, so you get the idea how it works, but it's still a bit of a lengthy read unfortunately. Can't really shorten it any further. In order to maintain safe distances on rides with multiple vehicles/trains/cars; ride pathways (track, roadways, rivers, troughs, stations, etc) are divided into segments within the operating control system. These segments are usually called zones or ride blocks. A very basic example of this is a load station, the lift, the ride area itself, and the unload station of a roller coaster. Each of these 4 sections of the ride are designated ride zones or blocks. Think of them as literally road blocks that nothing can drive through until cleared. The #1 function of every block system is to maintain a clear path ahead at all times. This is the fundamental rule that never changes. The control system is designed so that a vehicle cannot physically pass from one segment or block to another without the forward block being free (unoccupied). This is how they maintain a safe distance between multiple vehicles and stop them hitting each other. Each of these blocks are monitored by the control system and have the ability (via various braking methods) to stop any vehicle from advancing forward in the event of a fault occurring, a timing issue (as in, taken too long for guests to enter or exit vehicles), or simply due to the forward block being occupied by another vehicle. The ride control system will physically stop a vehicle and hold it in position in this block until the way ahead is clear. This is one of the primary purposes of brake zones you see in attractions. Use a small rollercoaster like Road Runner for example. It is broken up into 3 zones or blocks. Station. Lift. Brake Zone (on road runner, the free fall section of the track after the lift to the actual physical brakes is considered the brake zone). For the sake of using terminology that makes it easier to understand; occupied = blocked. unoccupied = free. In two train operation, train one is parked in the station, loading/unloading guests while train two is held in the brake zone. The Station zone is blocked. The lift zone is free. The Brake zone is blocked. Train one is loaded with guests and advances out of the station zone on to the lift. The lift zone is now blocked while the station zone is now free. The brake zone is blocked. Train two, being held in the brake zone has its brakes released and is driven forward into the free station building, parking in the home position and having the brakes applied for guests to disembark. The brake zone is now free, the station is blocked. The lift is blocked. Train one is nearing the top of its lift climb. The brake zone ahead is now free so the train progresses over the lift hill into the free fall section of the track. The lift zone is now free. The brake zone is blocked. The station is blocked. Train two loaded with guests dispatches out of the station and into the free lift zone ahead. The station zone is now free. The lift is blocked. The brake zone is blocked. Train one approaches the brake zone and stops in the brake. The brake zone is blocked, the station is free. The lift is blocked. Train one has its brakes released, advances into the station and parks in the home position for guests to disembark. The station is blocked. The lift is blocked. The brake zone is free. Train two approaches the top of its lift climb, the brake zone ahead is free so it continues over the top into the free fall section. The lift is free, the brake zone is blocked, the station is blocked. Train two stops in the brake zone and is held in position. The station is blocked with train one. The lift is free. The brake zone is blocked. You have just completed 1 full cycle of each train. The block control system is like a stop/go traffic controller at roadworks. It's opening and closing the way ahead to allow traffic to pass freely without accidents. Now, as I said before, remember the block system will not allow advancement forward unless the block ahead is free. A train in the station cannot dispatch until the lift zone is clear of the second train. The second train will be stopped on the lift and cannot advance forward over the top of the lift unless the brake zone ahead is clear. A train cannot be released from the brake zone to enter the station unless the station zone ahead is clear. Make sense? The more trains/vehicles/cars you have, the more zones/ride blocks you have. A ride will ALWAYS have more blocks than it has vehicles. You can really see this in action in rides like scooby doo and green lantern. Each of the physical brake positions along the track are block zones. The ride control system can physically stop a vehicle in each of these zones if the block ahead is not clear. During normal operation it will hold them in this position until the zone ahead clears, then it will allow the vehicle to continue ahead after a brief pause. No doubt you have experienced this in the high zone at scooby doo, or cars queueing before unload at green lantern? The nature of these rides means they are complex machines with sometimes hundreds of sensor inputs. The default action in any event that the control system detects an error or something is operating out of its control parameters is to stop the ride and go into safety fault. Now it doesn't have to mean an actual physical failure of a component has occurred for this to happen, nothing could be actually broken. It could simply be caused by a vehicle that didn't flag a sensor correctly to notify the control system it has left a block zone, or a car has taken too long to enter or exit a zone and has timed out. These sorts of faults happen multiple times a day and will generally require maintenance staff to attend and reset the fault to allow further live testing to make sure the fault doesn't reoccur and the ride is safe to reopen. As safety has become paramount over the last few years, pretty much all ride stoppages now result in guest evacuations before faults can be reset and testing can continue. It's an element of increased safety awareness but also down to risk minimisation. So if you were riding an attraction and previously experienced one of these type of faults without being evacuated, the ride was restarted and you continued to the station to exit like normal, it's now largely a thing of the past. Before it might have been a slight inconvenience and everybody might have continued within a number of minutes, so barely any notice was given to stoppages. Now, with tighter safety control measures, it's very evident when something goes wrong and guests have to be evacuated. The faults haven't changed, they have largely always been the same, it's the procedure that has been updated resulting in significant downtime for what might only be a non issue. It's the primary reason why I think the parks have to respond now and get on the front foot, explaining their processes to give the public greater peace of mind. Otherwise, media outlets are just going to keep posting drivel like this any time they hear a stoppage has occurred. It has the potential to go one of two ways; Either it will drive more fear into the public, or people will get sick of the media reports and start to ignore these reports. Having the parks respond would significantly reduce to chance of the former taking hold, while simultaneously helping to turn the tide against poor journalism and the publication of tripe like this.