Jobe

Gumbuya World have announced on their Facebook site the installation of a brand new ride for the Summer season. They are installing a KMG Inversion ride identical to the travelling version XXXL that makes its way on the east coast for Goldenway amusements. This marks the first real thrill ride for Gumbuya World and is the first major investment in the 12 months since it has been refurbished and reopened. This represents a positive step for the park and is a good indication that the park is travelling in the right direction and is a massive vote of confidence in the ongoing viability of the park. Coupled with this is the fact that Gumbuya still have the recently purchased Plunge slide from Seaworld yet to be installed and things are looking quite good for the park and its immediate future. Whilst this is a great confidence booster for the park, I do think that this ride installation may not come at exactly the right time. This is a high thrill ride that for mine does not really fill the demographics of the target audience that the park currently attracts.I think that one or two more family thrill attractions would be a better fit for the park at this stage in its life cycle. However, it may hint at more attractions to come and if so, then this could be the spring board to continued investment in the park. This could be a very good thing for the Victorian theme park landscape and could be the catalyst for continued investment for not only Adventure Park and Funfields, but also finally for some major reinvestment for Luna Park Melbourne.

Hmm yeah you are right mate. Interesting. One wonders if this was removed when the issues with the DA process and compliance reared their head not long after this was first put forward in January? I have a feeling that LPS may revisit this plan at some point.... Yeah I agree 100%. The Tumblebug space would be best utilised with another coaster. Its possible, with some alterations to the site, that a Maurer SC2000 could fit here. It all depends on how imaginative they can be with the site- ie does part of the coaster structure sit over the slab etc. I agree that utilising Big Dippers facade for a coaster makes much more sense. It will be interesting to see that if they do put a coaster here, WILL they name it Big Dipper? Personally, I would like it to be named the Wild Cat ( after the former Schwarzopf coaster from the 70"s) . I think that would be a good selling point to have the Wild Mouse and the Wild cat facing off against each other across the Midway. Ah yes given that data you are correct on that it would be difficult to fit in to either space. The removal of the Helix would definitely accommodate the width, its the length that's the main issue. I think that working with Gerstlauer on a custom layout would work in the space behind Coney and even the possibility of moving the kids rides and running the length of Maloney's Corner from the start of Lavender Green could be a possibility. Good stuff. Still no sources on this?? Just curious.

You have not read the State Environmental Planning Policy correctly. It states that: Complying rides are restricted to 118 feet or 36 metres as you have correctly stated, however, the park is allowed SIX rides ( including the existing Ferris Wheel, The Hair Raiser and the Moon Ranger) of being between 18 metres or 59 feet and 36 metres and 118 feet. This gives plenty of scope to add some rides and attractions of a decent height in the future, especially considering we know that Moon Ranger's days are numbered. Interesting that you rule out a Hydrus clone. I looked for this coasters dimensions everywhere and could not find the length or width of this coaster. The height is well within the parameters and looking closely at it, IMHO, it is conceivable that it is able to fit in Maloney's Corner behind Coney Island. If you have the actual dimensions then I would love to know where your source is as even the Gerslauter website does not have that particular model's dimensions, nor does RCDB. Happy to be proven wrong though. Its not a stretch to say that LPS has looked at a Maurer Sohne SC 2000- I have reported that very thing at least 12 months ago. Brad Loxely , the Senior Amusement Park Manager has stated they are the best bang for buck compact coaster going around at the moment ( barring a Eurofughter, which he has ruled out). Given that, plus this evidence from the Pitt and Sherry website, I would say its a fairly strong indication that LPS will get a SC200 Maurer coaster in the very near future. This will probably be located behind Coney Island as the Tumblebug site is just a smidgen too small to accommodate. This also leaves the reported "Flying Theatre" concept that LPS have filed a DA for. This has been shown to be an amendment to an existing DA and is set to be built on the Flying Saucer site and to replace the current offices adjoining that site. Whether this is a long term project or one that is in their current plans, remains to be seen. In this case , a DA is definitely required as the attraction requires a building and under the proposed amendment, any new attraction requiring a building needs a DA to be lodged. Given that there is very tight room restrictions, the proposed SEPP outlines where rides and attractions can be placed within the compliant zone that does NOT require a DA. If they were to change any of the other structures such as the Big Top, then this would require planning approval. The placement of the Hair Raiser ride has always puzzled me, as I have never thought it to be the optimum site to place the ride. If we are looking to maximise the park's existing space , then I would envisage it could be moved in the highlighted section on the map, adjacent to the Rotor. The Hair Raiser would fit in nicely in this space and would then free up its current site for a larger , more substantial attraction. Alternatively , it could also be placed next to the Tumble Bug ( of which this site is under utilised) but its close proximity to the nearby apartments and neigbours would probably rule this out. Time will tell but as long as the park gets back on track with its plans then this can only be positive. Where are your sources that say the Big Top does not make money as it once did?? Once again, interested to see this data........ And as AlexB has already eloquently explained further on, the will be no chance of removing or modifying the BIg Top- its far too important to the park as a revenue stream and a function centre.

The State Governments proposal to change the State Environmental Planning Policy for the Luna Park heritage site is nearing its end time for exhibition. This concludes on the 9/11/2018. The proposal will then move to the consideration stage where hopefully it swiftly moves to the Final stage of policy being made. The policy can be found here under exhibition on the state planning site : http://planspolicies.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=9674 The full proposal and document can be found in the below PDF: Luna Park EIE 2.pdf The main points of the proposal are: Interestingly, the document outlines also with a plan on where development of rides and attractions can take place in the park ( see the PDF for this. ) This , hopefully, is a huge positive step for the park to move forward and resume its plans for ride reinvestment and renewal. This legislation should address any concerns that management of Luna Park has cited as being onerous towards any new development. Win win for all.

Surfrider should have been put in Seaworld in the first place IMHO. I still think it would be a good option to move it. A you say, small compact ride , small footprint but provides a good thrill. It wold be a good move and could help alleviate SeaWorld's lack of ride issue.....

Ha. Yeah you are quite correct. And yes agree the current website is not great. Had a brain fart and thought it was a brand new site for NEXT year. Thats what 14 hour work shifts will do to you. Cheers

As an aside, Luna park is set to receive a whole new website in 2018 , launching around Easter. Here is the link to the article : http://www.campaignbrief.com/2017/10/luna-park-set-to-launch-new-we.html Very interesting and good signs showing the ongoing commitment to refreshing the park and overall experience. For those who are a little unsure about the current state of play that Luna Park is currently in, here is a very informative summary of the situation by law firm Carroll and O'Dea. The link to the article can be found here: https://www.codea.com.au/sub-publication/taken-for-a-ride-development-consent-troubles-for-luna-park/

You're so right. This is getting very unbearable......

You could be correct but I am not 100% convinced based on that evidence.It could also be the same ride with a new roof and a re-theme. The rides themselves look incredibly similar Yeah i have The Spirits of The Carnival DVD- its a great doco. Its a while since I have seen this though- will have to hunt around and get it out for a viewing. I visited LPS in the 80"s a couple of times- yeah it certainly was a shadow of its former self. Still, it did have a couple of redeeming qualities ( The Schwarzkopf Jet Star was an interesting ride - unique in Australia and it was not a bad collection of rides overall) but it did nothing to match the atmosphere of the original nor even the current incarnation.

There is no need to get grizzly about it........I reckon the look on your face at this instant would be a Kodiak moment.....

Yeah Nimble all the info I have points to the 80"s Luna Park Unit being the same one that was later bought by Wittingslow and was installed at Darling Harbour where it briefly became a travelling unit before settling back at LPS in 1994 when Wittingslow operated that particular incarnation of the park. It certainly looks the same!!!

Also correct me if I am wrong but the ARM Ali Baba has over the shoulder restraints as well?? I havent ridden one of these but know of their infamous reputation. I have ridden a Rainbow many times and the feeling of the being free and that floater air as you describe is brilliant!! What a shame there are none running in Australia at the moment- I do understand that their reputation took a hit when their was a fatal accident on one in Sweden I understand? Is one likely to hit the road any time soon?? This is becoming like the fabled Turbo!!!

Interesting points Jamberoo Fan. Just to clarify to your point- Luna Park ARE claiming that the DA exemptions affect Luna Park's long term heritage. If they cannot get the DA process clarified so that they can ADD new attractions and rides and refresh the park, they are then saying that the parks viability and its future is at risk. Since the owners of Luna Park are tasked with maintaining and keeping the historical aspects of Luna Park's heritage ( such as the towers, Wild Mouse, Coney Island and Crystal Palace and indeed the overall precinct) this then affects the future of such attractions. This is the basis of their claim and , going by what you have stated, you would appear to agree with this assessment. Furthermore, they are now seeking clarification regarding the installation of temporary rides and attractions at peak and seasonal times. ( and to which the NSW government has now seen to amend in LPS favour) This is a function of the way that the process has been interpreted NOW. As stated before , Luna Park does have a significant precedent to this as they have operated and installed over 200 temporary attractions over the past 12 years WITHOUT issue. Why is there now an onerous and ill conceived interpretation of the said process when this has been normal practice for the past 12 years? The temporary rides and attractions that Luna Park have installed over the past 12 years have in part, enabled them to be in the financial position they are now in for them to make a $20 million investment back into new attractions and refresh the park. In other words, keeping the park relevant. True these rides themselves do not form part of the long term heritage of the park, however, they significantly add to the function and cash flow that KEEPS these heritage attractions alive, maintained and open to the public. I think that is a pretty strong reason and claim for Luna Park to move forward in seeking exemption from the DA process for the installation of temporary attractions. Your claim that this should apply to all theme parks across NSW is , in my mind, flawed. As with anything, each case must be met on its own merits. Jamberoo is not a heritage listed precinct last time I looked, it is not surrounded by volatile residents in high rise apartment towers directly adjacent to the park nor does it , by your own words, ever have installed a temporary attraction in "20 years" Its long term viability is not at risk if it cannot add temporary attractions at seasonal times like at Luna Park. The comparison , in my opinion , is really chalk and cheese.

100% agree that Universal is not a good fit for purchasing Dreamworld. Slightly off topic , but which operator could get the best out of Dreamworld and who would be the best fit? Merlin? Cedar Fair? Six Flags? Parques Reunidos ( whic I think is the most likely..)

Yeah agree Joz- to me its a massive missed opportunity. as an aside, does anyone know if there is a massive difference in cost between the 2 models?

Nimble that was my thought as well- I thought that Luna Park's Love Express was purchased by a travelling showman that toured then went to Darling Harbour and back to Luna Park in 1994. Happy to be proven wrong if you have alternative info @19Michael96? To be clear here, the temporary ride strategy is only for peak and seasonal times . It is not an unusual strategy and is designed to provide buzz to the park in offering 2 or 3 extra attractions. Whilst they may not be everyone's cup of tea, they certainly provide the park with a good strategy to attract more visitors to the park at these times. I know my kids and their friends love to see what is coming over summer for the January school holidays, so do not discount the broad appeal that they have. Luna Park Melbourne is also operating on a similar strategy to great success. Rides such as Crazy Coaster, Pirates Revenge, The Avenger, Hard Rock , Freak Out and Disk O are all major travelling rides and very popular. Who wouldnt want to reride these again and again in the unique environment of Luna Park, covered under the one park pass at the time? The expense for hiring these rides is quite cost effective and is a factor in helping the park get to the stage where they are ready to pump $20 million in new rides and attractions for the future. Luna Park Melbourne is embarking on a similar strategy so that they can get themselves into the same financial situation where they can invest in new attractions. The costs for keeping the Scenic Railway , Carousel and Ghost train are quite large. This strategy of temporary rides is due to cease once the $20 million investment plan and a full ride compliment has been reached. Its certainly a positive step that the government has recognised that the interpretation of the DA process was onerous for the operators of Luna Park, especially given the numerous precedents over the last 12 years. Hopefully, this leads to an accommodation whereby they can resume the plans for the $20 million investment and continue on the important job of revitalising the park. Thanks for clarifying @HussRainbow87 I would certainly love for a Huss Rainbow unit to reside at LPS......it was in the original plans for the 1995 incarnation you know........love that ride!! It would have been iconic looking out over the harbour to see a Huss Rainbow in full swing!! What a view it could have been!!

Sorry mate forgot to answer your question! Yeah it came up on a Facebook post but there is certainly nothing untoward about it- @19Michael96 mentioned your name in regards to your post and I just replied to it as you saw was posted here. They certainly appear to still function- please visit https://www.northsydney.nsw.gov.au/Home Yeah fair point and I understand where you are coming from. If this was another operator then I would most certainly be apprehensive but the fact that the current managing director Peter Hearne , is on record as saying that this is something they would not do, this does alleviate those concerns somewhat. Plus, as has been shown, the legislation protecting the historical aspects of the park ( buildings, rides and amusements) are separate to any new developments and , in my understanding,take precedent over these. Interesting considering now that the NSW State government is looking to amend their interpretation of this process- 200 temporary rides and attractions over 12 years does demonstrate a fairly large precedent. Agree 100% here. Perhaps although I feel that it is reasonable to think that once the general public at large have read an article on the issue that would then be enough to educate them to form a reasonable opinion on the matter. Thanks for the excellent discussion AlexB, as always good value! What a particularly negative and absurd statement!! Just an observation- every post you submit on Luna Park seems to be very negative or overly criticising- it certainly appears that you have a unhealthy bias or ulterior motive against the park. Discussion and constructive criticism are certainly welcome. However, in my mind, blatant negativity and a particular bias are really not. Just my opinion. " Kinda glad to be honest..." Wow!!! Its like you just want to see the park fail- that statement certainly does nothing to detract from anyone gathering that opinion! Could not agree more mate..... The SBF Tango Train , in my opinion, is a well presented and well themed ride. It has an excellent lighting suite and it looks brilliant in its place along the midway. I certainly concede that it does not present as great a ride as the Mack model but lets give Luna Park a little kudos here. They replaced an old ride that was maintenance heavy and was likely costing money with extensive downtime. Instead of just ripping it out, they gave the ride its due and turned its leaving into a positive and then replaced it with a BRAND NEW ride that replicates the ride it replaces. It is this commitment to new investment in the park that should be celebrated here.

Agree 100% Youtube is a great place to keep up to date with all things amusement parks. @GoGoBoy I rate TimTracker highly. He has some great content and its regular and enjoyable to watch. Theme Park Worldwide has some good content and some amazing trips and vlogs but is constantly hampered by the host of the show Shaun Pembroke and his mates being some of the most annoying cockwombles that I have ever seen. Still worth a view and a laugh until the nauseousness takes over. Theme Park Review still do great videos- they are always worth a watch. Some channels that have not been mentioned that are extremely worthwhile checking out are Theme Park Crazy and Expedition Theme Park. Both have excellent content that is a little different to the run of the mill vlogs and reviews. Expedition Theme Park in particular has some excellent videos on the history of a variety of parks and is called Expedition Extinct. Highly recommended. Theme Park Crazy has some excellent Top 10 lists and he is also extremely prolific. Defunctland is also another great channel for the history of parks , especially Disney attractions. Offhand Disney is one of the best resources for all things of course Disney related. CoasterBot is also a brilliant channel with some excellent "What Is?" videos that relate to anything from how coasters actually work, manufacturers , theme parks themselves or individual rides. Xtreme Rides is a great channel with a particular slant for European parks and rides- well worth a view as well. ParkChat Live , whilst great in being Australian in content , is let down somewhat by the hosts. The new guy is , IMHO, very ordinary to watch and the actual host is all over the place in his delivery. Its actually a chore to get through a whole episode now, especially since James has left- he made the show far more palatable. Still, it does have its high points and is worth checking out every now and then. Needs work though to refine the experience. For websites, as has been mentioned, I cannot go past Screamscape. It has been around for years and years and is still , in my mind , the number one source of all news and rumours for amusement park news worldwide. For all things coaster related, you cannot beat RCDB. The bible for any enthusiast. For Aussie content, then of course our home page Parkz ,is a great asset. Interestingly enough, many international sites do piggy back content from Parkz pages to add to their own international news. I know Screamscape has done this on any number of occasions and this really shows how important Parkz is to the Australian amusement park industry and its standing internationally. Great thread!!

Well. Its unfortunate that a view of mine that was aired in another forum was posted here but it is what it is. Your posting, is as always, fairly thorough , in explaining your view. Its one perception and an interpretation from what you posted but that's not where it ends. However , for mine, and of course for the management and owners Luna Park Sydney, there is another , differing viewpoint. Luna Park has operated since 1935 and during all that time (apart from the time the Park was closed in the 1980’s and 90’s); rides have been brought in, moved around and taken away. In 1990 the first Plan of Management, after extensive public consultation, confirmed Luna Park should continue as an amusement park. A number of development approvals were granted by North Sydney Council in the early 1990’s including the ability to bring rides in from time to time. In 1996 after the Park closed, a new Plan of Management was finalised in 1998 after extensive public consultation. Once again it confirmed the site should remain as a viable amusement park. In early 2000 a number of staged development approvals were granted, covering noise, light, hours of operation and ability to introduce new rides, move rides around and remove rides, excluding heritage rides The recent court decision found that approval had been granted to deal with rides but due to poor drafting further development approval is still required every time a ride (including even inflatables!) are brought into the Park. This was not what the operators of the Park nor the original Development Approvals granted in 2000 had been agreed upon. The problem lies in the current interpretation of the Development Approvals covering the ability to bring in new rides. Luna Park understands that any new ride must comply with the rules and restrictions set out in the 2000 Development Approvals, and have strictly adhered to this as stated in their accords. However, the the poor drafting and ambiguous text of the last Development Approvals has led to the issue we currently have and the differing interpretations ( right or wrong). Luna Park certainly has history showing that they can introduce new rides into the park, or move them around, without the need for a Development application in each case. Case in point is every seasonal ride that is erected and brought into the park for up to 6-8 weeks of the year since the 2004 reopening. Now I am not a lawyer, and neither are you, so we can all have our viewpoints on this same situation. However , until a definitive ruling is handed down, it just becomes a matter of clarification. One thing that I can definitively say is incorrect is your analysis that the park are free to install whatever they want. The historic rides and their locations are protected and are unable to be touched in the manner that you intimate. The park operators run the park on the knowledge that these attractions must be maintained to a set high standard and they cannot be removed or displaced in any way. The park also will not build anything that is out of character with the rest of the park. Every ride they install must fit into their overall vision of what the park stands for. Examples of this are the latest improvements to the Rotor, the awesome 3D facades under the Wild Mouse ( as pictured above) and the refurbishment of the Light House Cafe into the brilliant looking Helter Skelter Tower. Yes the park is in dire need of new rides and attractions but they also know that they have very finicky and troublesome neighbours to deal with. Sadly the days of large coasters coming to LPS ( as much as I would love to see one) are a dead dream. Plus this also goes against the DA's that were set down as mentioned above, as a ride of this nature would operate outside of the operating park envelope as set out in the conditions. This is the reason that the Hair Raiser is as tall as it is- LPS know and understand that while they have the ability to introduce new rides and attractions, they also understand they need to be reasonable neighbours to the nearby residents and NOT install anything that would be considered controversial. So the fear of LPS installing a Tower of Terror ride with a huge Giant Drop are definitely unfounded. LPS are campaigning to the state government to review this decision. Until then, this has delayed the $20 million ride investment as announced in March 2017. Luna Park certainly has strong support from the public on this issue ( a petition of over 5,000 signatures is being readied to present to the state govt) and on their recent tours, Pink and Katy Perry offered messages of support for the park, eliciting their love and fondness for the "place with the big face" across the harbour. A Sydney poll conducted for the park by YouGov Galaxy showed 85 per cent of those surveyed think it's important for the park to continue to operate viably. A further 89 per cent supported the previous planning laws and 63 per cent thought the new rules are "unfair". Of course , this is only public support and nothing is legally binding, but it is encouraging to see that generally , the park is seen in a positive light by the people of Sydney. I am sure this setback will sort itself out, and one way or another, the park will continue to grow and to thrive. Its just my opinion, that this is a setback the park does not really need. I am sure they will over come this latest challenge.

Having been to Manchester mate, I can surely attest to it being a densely populated and modern city. Not sure what being from Manchester signifies but I imagine it would be quite a different experience to having a childhood or growing up in Australia. Buts its a very nice city , I enjoyed its feel and atmosphere a lot.

Funny was only thinking this the other day after watching several Youtube videos that featured similar rides. Adventure World in Perth has something similar. This one in Brazil looks fun.... This one in Germany looks like an Insurance Nightmare!! Looks fun though..... This one is more of a Whitewater river than a slide but they look are far superior to your average Lazy river. Another good one from the Bahamas. This one in England looks fun without any tubes or rafts required. This one at the venerable Action Park requires you to wear a helmet!!!!! Bit too extreme for Australia methinks! This is TeAwa, The Fearless River and Volcano Bay and is far and away the best attraction at this park. This is the type of attraction that our Australian Water parks need- they are massive crowd soakers and lots of fun. I rode this 12 months ago with my family and friends and I reckon we did the loop at least 20 times. Brilliant- if Jamberoo put in something akin to this it would be a highlight attraction. Although when we rode this last year, there was no requirement to wear a safety vest. Would love to see more examples of these type of slides in our parks-they are fun and thrilling yet the whole family can partake. In saying that, I would have loved to have ridden those slides at The Water Works Mt Druitt, although I cant help but feel that the parks may shy away from these type of slides due to slow throughput and propensity for injury and muckraking..... Who else would like to see something similar to these examples in one of our water parks?

Whoa!!! You are not suggesting that they remove the Crystal Palace are you??

Fair point Joz and one that I echo. It may not happen to you but it certainly DOES happen. If you feel that its worth the risk then who are we to judge. Go for it. I for one, am not willing to take that risk as I have seen first hand several times instances of stolen items from parks , and beaches from people who did not mitigate the risk. We travel to Jamberoo on a yearly trip with about 8 families. We simply buy one locker and we all put our various phones, wallets and valuables in this. Cost is negligible. However, even if we were on our own as a family, I have and would always take the locker option. In my mind , its simply the safest and smartest option to take

You are quite correct in that. One of the towers was in bad shape and was in danger of collapsing. They removed them for the '81 opening and this face lasted until 1989, when the park closed for "renovations" The spires ( inspired by the Chrysler Building in New York) were not reinstated until the current face was installed in the 95 reopening.

Just a quick update on Luna Park Melbourne- They will be getting 2 new permanent kids rides in the form of a spinning coaster and a kids Ferris Wheel. The make and model of the coaster has not been confirmed but it has been stated as being geared towards younger guests so i would assume that it could possibly be a SBS Visa model such as the Crazy Coaster at Adventure park in Geelong These rides will be installed over the coming months and i expect them to be in the ride lineup for the January school holidays. There is no mention that these new rides would be replacing anything currently in the park, although given the size of LPM and the fact that it has limited room, I would not be surprised if these rides DID replace existing attractions. The Zamperla powered coaster Silly Serpent that is currently in the park is of a fair age now and it would not be unreasonable to see this new kids coaster replace the Silly Serpent. The park has stated that the space on the old Metropolis site will be retained for seasonal and temporary attractions. They have replaced their trackless train with a new model that boasts increased carriages.over the previous version. A new coaster for the old Metropolis site is very much on the top of their wish list but it is not on the horizon for the next couple of years. The reason for this is the expense and upkeep of their heritage attractions such as Scenic Railway, Carousel and Ghost Train. To keep these attractions running and in good condition requires a large budget and this eats into new attraction investment. ( Plus Lyndsey Fox is being stingy..) The 105 year old PTC Carousel has just completed a very delicate and expensive 12 month refit and is now open again to the public. They will still continue to use the Metropolis site for seasonal and holiday attractions such as the Pirates revenge flume and Crazy Spinning Coaster that they have utilised over the past couple of years. This mirrors their sister park , Luna Park Sydney and their schedule of rotating seasonal/holiday attractions. They have in that space for October the Famous Spiegeltent live attraction which will be in the park for a 3 week stay. I am in Melbourne in January for a couple of weeks and will be visiting Luna park Melbourne, FunFields and Adventure Park with the family, the latter 2 for the first time. I will certainly upload some trip reports and pictures from these parks as they get little attention on these boards compared to their giant Gold Coast cousins. Cheers.