Tricoart

I think, if the plans were solid enough/continue to be, I don't see why Big Dipper would drastically change the plans. Even if it was just a Stunt Pilot clone, it would still be the tallest, longest, fastest, most inversions, etc. single rail in the Southern Hemisphere, so if they want to market it as a record breaker then they still easily could.

Yeah ik, just saying that some reports state the incident happened in the station, which would mean it was a collision of some kind. Glad to see there's another ETR fan here, though.

El Toro's been pretty issue-prone recently, with the derailment last year as well (which was an Intamin problem with the design of the Prefab's track IIRC, so not RMC). If I'm not mistaken, though, after it was reopened, weren't there multiple complaints that the reinforcement they'd added to prevent future derailments made the ride noticeably rougher? It's unknown what the issue was yet, but workers have been seen inspecting the track after the accident, and there's been people saying there was a major pothole near the Rolling Thunder hill (someone even said there was a 'bang' on that section when they rode it a couple days before the accident). Depsite that, some are saying the incident was in the station, making it a block zone thing, whilst others are saying it derailed again, so there are many conflicting reports. I think the most accurate thing currently is that 12-14 people were injured, and out of that, 4-5 were hospitalised.

The only one I know enough about is Iron Gwazi, but they had to slow the lift hill on it post-opening as it was running faster than designed, they didn't do proper/enough clearance testing so particularly tall people were smacking their hands on the wave turn near the station building, build quality on things like their trains are said to have remained subpar, and loose articles still remain a particular issue on them due to being so aggressive (but that's more of a park thing, not an RMC thing). Their main issue of structural problems seem to have been mostly alleviated by now, but it's also worth mentioning that RMC semi-recently had a switch of lead designer and CEO, so who knows what the future holds.

Green Lantern's a good little coaster, until the final brake run tries breaking a few of your ribs when it stops. As for an RMC hybrid, out of all the problems there are with Dreamworld getting one, them not being gimmicky enough isn't one of them IMO. So long as it's presented well, and it utilises it's structure in the layout (headchoppers), if anything it'll be seen as a much taller, longer, faster, more intense and fun Leviathan. The whole reason RMC blew up is because they're relatively cheap (at least as conversions), and easy to market as a unique experience. Which, ofc, has somewhat died down in the US, but is far from it everywhere else, especially here.

Yes, CEO's do spin, that's also called marketing. But that doesn't mean that any quote of theirs should be taken as an inherent lie, just cause some people on a forum said so. Unless there is a defined base for it to stand on, from an outsider, it is baseless. If it's true, then great, what's done is done. If it's not, still great. Doesn't change anything anyway, the outcome's still the same. This is just fighting over semantics.

Ideally, it becomes our own little Australian Coaster War.

Yeah I getcha, I've been in other circles where I've both been the one with insider info, and the one hearing (way too many) other people try pass off that they do. So, I've kind of learned from that experience to just not trust any 'insider info' til there's legitimate proof behind it, and sit pretty til what I know, is.

I think what we currently have is heaps of evidence pointing towards a fact, so unless there is (sourcable) heaps of evidence pointing towards another, it's nothing more than fiction/rumours. Be it that Future Labs was never getting built, or that Leviathan is sinking into the abyss, til there's solid reason to believe that they're the case, they're not.

If they went all-in on an RMC and made a hyper-hybrid, they could get tallest/longest/fastest in the Southern Hem from DCR, tallest/longest/fastest hybrid in the Southern Hem, most airtime on a coaster in the Southern Hem, etc. But that's all pipe-dream territory, and I just can't shake the feeling that Dreamworld may view RMC as not being reliable/safe enough for their standards right now.

As did most of the people that were quoted, either during the conversation or afterwards. Hence: There's no 'mob' to be lumped into, everything was taken out of context.

It all went downhill after the Black Death. Now people can't even get the flu without taking sick days.

Would be a very interesting concept for Dreamworld to construct, and if they do it right then yeah a Family Wing could be a pretty good fit for the park. Headed down the possibility of a clone, Chessington's is much smaller and built into the plot of land it resides, so for the sake of comparison I'll compare Legoland Germany's model. If this recreation turns out to be anything like the actual ride, then this model should be a pretty great option to be cloned over, bridging the gap in Dreamworld's lineup quite nicely. Also, according to this article from it's announcement (https://zusammengebaut-com.translate.goog/legoland-deutschland-bekommt-weltexklusive-achterbahn-142193/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=wapp), it's said to have cost around 15 million euro, or roughly 21-24 million AUD (24 mil with exchange rate at time of article, 21 mil with current rate), so even with increased costs as a result of being shipped and installed in Australia, it shouldn't be too far out of Dreamworld's budget. However, it seems like it's still in the air as to if Legoland's model has a lift hill, or if it's got a swing launch like Chessington's (replacing the station & turn toward the lift in the above concept with a backwards launch & twisted spike, and having the spiral 'drop' end the same way that Chessington's will, that being with straight sideways track). So, in the case that it turns out to be a swing launch, then there are better options for Dreamworld IMO. This is at least partially due to my opinion towards launches (and especially swing launches at DW) being that Dreamworld, and to some extent the Gold Coast in general, should be getting more lifts and less launches. Aside from that opinion, however, perhaps a more valid reason against the model would be (due to having no switch track like ST) both Chessington's and Legoland's would effectively be launched boomerangs, meaning longer ride times and lower capacity than a traditional block zone setup, which they can only really negate by great ops or getting 2 like MW. Also, the one thing unknown about these rides currently are their trains, and therefore their height requirements. And, unless there is something pretty funky going on with the trains (which, to be fair, has been somewhat theorized, as a result of them both on textbook containing an 'inversion' and spikes taken on your side), the requirement could end up pretty high, especially in Australia.

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's actually a giga S&S Axis coaster in ABC Kids World themed to the Big Red Plane.

Nah, I totally agree that they need to go for a water ride above any new thrill coaster, anything from a normal log flume to a PowerSplash, to even one of those cool Intamin ones like SeaWorld San Antonio's getting. And pretty much every park on the Gold Coast could do with a new dark ride, so yeah I too hope/think that'll come beforehand. The whole discussion is (at least on my end) solely for if/when Dreamworld decide they want to construct a new thrill coaster, who they'll go with. Whenever that may be isn't to say. As for manufacturers once that time comes, an RMC'd be nice and fit quite well, as would a Lech Coaster/Fønix-esque Vekoma, so long as it isn't launched and has some good airtime moments mixed in. Ideally though, I still think they need/I would still prefer them to get a thrill/family-thrill coaster with no inversions, cause as it stands it's pretty large jump from Madagascar to Motocoaster to Gold Coaster & Steel Taipan.

I don't think anyone in the thread is even suggesting that they'll get a new thrill coaster in the next (at least) 5 years anymore, just discussing what it could be once that time comes. And yes, I agree that the GC needs more coaster diversity, but that doesn't change that what Dreamworld needs for their lineup (in the thrill department) first and foremost is an airtime-focused, non-inverting coaster with a lift hill, which mainly fits either a megacoaster, hyper/giga, or woodie.

They're nowhere near sister parks, the only thing that relates them is a similar name (VRTP's/Australia's = "Sea World", SEAS'/United States' = "SeaWorld"). If VRTP want to mirror SEAS by leaving animals behind, however, then they go right ahead, but I'd be pretty disappointed if that were the case. Even as far as just renovating their current enclosures, some are of course pretty top-notch already (Shark Bay and Polar Bear Shores come to mind), but others are showing their age and/or could really be a lot better if they were to put the necessary funding into them (e.g. Seal Harbour, Sea Jellies Illuminated, Penguin Encounter). And there are always more species they could add, like your usual fish, eels, octopi, (more) jellyfish in a full-on aquarium building, or some singular-species enclosures for unique animals they don't yet have (absolutely unrealistic pipe-dream being Dugong). Management at Sea World must've been off their rocker if they thought they could just decide one day that they were going to house Crocodiles, Gorillas, and Hippopotami.

I think you've also gotta keep in mind that it is still (at least partially) a marine park, and there are definitely some things they could do on that end as well.

I honestly forgot Dives existed lmao, but they'd be above a Wing and under a Giga in fitness for the park IMO

IMO, either another Mack or a B&M would be the most likely for Dreamworld's next big coaster, and if they were to go with a B&M, then I think their most likely models'd be (in terms of fitness for a post-family expansion Dreamworld): Hyper > Giga > Wing > Flyer > Invert > Surf. An RMC may fit their lineup, but they are (or were) somewhat infamous for being cost > quality in some aspects, and I'd imagine parts sourcing could be a big issue. If they were to go for one, it almost definitely wouldn't be the RMC of our dreams, being either a Raptor clone or an RMC Family Hybrid.

I linked the thread partially due to that, and partially due to the section explaining why they went with a Mack. As they say, they could have gone for a cheaper (in their words 'second tier') manufacturer, but chose to spend a premium for the increased safety record and reliability that Mack has. Then, they go on to mention ToT and Wipeout as rides they chose to remove due to both part difficulty and unsatisfactory ride systems. To me at least, that sentiment makes it seem like they've got a much higher chance of buying from these upcharge manufacturers (like a Mack or a B&M), and are less likely to go for something like an RMC, Gerstlauer, Vekoma, or (less so) Intamin with their large investments for the time being. If they were to get a B&M, I'd imagine (or hope) that an invert is pretty far down on the list, second only to a Surf. They're in need of a coaster that's not inversion-based, not a third one.

I'd encourage you to read this:

Southern Hemisphere's first multi-type dark ride*

It's all because of those damn koalas...

DW you didn't read it wrong, they just wrote it wrong. The article's exact quote is: So yeah, no mistake of your own.