13 minutes ago, RobMac said:

Insta...how 2010.....

Insta wasn’t even a mainstream release with video until 2013 so there goes that…

User numbers have heavily increased the past 3 years, whilst the annual % increase in 2022 was the highest ever, so if anything, insta is more relative today than at any other point in its history. 

 

1 hour ago, RobMac said:

Insta...how 2010.....

Uhhh more young people use insta over fb these days actually. You're giving away your age a bit here

1 hour ago, Baconjack said:

Uhhh more young people use insta over fb these days actually. You're giving away your age a bit here

you’re not wrong, facebook hurts my brain trying to use it

Facebook has got to be the hardest big app to navigate. It’s so complicated and confusing. You would think a multi billion dollar company could make a less confusing app. Instagram is not much better.

12 hours ago, Brad2912 said:

Greg Yong must have ignored his friend request on Insta..

First time for everything

 

On 24/02/2023 at 12:49 PM, Rivals said:

On 24/02/2023 at 12:29 PM, TBoy said:

Before the refurb they had 23 attractions, which will soon decrease to 20 (counting shows (permanent) and not counting animals + WWW)

Attractions going:

• Dronkeys
• Gingy's Glider
• Puss in Boots Sword Swing
• BIP Maze
• Dorothy's Tea Cup Ride
• Big Red Boat

Attractions coming:

• Jungle Rush
• Big Red Planes
• Big Red Coaster

Compare that to Movie World which will have 23 attractions by 2024 (WoO counted as 3 coasters/SurfRider also counted) to DW's 20. For the first time MW will have more than DW.

+ Dreamworld Flyer and the splash pad.

I don’t really think it is necessarily a bad thing though. They really are transforming the park while fixing past managements poor decisions. Sure it’s a lesser ride count but atleast it will now be quality over quantity, and they’ve already stated they have more plans for the next 5 years or so. It’s really nice seeing our parks get so much care and investment as of lately.

+ an all-new Vintage Cars.

Edited March 5, 20232 yr by Whombex

53 minutes ago, Whombex said:

+ an all-new Vintage Cars.

I counted the vintage cars as one because it will be moved, not removed and rebuilt. At least we finally got a post as we had 0 posts yesterday.

20 minutes ago, TBoy said:

I counted the vintage cars as one because it will be moved, not removed and rebuilt.

My understanding is they will be removed and rebuilt. Based off the concept artwork (I know, you can’t alway trust them), but the cars show are completely different to the ones now. Similar to the new train carriages, I’m expecting there to be new cars with a safety system (door/gate) in place so people can’t just jump out of the cars. And with the attraction getting a whole new name, even thought they’ll likely still be referred to as the vintage cars by guests, I see this a new reimagining and version of the attraction, not just like a relocation like it was when it went from the front of the park to the back 

Thats a shame because the current cars have charm. 

30 minutes ago, Gobbledok said:

Thats a shame because the current cars have charm. 

Yeah, but so did the train, which is what this’ll be compared the most to on here. What’s of utmost importance to them is making it safer, increasing it’s throughput, and making the theme/setting more interesting. If that means swapping out the Model T replicas for larger, modern, more stylised vintage cars, that’s what they’ll do, regardless of the charm or history of the original ride vehicles. And, if they do a good enough job at it, their target demographic won’t complain (might even openly welcome it, getting rid of the diesel fumes & all).

Edited March 5, 20232 yr by Tricoart

56 minutes ago, Gobbledok said:

Thats a shame because the current cars have charm. 

Just checked, it does state on the website the attraction is getting new vehicles 

Also model t ford’s don’t really fit the theme of “jungle”

It’s a shame as it’s the ride with the most similarities to John Longhusts dreamworld and Model T fords aren’t exactly a common sight. The parks are worth a bit.  It’s one of the few vintage car rides to use the operating system they do left. I think it getting new cars is the only real blow of this new upgrade. Oh well. Things don’t last forever I guess….

50 minutes ago, REGIE said:

It’s a shame as it’s the ride with the most similarities to John Longhusts dreamworld and Model T fords aren’t exactly a common sight. The parks are worth a bit.  It’s one of the few vintage car rides to use the operating system they do left. I think it getting new cars is the only real blow of this new upgrade. Oh well. Things don’t last forever I guess….

I'd argue this shares more similarities to "John Longhurst's Dreamworld" than the current iteration of the Vintage Car Ride, seeing as it is once again located in Rivertown, adjacent to the river of which it's name is derived. Yeah, it's a shame for supernerds that the vehicles will no longer be 'genuine' Model T replicas, but to everyone else they'll be good enough, and the downside of not being 'genuine' also leads to countless upsides (larger cars, better accessibility, reduced repair costs, reduced operating costs, reduced fumes, etc.).

16 hours ago, Baconjack said:

Also model t ford’s don’t really fit the theme of “jungle”

I mean - before they had Jeeps... how do you think they got around? It wasn't all done on horseback you know...

I guess lest fumes is good but the smell from the Vintage cars is nostalgic. Same with Currumbin wildlife sanctuaries Diesel trains. 

Edited March 6, 20232 yr by REGIE

23 hours ago, themagician said:

Just checked, it does state on the website the attraction is getting new vehicles

 

9 minutes ago, Michelangelo said:

but I can’t see them dumping all the current cars, instead they’ll retrofit some kind of safety feature to the existing.

Based on the wording on their website, all the vehicles will be new. 

1 hour ago, Michelangelo said:

I can’t see them dumping all the current cars, instead they’ll retrofit some kind of safety feature to the existing.

Thats a bold viewpoint given the existing vintage cars were essentially made 'in house' (not something the park has had a lot of luck with) and retrofitting things hasn't exactly panned out long term either (log ride, shockwave). 

The train is a perfect example of the park looking ahead to modern technology built by reputable companies with the risk assessments done by third parties not invested in the outcomes. I am confident that the cars will be all-new, probably fully electric, similar to the treasure hunters vehicles in Universal Singapore.

The original Model T Ford parts (the lights, radiator frames, wheel flanges etc.) would be easily worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, especially if they were looked after and not trashed. Would be easy to tear out the four-stroke motors and electrify them or rehab the existing vehicles into a new control system.

 

15 minutes ago, Slick said:

Would be easy to tear out the four-stroke motors and electrify them or rehab the existing vehicles into a new control system.

Maybe so, but they'll still be assuming all of the risk in this case. Businesses want to be able to offload that responsibility these days (quote below for reference):

17 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

The train is a perfect example of the park looking ahead to modern technology built by reputable companies with the risk assessments done by third parties not invested in the outcomes

I can't imagine there's many companies out there well-versed in the retrofitting of T-Model Fords. But then again, if the rumours of TTD and Zamperla a true, never say never!

26 minutes ago, franky said:

Maybe so, but they'll still be assuming all of the risk in this case. Businesses want to be able to offload that responsibility these days (quote below for reference):

That's precisely it - it depends on risk appetite. There's also different levels of risk in attractions, and there's a big difference in potential risk between a simulated car ride and roller-coasters. Remember, if it was so risky, they wouldn't let kids drive them. By extension, as I've covered previously, Disney has a different risk appetite and assumes more responsibility to ensure their capacity and guest satisfaction metrics are maintained. You could also deduce that Dreamworld's risk appetite isn't the only point of reference here, and sometimes there's over-reach (see Tiger Island).

Edited March 6, 20232 yr by Slick

25 minutes ago, Slick said:

Remember, if it was so risky, they wouldn't let kids drive them

I don't have the inside scoop on incidents and stoppages, but i'm sure that 'ability to stop and exit vehicle, walk in front of other vehicles that are completely under the control of untrained guests' would rank as 'possible' on the risk assessment matrix, and being run over by one of these things has at a minimum 'Moderate' chance of hospitalisation or causing disability - ie, broken bones or worse. At a minimum its a moderate risk calling for enhanced control measures, which so far are primarily administrative controls - almost the last line of defence (and something Dreamworld was criticised over during the TRRR inquest).

Replacing these vehicles with ones that prevent guests from exiting the vehicle reduces the likelihood from possible to very unlikely (and in addition, its a reasonable assumption that the new system presumably permits a power disconnect to all vehicles, so a trained operator can prevent collision).

Even if the potential type of injury doesn't change (though it's highly likely the additional control measures would reduce the severity), the assessment drops to low\very low as the control measures implemented have been eliminated, substituted, or engineered out of the attraction.

I am a big fan of nostalgia, and firmly advocate parks respecting their heritage and doing it justice (skyvoyager is an eyesore, and the removal of Police Academy was a travesty).

I also know that you've spent a good amount of time with John Longhurst, and this park plays a big part in your life (not intended to be doxxing, this is taken straight from your own published musings) so I understand why you're strongly opposed to the replacement of what is essentially the last 'longhurst' era attraction left at the park. 

But in this case, despite the nostalgic value, Dreamworld needs to ensure that they never again have an incident occur that can be traced back to 'in house design' or any other sort of negligence as a result of doing things in-house.  They simply wouldn't survive it. Reputable companies, with proven attractions and external, independent oversight is a necessary evil in the park's recovery - and in my opinion, it's the only way for the park to survive.

40 minutes ago, Slick said:

 You could also deduce that Dreamworld's risk appetite isn't the only point of reference here, and sometimes  there's over-reach (see Tiger Island).

I know what you're getting at here as you've discussed it previously, but we've seen incidents where Tigers have injured handlers. And while the experts (of course I mean Pat) say this isn't the best thing for the animals, you're talking about risk appetite - which is what's best for the people.

I know - the incidents have generally been said to have been a handler doing something they shouldn't have, but that's still reliant on administrative controls, so taking the handlers out of the enclosure - elimination or engineering control measures are still a "safer" way to mitigate the risks. 

What this does for the animals - health or behaviour wise - has to be second to people safety. And you can't get bit if you aren't in the same enclosure to begin with.

3 hours ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

The train is a perfect example of the park looking ahead to modern technology built by reputable companies with the risk assessments done by third parties not invested in the outcomes. I am confident that the cars will be all-new, probably fully electric, similar to the treasure hunters vehicles in Universal Singapore.

Doors like the ones on Treasure Hunters make sense for it 'cause it rises rather high, and is commonly directly adjacent to rather harsh drop-offs & water. If I had to guess, going off the concept art (or just by choosing the more cost-effective/proven option), IMO vehicles like these'd be the more likely option they'd choose:
http://www.gouldmanufacturing.com/antiqueautoride.html

Edited March 6, 20232 yr by Tricoart

I know you have given clear points and it makes sense but what if they added doors onto the model T’s?  It’s still in house but if theres 0 chance of something happening on a in-house built ride it seems OK?  Little gates wouldn’t be to hard to add on. And basically eliminate the worry of people coming out of the cars.