Time for something new..

[superman7444]

Hey guys, I heard some goss which may cure some curious minds...The rumour about the Simpsons coming to MW is age old, and thats about all it remains these days. A few years back MW was faced with a decision to purchase the rights the one of two themes, these two themes were...Shrek or Simpsons...They chose Shrek. And thats all there is to it.

[aussienetman]

I think they should open up the driveway area to the left of Lethal Weapon looking from the Superman ride. Put in a enclosed travelator to enable guests to get to the new and exciting section of the park. Along the left hand side, we see movie memorabilia, costumes and the like. On the right hand side of the tube it is a clear glass window, enabling guests a new and exciting view of the Lethal Weapon ride. Positioned above the travelators there are plasma screens, playing trailers for upcoming WB movies. This would allow guests another access point to the back side of the park and the new themed area. kind of like this http://www.kunsthausgraz.steiermark.at/cms.../Travelator.jpg I think a Simpsons land would be brilliant. I could just imagine a huge Nuclear Power Plant (aka Cinderella's Castle at Disneyland) towering over the park - how funny!I really don't think they should get rid of Batman yet - it is a great family attraction!and the showstage - perhaps a permanent show like a Broadway revue or something massive and gerat. How about a Cirque Du Soleil show?

[rob]

If they were going to build a Simpsons land, maybe it could look something like this:

Edited October 4, 2007 by rob

[MickeyD]

^ Hey that's pretty cool.. I totally agree a whole new 'land' is suited to that area of the Park you have outlined but that's a fair chunk of real estate - u would wanna see at least two new ides perhaps one "E" ticket style major attraction and one more minor flat ride? Everyone seems to be pretty keen on the Simpsons idea and why not? It has been a phenomenom for decades and will probably continue to do so for many more years to come so I guess it's a pretty safe investment that if done right would not become dated too quickly. The transition of Theme's would work quite nicely too and it would certainly suit the overall appeal of the Park. I do like the idea of a Rapids ride but I'm still with Richard on this one - the Universal Simpsons ride is going to be awesome, cutting edge and a real winner for their Park's. Fair enough, the Batride simulator may be getting dated and that area could be better suited for a change? MW have monitored the success of Universal's decisions & reacted similarily in the past so why stop now? Some examples: - Universal built Back to the Future, MW brings Australia's 1st high tech Simulator experience (Batman) - Universal built Jurassic Park, MW built WWF - Universal opens Shrek 3D, MW did the same - Universal opens the Simpson's Ride and MW...? What's good for the Goose..

[JDB]

Personally, I'd lean towards a dark ride themed to the streets of Springfield (A Bit more of an opportunity for the sight gags we are used to

I agree with you here. I'd love to see a new ride like this over a themed river ride too. Even though I really want it to happen, I can't see The Simpsons in Movieworld any time soon.

[Richard]

I really don't think they should get rid of Batman yet - it is a great family attraction!

It was a great family attraction 10-15 years ago. What remains today is the dated and overwhelmingly lacklustre shell of the original attraction. Its story makes zero sense, the animation is simplistic, the theming has no correlation to the story and the motion is terribly designed and synced, making for a rough and uninteresting physical ride experience. In terms of Simpsons attractions - rumoured, wished or otherwise - my understanding of the forthcoming Universal attraction is that it is a very Universal Studios centric ride plot, that will ostensibly refer to Universal franchises throughout the ride, making it a largely unsuitable attraction to be cloned in a non-Universal park, a la Shrek 4D. I actually quite like the river rapids / nuclear waste idea. The whole three-eyed fish thing is years old, but I think it's still one of The Simpsons' most identifiable elements. To me the setting isn't really to provide an intrinsic storyline, but rather to facilitate an enjoyable ride experience that plays off many well-known Simpsons gags along the way. Create an overwhelming Simpsons environment with a loose plot that ties together the elements and justifies the ride style and I see it as a very solid attraction. A Simpsons ride shouldn't be aiming to become storyline driven as though it were lifted straight out of a recent episode, but rather it should be an homage to the ideals and nature of the show through a loose story that provides a platform for an enjoyable experience. That's the only way such an attraction could remain truly relevant 5 or 10 years down the track. Popeye at Islands of Adventure to me is the perfect example of this style of ride executed in this manner. That's not to say I don't like some of the other ideas being thrown around, but I think there is a definite need for more water rides at our parks. It's astounding that we live in such a hot area, yet all our parks have 1-2 rides each that'll get you slightly damp at best. I'd like to think our overflowing water parks pretty much show that the public craves attractions that keep them cool.

[Gazza]

^Exactly, one other point of course is that water rides are that darn cheap its not funny, we all know how in the past our parks have managed to homebrew some of their own, it's a testament to their simplicity. But rapids is something I would most like to see given the ride effects they can do has advanced quite dramatically since the 1980s when the majority of rapids rides were built. 300 days of sunshine and barely any water rides If people are fixed on a Simpson's themed rapids (I personally think where the wild things are would have been nice, but hey this could be cool too) It would be funny if it wasn't just limited to a Polluted river theme, but rather a multitude of Springfieldian water environments, eg a wooded section through the Springfield state forest, port springfield, the part of the river in down town with a stone bridge, the canyon with the hydroelectric dam etc. Richo is on the money with the idea of an overwhelming Simpson's atmosphere, just make the ride jam in as many references to the show as possible so people spend as much time enjoying the ride movements as they do spotting things. I mean in the port section you could have a sewer outlet jammed with metal springs, and echoing down the pipe you could hear homer chanting "199 springs to flush down, 199 springs" In the state forest would be fat toni and his gang up to no good, in the hydroelectric canyon maybe a pig blocking up the outlet or homer trying to fake his own death, in the downtown section you would pass by homer with his head wedged in the closing bridge, the power plant owing to its industrial environment would be the perfect place for the vertical lift and drop. And of course you could have coincidental stuff around the ride with characters behaving in typical ways, im sure Barney Gumble and Ralph Wiggum could have gags involving embarassing behavior, Nelson could be dangling Martin over the river by his undies (wedgie), Grandpa simpson could simply be asleep floating in his rocking chair for some unknown reason. Artie Pie could have crashed his chopper in the river. Hell, you could even ditch the river concept all together, just say springfield is flooded (homer did it) and the resulting mayhem would be more than enough fodder for a ride.

[Churros]

I think the possibilities for a Simpsons themed ride are endless. After all, there is like 18 years of material out there and it is so iconic. Listening to some of the ideas is getting me interested, but I am not sure that Movieworld needs a third river ride. That being said, I think some of the ideas being thrown around here are arousing my interest. I am totally for the idea of a good family-esc ride. But family attractions need a good story or theming to keep you interested or you become pre-occupied by the tame nature of the ride. Naturally, Movieworld have a nack for pulling it off. Can't wait to see what the future holds though. Keep up the good speculating

[zane]

I think Aussie needs a Wooden coaster, manufactured either by Intamin or Great Coasters International, one could easily fit into the back area behind Scooby. woody.zip

[Richard]

but I am not sure that Movieworld needs a third river ride.

I can't think of too many parks of a similar size that don't have more water rides than this. Most parks in England have more water rides than our parks... and they're in England! As Gazza said, 300 days of sunshine a year on the Gold Coast. Average maximum temperature of 28ºC for nearly six months of the year with peaks of over 40ºC many days. Ever seen the ridiculous queues even capacity monsters like Wild West Falls get the moment the temperature creeps over 32ºC? I can easily see room for 2-3 more water rides in each of our parks. Generally speaking they're cost effective and very high capacity.

But family attractions need a good story or theming to keep you interested or you become pre-occupied by the tame nature of the ride.

While I totally agree with regards to story/theming, this notion that 'family ride' means a ride so boring that you'd fall asleep if it weren't for interesting theming doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't think anyone here is envisaging an it's a small world style boat ride. If a below-average ride experience has to be patched up with theming to make it barely enjoyable then the ride system isn't doing its job (see: Motocoaster), and I think Movie World is smart enough to be able to deliver I'd have agreed five years ago Movie World had a nack of sorts for delivering to notch theming, but these days it's somewhat hit and miss. It has been several years since Movie World has delivered what could be considered a world-class themed attraction. I'm by no means suggesting they can't do it anymore (I believe they most definitely can and will again in the near future), but I think that priorities in recent years are such that delivering the same standard of theming doesn't weigh in all that much.

[Churros]

While I totally agree with regards to story/theming, this notion that 'family ride' means a ride so boring that you'd fall asleep if it weren't for interesting theming doesn't make a lot of sense. I don't think anyone here is envisaging an it's a small world style boat ride. If a below-average ride experience has to be patched up with theming to make it barely enjoyable then the ride system isn't doing its job (see: Motocoaster), and I think Movie World is smart enough to be able to deliver

That being said, you would have to agree that Scooby Doo would not be half the ride it is if it were a stock-standard wild mouse just built out in the open with a tin roof cover over the que line. I wasn't implying that family rides are that boring, but again, if I take the example of Scooby Doo, the animatronics, lights and all that jazz make the ride so much more of a hit.

I'd have agreed five years ago Movie World had a nack of sorts for delivering to notch theming, but these days it's somewhat hit and miss. It has been several years since Movie World has delivered what could be considered a world-class themed attraction. I'm by no means suggesting they can't do it anymore (I believe they most definitely can and will again in the near future), but I think that priorities in recent years are such that delivering the same standard of theming doesn't weigh in all that much.

But keep in mind also that it has been a few years since Movieworld produced a fully customised themed family ride. The latest additions Superman Escape and Batwing have a high thrill emphasis. While money could have been sacrified when it comes to theming, essentially this is done on the premise that the ride experience is the focus. And in both occasions the ride delivers. Even so, what theming they have made with Superman improves the ride experiene moreso. I can't imagine that Movieworld would produce a family ride... whether it be river rapids or whatever without finishing the job, not on a major attraction anyhow. PS - No woodies. They are a waste of space and money; and they look like sin. If you are desperate to experience the ride of a wooden coaster get on the train to Brissie or catch a taxi. If they are going to build a new large scale coaster, they should look at either a B&M with a unique seating/standing/lying position or Intamin with inversions or build a mega coaster if you are keen on airtime.

[Richard]

Your original words were "theming to keep you interested or you become pre-occupied by the tame nature of the ride". I think Scooby-Doo would still be a good ride with or without the theming, because ultimately the ride experience does come down to the physical nature of the ride. I've ridden this exact same ride out in the open overseas, and to say it's only half as good would be a huge understatement. It's still a very fun ride, and I'd go so far as to say Scooby-Doo wouldn't be nearly as good as it is if it didn't have a quality coaster at its core. It all comes down to the physical experience. Theming will make a ride memorable and more interesting, but regardless of the ride type it's absolutely critical that it's a ride system at the core that is exciting and enjoyable. Thankfully I think this is one area Movie World has shown that they are on top of. In terms of overall park developments, I'd have to say I've not been too convinced about a lot of things they've done around the park, not just major attractions. It seems you agree with me that Superman and Batwing are not up to Movie World's previous standards of theming. The reasoning for this is totally irrelevant to what my original point was, and that is we can most definitely be optimistic that Movie World will deliver world-class attractions as they have in the past, but to have blind faith and simply assume that it's a given wouldn't be wise, because their strike rate isn't all that high. No one that has ridden any good modern wooden roller coaster can honestly say that they aren't great rides. If you're honestly comparing a wooden coaster experience to a train or taxi ride then I think that speaks for itself. From a financial perspective they are very sound investments. Elsewhere they prove to be consistently popular year after year. The idea of a wooden coaster at Movie World has been around for years. I wouldn't expect it to happen anytime soon, but I think it's an idea that would be no less successful than any B&M or Intamin that costs 2-3 times as much.

[Gazza]

Re wooden coasters: This is what $12 mil AUD gets you with steel: http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig2999.htm?picture=15 This is what $7.3 mil AUD gets you with wood: http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig3231.htm?picture=3 Wooden coasters are awesome. If the only ones you have ridden are Bush Beast or Scenic Railway then you are going by the wrong examples, it would be like saying steel coasters suck because Thunderbolt did. They have an excellent ride experience, and do the same as steel but cheaper, the GCI Millennium flyer trains can handle twisted layouts smoothly so rider comfort is not an issue. They look fine to me, the rustic timber look suits the wild west theme wel and if you dont like the look then put it out of the normal park, a bit like what Knotts have done with Ghostrider (only the station and queue are really in the main part of the park, the rest of the ride goes out around the car park), waste space is a silly argument, just build a twister layout and cram it all in, or an out and back layout and use only a narrow strip of land. They arent that much worse than normal coasters. I think one of these would be a great experience, you could build something colossal fairly cheaply. Could you honestly say something like this wouldn't be a great addition: Looks a bit different to a train line to me.

but I am not sure that Movieworld needs a third river ride

But they have 4 roller coasters, so 3 river rides is fine. Edited October 5, 2007 by Gazza

[jcgoldcoast]

I personally would love to see a modern wooden coaster in Australia. I was recently on TPR's MidWest trip, where a very large number of the coasters were wooden. Some of the older woodies may have been comparable to a train ride (eg The Beast) however anything that has been built in the last 5-15 years are immensely entertaining and I would even go so far as to say they are much more enjoyable than Superman and Lethal Weapon. When you see rides like Voyage and El Toro, and see the budget they were built on (US$6.5 mil for Voyage, and I would hazard a guess at about US$12 mil for El Toro (no official price is on the internet)) they are defiantly within the budget of our parks here. Both these rides have much longer ride times than any coaster currently in Australia and therefor may provide a more exciting ride for all riders. I would defiantly be very impressed with any of the parks if they built a woodie on the scale of Voyage or El Toro, although I don't believe any of the parks have the space for a ride of this size.

[Churros]

Your original words were "theming to keep you interested or you become pre-occupied by the tame nature of the ride". I think Scooby-Doo would still be a good ride with or without the theming, because ultimately the ride experience does come down to the physical nature of the ride. I've ridden this exact same ride out in the open overseas, and to say it's only half as good would be a huge understatement. It's still a very fun ride, and I'd go so far as to say Scooby-Doo wouldn't be nearly as good as it is if it didn't have a quality coaster at its core. It all comes down to the physical experience. Theming will make a ride memorable and more interesting, but regardless of the ride type it's absolutely critical that it's a ride system at the core that is exciting and enjoyable. Thankfully I think this is one area Movie World has shown that they are on top of.

Yep yep... ok. I know I was essentially using something more along the lines of Looney Tunes as a reference to that exact statement. Personally, I havn't been on a Scooby Like Wild Mouse without all the extra theming, but I still think the best part is the way in which you are deceived into believing its a small ghost ride before being thrown into a full on wild moust. For people who havn't ridden the ride before, this not knowing is the best part. But I will re-structure my statement, imagine a ride like Looney Tunes without theming. I am just saying that in my opinion in family type rides theming helps satisfy the craving for excitement along with the ride experience.

In terms of overall park developments, I'd have to say I've not been too convinced about a lot of things they've done around the park, not just major attractions. It seems you agree with me that Superman and Batwing are not up to Movie World's previous standards of theming. The reasoning for this is totally irrelevant to what my original point was, and that is we can most definitely be optimistic that Movie World will deliver world-class attractions as they have in the past, but to have blind faith and simply assume that it's a given wouldn't be wise, because their strike rate isn't all that high.

Yeah, but this is just a forum of speculation. It is just a place to bounce ideas. I completely agree with your statement, but it isn't as though I am about to bet my life savings on Movieworld delivering a world-class attraction. I just feel that in my opinion that when WVTP do something underdone (ie Superman or Batwing) it still turns out to be relevant and attractive, while still being cost effective. And that considering that they havn't had the opportunity to create a ride where story is the emphasis for a while, then it is unfair to suggest that they no longer know how to pull it off.

No one that has ridden any good modern wooden roller coaster can honestly say that they aren't great rides. If you're honestly comparing a wooden coaster experience to a train or taxi ride then I think that speaks for itself. From a financial perspective they are very sound investments. Elsewhere they prove to be consistently popular year after year. The idea of a wooden coaster at Movie World has been around for years. I wouldn't expect it to happen anytime soon, but I think it's an idea that would be no less successful than any B&M or Intamin that costs 2-3 times as much.

Are you having a dig at me? It was just a statement. Quite possibly the reason that Movieworld is yet to install a woodie is because unlike many of us, they actually know how to run a theme park and know that while they could be potentially popular, there are better attractions out there (and please, don't use the Motocoaster as a basis of dissagreeing with this statement... I know... I know). That being said, even if Wooden Coasters have the ride experience people are talking about (regardless of how they differ from a taxi ride) then that really doesn't justify the fact that they are aesthetically inappropriate. Placing such a horrible structure in Movieworld would be far more detrimental to the visual appeal of the park than the screen in mainstreet ever was. EDIT: Oh, and no, sorry Gazza, I appreciate the effort but I'm not feeling it champion I think we need something that goes upside down and gets a bit more creative. Not that I am saying they are that bad, but there is probably a lot more better stuff they could go with here. Edited October 5, 2007 by Churros

[Gazza]

Maybe have a look at this vid of Balder then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvBaCyVtMns You can see how smooth it is, and just looking at the shaping of the track gives an indication of the amazing airtime you experience. And yes, I would like to see another looper at MW, but seeing all these great woodies going up overseas has really made me jealous. The thing is it comes down to the budget, dollar for dollar, you get more coaster out of a woodie then you do out of a steel, in other words if you spent the same amount on building woodie, and then a steel, the woodie would most definitely be the better ride. That not to say steel coasters aren't great rides, B&Ms have all been excellent from the ones I have ridden, it just takes more money to make a steel coaster 'work'. Its going to be a long time until we see a a hyper built here, but in the meantime a woodie would give a comparable experience more affordibly. Yeah, they might be ugly, Im sure there is some way they can attempt to hide it, just have a themed queue line maybe that limits the view of the ride within the park to a few key features (eg the lift hill, and with thathave it running in the same direction as the entrance path so the wooden structure cant be seen from the side) By the time people are on the ride they wont really care about the look of the structure. IMO its sort of funny how everybody who hasn't ridden woodies say they are boring, but those who have rave about them. Maybe part of the reason is because woodies look simpler (just hills and drops) which makes them look boring visually compared to the twisted layouts of steel coasters. But as the saying goes, dont judge a book by its cover. Lets now look at what is currently our best coaster, Superman, what makes it great? The launch obviously, but those airtime points are its other excellent feature. Woodies are all about this airtime, and some rides like El Toro are pretty much all about having these airtime points one after the other, which does simplify the ride a bit. This is where twister layouts come in, and you end up with the best of both worlds: Maybe have a look at this vid of Balder then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvBaCyVtMns You can see how smooth it is, and just looking at the shaping of the track gives an indication of the amazing airtime you experience. And yes, I would like to see another looper at MW, but seeing all these great woodies going up overseas has really made me jealous. The thing is it comes down to the budget, dollar for dollar, you get more coaster out of a woodie then you do out of a steel, in other words if you spent the same amount on building woodie, and then a steel, the woodie would most definitely be the better ride. That not to say steel coasters aren't great rides, B&Ms have all been excellent from the ones I have ridden, it just takes more money to make a steel coaster 'work'. Its going to be a long time until we see a a hyper built here, but in the meantime a woodie would give a comparable experience more affordibly. IMO its sort of funny how everybody who hasn't ridden woodies say they are boring, but those who have rave about them. I was chatting to Richo the other day, and the problem is close mindedness, parks seem to spend a lot of money getting the newest technology (Eg motocoaster) when for the same price they could use a more established ride system and end up with a very solid attraction. I was chatting to Richo the other day, and the problem is close mindedness, parks seem to spend a lot of money getting the newest technology (Eg motocoaster) when for the same price they could use a more established ride system and end up with a very solid attraction that is a better ride.

Edited October 5, 2007 by Gazza

[MickeyD]

^ Too true Gazza, I can see where Churros was coming from too with throwing in a bit of a laugh! Personally I've ridden quite a few woodies overseas and they are just another Coaster to me. Don't get me wrong, I would love to see a good one in Australia eventually but I don't think it's the right ride next for MW - The general consensus has convinced me - I'm really loving the Simpsons land ideas with interactive displays and an indoor/outdoor rapids ride

[zane]

look this is our options for the 15mill mark: B&M looping: http://www.rcdb.com/ig2504.htm?picture=26 wooden: http://www.rcdb.com/ig3183.htm?picture=8 And by the way, arguing is not going to achieve anything. Zane.

Edited October 5, 2007 by zane

[Churros]

^Haha! Yeah that looks pretty cool. But knowing our parks you would be lucky if you get a smaller version of this. I understand you can get more bang for your buck, but does that mean a park can spend less and receive less? Knowing our guys, that's what would probably happen. I still think they need a lick of paint though to spruse them up too. That looks alright because it is fairly new, yeah? I think by all means they can build one, just put it in a showstage building or something so you don't have to look at the supports. After a bit they begin to look like pine fences Look, I've said it before but I am sure that whatever Movieworld has planned, you could expect that they are building up to something good. The only thing I fear is that if they use the bit of land behind Scooby and the ride/attraction/area turns out poorly and you have wasted the area (hence why I said a woodie would be a waste of space).

[Richard]

Are you having a dig at me? It was just a statement.

If you compared a wooden coaster to a train/taxi ride then it speaks for itself in that you evidently have no experience to back your views on wooden coasters.

that really doesn't justify the fact that they are aesthetically inappropriate.

Evidently your tastes differ from others. Fair enough you don't find them visually appealing, but I have little doubt that the majority of parkgoers don't mind one way or the other. If we're going to get hung up on aesthetics, then it'd probably be best to disregard that half of the park is plain white sheds.

[Gazza]

With that Daemon ride, the drop is half the height of Superman Escape's this pic shows the whole layout better http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig2504.htm?picture=13 On the other hand, $13 Million USD will get you a B&M of this scale: http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig2528.htm?picture=19 http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig2528.htm?picture=44 Which is a bit more promising though keep in mind it was able to utilise a hillside (Daemon was probably a bit more expensive considering it is at a European park and it was built 8m up off the ground). Id love a multi looping B&M, but it would be a big thing so not much would happen at the park in the years surrounding.

Evidently your tastes differ from others. Fair enough you don't find them visually appealing, but I have little doubt that the majority of parkgoers don't mind one way or the other.

See, The funny thing is, when the GP think of a stereotypical roller coaster, or when an illustrator/cartoonist draws a roller coaster, it often ends up being a wooden coaster. If you were playing Pictionary the most likely response would be a wavy line with a grid underneath. Its ingrained in the minds of normal people, so they wouldn't really care. Edited October 5, 2007 by Gazza

[Gold Coaster]

??? There's nothing unattractive about a proper wooden coaster. One with a nice shape that has nice landscaping to go with it is quite attractive. I'd actually be happy to just have something like Beast at Dreamworld if they expanded the park area. I didn't find it overly rough (except in the Jackhammer seat at the very back but even then it wasn't unbearable), just a decent ride length (about 5 minutes; the 10 mins night ERT was brilliant going through the trees and riding the airtime hills etc). Voyage (call it 'Walkabout'? ) or Queensland Rumbler would be MINT though. We just need a few signature rides to offer something for those lucky enough to live in the US or Europe and have so many to choose from. Whatever type that is, I'm sure we can expect some great things in the years ahead.

Edited October 5, 2007 by Tony Teulan

[zane]

Example of good looking woodies: Picture

[Rollercoaster13]

Formula of new ride technology Steel = Can be launched (like superman) Wooden = ugly.. im not sure if they can be launched.. and they are old.. VERY HARD TO MAINTENANCE! Water rides = This isnt old technology if you have very good themeing (like Wild west falls) Wild mouse = This is pretty good technology they can do anything... backward drops... vertical lifts heavy theming and sharp turns (like scooby-doo spooky coaster) Inverted = (Lethal weapon) Simulator = bad rides anyway (Batman) Drop rides = Good (batwing spaceshot) Whats missing in this list is wooden.. Movieworld arent making a wooden coaster because it is old technology and it wouldnt look good unless its western themed, wooden coasters arent as appealing as the newer technologies *gets flameshield* god help me when the flaming begins

Edited October 5, 2007 by PixelPushed

[Gazza]

VERY HARD TO MAINTENANCE!

Very hard to maintain don't you mean. One solution is for the park to go with Intamin, their track construction method is different and requires less maintenance.

Movieworld arent making a wooden coaster because it is old technology and it wouldn't look good unless its western themed,

Well, Movieworld wouldn't make the coaster, they would get another company to build it for them, like Intamin, GCI, The Gravity Group etc. But you are right, a Wild West theme is the only way to go at MW with a ride like this. But, I don't get this "old technology" thing people are saying, wooden coasters have magnetic brakes, have computer systems monitoring them, are designed in the first place using computers and advanced engineering techniques, and looking at this pic of a modern wooden train, you can see how they use a design comparable to a steel coaster: http://www.rcdb.com/m/ig1562.htm?picture=20 The only difference is what the ride is made of. If wood is "old technology" why do the still build houses out of wood when steel framed homes are available??? I think your "formula" oversimplifies a bit, and seems to be ignorant of what ride technology is capable of, to lump all simulators as "bad" is a bit much, what about rides like Soarin' over California or Back to the future? both very impressive rides. Besides, none of the technology you list is really that new, all of it has been around since the start of the 90s, for some of it, even earlier.

Inverted = (Lethal weapon)

We know Lethal Weapon is inverted. People who say Wooden coaster are ugly are one step away from being like the people who live near Luna Park or the Alton Towers locals, something to think about Edited October 6, 2007 by Gazza