What's next?

[Gazza]

Well, In any case they could just get a quote to see what $20 million could do. I mean I really have no idea how much they would cost, Its funny because just looking at that video on the Intamin website, you wouldn't pick something so cute to be something so hugely expensive. Now Indiana Jones at Disney runs with 15 vehicles and has an hourly capacity of 2400 (sorry, not 2500) Now, I think if it were an Australian installation, MW might be willing to accept a capacity of 800pph just to get the ride and IMO that is still pretty reasonable, better than Motocoaster anyway. So MW could perhaps have 5 transports in use, and one spare. Those vehicles cost millions, so if you could reduce the number of them to a minimum then that's a big bit of your costs gone. I suppose you could cut the ride time a bit given its fast paced, 3 minutes is still pretty good. Another thing I'd like to add, But a small Japanese park called Lagunasia actually had one, however they ended up replacing it with a roller coaster, So I cant imagine them being excessively expensive for a park to just get rid of it. I do think theming efforts make up a big portion of the cost though, its labour intensive and takes quite a bit of planning, I mean black mamba at Phantaisaland had an $11,000,000 theming budget. Disney IMO manages to spend ridiculous amounts so I dont think they are the best example to go by in terms of cost predictions.

The Zamperla Volare is an eyesore and widely criticised for being uncomfortable and rough. I can think of dozens of better ways to spend $6.5 million, especially at a park like Movie World.

I 100% agree. I would suggest to you Sonic 123488 that you actually ride some of the things you are suggesting, a lot of the things you are suggesting just seem random and dont explain how they would fit in MW. Zamperla volares are terrible rides, they are flying coasters, but there is such thing as a bad flying coaster you know, those rides are basically like being strapped in a sandwich toaster. Are you honestly saying you would rather a Volare than a Multi Motion ride? Also, volares are crappy short rides, they are only a bit over a minute long, which makes it a shorter ride than WWF, Scooby, Batman, LW, and even road runner.

How many times do I have to say, Zamperla Volare $AUD6 500 000 small footprint

If you are having to repeat yourself, it means nobody is listening. And why are you obsessed with having a small footprint. MW still has plenty of space for big rides if it wants one. Edited October 28, 2007 by Gazza

[sonic123488]

The Zamperla Volare is an eyesore and widely criticised for being uncomfortable and rough. I can think of dozens of better ways to spend $6.5 million, especially at a park like Movie World.

Well I think it looks good and as for the roughness well I couldn't say until I ride one, I mean it could fit in with the Iron Man an upcoming Warner Brothers Movie, lets say the "the Iron Man Flight" . But if we were going to try something new here in Australia the Zamperla the most realistic space and price wise. Can you list these dozens of other ways please? The reasons I am obsessed with space is because while movie world is a relatively small park(in a financial sense) they need to save space for when they do become big parks and start building big coasters like say the Tatsu at Six Flags at Magic Mountain. And also have any of you been on these simulators? Edited October 28, 2007 by sonic123488

[Gazza]

I have been on one, In fact Indiana Jones is my favourite ride out of all I have been on. Your space argument makes no sense, WVTP own a huge amount of land, And as you can see only a small part is actually used by MW. Lack of space is not an excuse to build crappy rides.

[Richard]

All I can find out about Lagunasia's ride is that they allegedly once had an Indiana Jones style ride. I couldn't find out anymore than that, and the park's targeted attendance is 600,000 so I'm thinking something might have been lost in translation on this one. We've heard that Dreamworld has faced several-hour queues for Motocoaster in non-peak periods with both trains operating. I think that demonstrates more than anything the need for higher capacity rides. In the past five years or so attendance has grown at our parks at a greater rate than new attractions have brought added capacity. For a major family attraction, no less one that is indoors (i.e. airconditioned), I can't see any room for anything less than 1-1,200pph at peak. At the end of the day, if Intamin could offer a ride like this for a suitable budget (say $20 million), then I'd have no problems; as said I really like the concept. I however severely doubt that it would be possible, or else we'd see a lot more rides like it around the world rather than the handful that do exist. As for Black Mamba's theming costs, that seems about right given the extent of it and the fact that it's all outdoors and is largely self-standing structures. Indoor theming that is mostly paint, plastic and fibreglass, we'd be looking at costs that are more in the 5-6 figure mark tops, based on the sort of figures you see for television set building costs. sonic123488, you might be directing this more towards Gazza given this is his idea, but I've ridden both Indiana Jones at Disneyland and DINOSAUR at Disney's Animal Kingdom, and can say with 100% certainty that such a ride is infinitely better than a Volare. Our parks aren't about saving the good stuff for the future. What you see today is more or less representative of what the future will hold. We'll never be in the same league, attendance-wise, as a park like SFMM. That's a simple fact. I'd think again if you're under the impression that 10 or 20 years from now we'll be pulling 3+ million guests a year.

[Gazza]

All I can find out about Lagunasia's ride is that they allegedly once had an Indiana Jones style ride. I couldn't find out anymore than that, and the park's targeted attendance is 600,000 so I'm thinking something might have been lost in translation on this one.

I did a bit of digging, and there is a trip report which desribes the ride here: http://www.bannister.org/coasters/trips/2005/0902.htm

Far better was Treasure Hunting. This began with a lengthy pre-show in Japanese which I could understand perfectly despite no comprehension of the language; it was an entirely predictable affair with a semi concious animatronic explorer with his head on the countertop of a bar, the requisite skull and crossbones flag, and so on. With that out of the way, we were led into the inside of a heavily themed tomb, where we boarded large off road vehicles mounted on a track. Once we were secure, we set off over some rough terrain, with speed and elevation changes as we passed through some fabulous scenery that felt like an abandoned temple. Among the other scenes were one where some headlights approached us at speed only for our vehicle to dive underneath into an abyss which we had not been able to see in advance. Such a fabulous attraction was marred only by the fact that nobody was riding it; only four of us had been in the pre-show room, so the operators down by the jeeps, which could seat sixteen, were largely idle.

The only picture I could find was this one:

We've heard that Dreamworld has faced several-hour queues for Motocoaster in non-peak periods with both trains operating. I think that demonstrates more than anything the need for higher capacity rides. In the past five years or so attendance has grown at our parks at a greater rate than new attractions have brought added capacity. For a major family attraction, no less one that is indoors (i.e. airconditioned), I can't see any room for anything less than 1-1,200pph at peak.

Keep in mind those 2 hour queues were happening with one train in use, and combined with DWs coaster operating techniques not that unexpected. But I can see what you mean, I was sort of comparing with our newer coasters which do close to or just over 800pph so I guess I assumed that was a respectable level. I reckon though if you took approriate measures you could squeeze a good capacity out of one, stuff like single rider queues and good station set ups aren't done nearly enough here. Still, as you said price is a big factor, I'd be really interested in what exactly the cost of these is, its just too hard to predict, I mean with normal coasters you often see themed and unthemed variants of the same thing so you can work out the cost, not so with these. What is also hard is with these asian installations you really don't know how elaborate they have gone with the theming. Still, its fun to dream.

[Gold Coaster]

^ Gazza, this is off topic but is that water slide video on Youtube or somewhere on the Net? I'd love to see/send people a link to a bigger version.

[Gazza]

It's part of the compilation: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Elgwn-6nJWg Get it while you can, a duplicate video like it was taken down due to copyright claims by the ABC (American). On another note, next time I ride the twister I am going to see If it is possible to do that on purpose.

Edited October 29, 2007 by Gazza

[sonic123488]

Now getting back to coasters/attractions/rides. This simulator seems pretty good, -movieworld has space- but where do you think it would best fit?

Edited October 29, 2007 by sonic123488

[Gazza]

This is something I have been thinking about for a while, but what about a B&M flying coaster? The first installation, AIR came in at around $26 million AUD (a fairly short prototype, with a fair bit of digging), and the more recent Tatusu came in at lower $23 million AUD (A huge 1.1km long layout built high off the ground on a sloping mountain) These sorts of prices aren't that far out of MWs $20 million or so limit, so I don't actually think a small flying coaster (even a cheaper Superman/Crystal Wings clone) is too far out of the question. You could ditch the dual station and the 3rd train, and that right there is a couple of million off the price (The two train S:UF at SFGA can handle 1,100 pph anyway, and personally I think the second station is unnecessary, flyers only take about 20 seconds longer in the station (lifting/lowering takes 10 secs each way) ) and naturally it would be a bit cheaper building on flat land than on the side of a mountain in an earthquake prone area. These really are fantastic rides, and I couldn't see it being anything but a hit. Theme wise, I know the Matrix trilogy is a bit old, but I think Neo's flying ability would translate well into a flying coaster, ultimately the theme would be a way of Including a WB licence. It could be based around the sequence in the second film where Neo gets trapped at a Château, and must fly quickly to the city to rescue Morpheus on the top of the truck in that freeway chase. The queue would begin with a cool entrance portal signifying entering the matrix (if they still have theming from the Matrix Exhibit, recycle some of that) The queue would then be in a pleasant landscaped garden and would enter the Château, there would be a couple of suitably themed rooms, and the pre show would simply involve the scenes from the film that lead up to freeway chase. Riders would then board in a station that continues the château theme. The coaster would follow, with no elaborate theming, just nice landscaping and coniferous trees. A final interesting element would be just before the brakes (which could somehow be poked out of the main layout) a scene would be set up with 2 trucks crashed into each other on an asphalted section of mock freeway simulating that final moment when Neo plucks Morpheus to safety. The track would fly directly over the trucks.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Gazza

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Gazza, I think thats a great idea, but I think it's been said before - Matrix technology IS a bit too old for a new attraction. Generally the theming of the rides in MW, and other TRUE theme parks with an external movie \ genre link generally coincides with the release of the movie - either on screen or dvd. The Matrix was great in it's time - but for the same reason MW closed down the Matrix exhibit, as well as the Harry Potter exhibit - it had its day, and now its over. I think to coincide with the release of the next Harry Potter movie, MW would do better to theme a coaster to HP - maybe flying - making the train like a big broomstick or something. Movieworld already knows how to theme HP - you've got the store, the train, and the platform, as well as the old walkthrough for HP also - the skills to take this theming into a new area and create a "hogwarts" themed land would be easy. Plus if a bunch of Indians can build Hogwarts in a month for a religious holiday, i'm sure MW could do something a little more permanent and interesting with the backing of Warner Bros. licensing behind them.

[Gazza]

^Unfortunatley, I think a HP ride is out of the question, I would have liked to have seen one, but IOA at Universal Orlando ( http://www.universalorlando.com/harrypotter/ ) have gotten the rights to Harry Potter, and are doing a whole 'theme park within a theme park' and are spending a huge amount of money to do so. Reportedly, JK is very picky when it comes to this sort of stuff, So I dont think WBMW will ever get to see a harry potter attraction again simply because they couldn't do it to her standards. Going back to the Matrix idea, Ill admit it is a tough cookie, but not impossible. I don't think the GP cares about the age of a movie franchise actually....why else would MW have stuff like Police Academy and Lethal Weapon (As well as overseas attractions, Borg Assimilator (Star Trek) at Paramounts for example) ? Coinciding with a movie release would help the ride with a bit of marketing kick in its first year, but I think its way too much of a gamble anyway, how do you know whether or not the film you are basing it around will flop anyway? Besides, proportionally I don't think a lot of riders get to experience things in their first year anyway when the tie in effect is at its strongest, If somebody had not visited MW for 6 years, It would not matter whether SDSC was built in 2002 or 2007, the entertainment value would not be diminished. At the end of the day, the ride experience is central, if people are willing to travel to DW to sit on a motorbike shaped coaster car, I'm positive people would go to MW to experience something as close as they'll ever get to having the ability to fly. The theme is something that ties it into the park, and makes it nicer for the people who appreciate it. Problem is, the pool of WB movies that are either good or really popular is pretty small, and from those, the ones that would translate into suitable rides is even smaller, I don't see the harm in using past hits as the basis for rides, if it means the overall product is better than a newer, but possibly not as effective theme. I really comes down to clever marketing, maybe the Superman approach is better, focus heavily on the unique and exciting aspects of the ride rather than the theme, that's not to say you couldn't work in the theme in some way, just film the ad with green filters and similar camera techniques to the film, and the fonts/logos on screen would also reflect the matrix branding (use that distorted Serriff font), and overlay that japanese "code rain" on the footage in places too. The ad could also jog peoples memory about the Matrix....here's how it could be scripted (though Im hardly a marketing expert): < text on screen in Matrix style> "In 2003, people asked, 'what is the Matrix?' In 2009, experience it for yourself" <Cut to footage of the ride in action with plenty of cool camera angles> " 'The Matrix: Flight of Neo', Australias first FLYING roller coaster!" <focus camera on the expressions of a group of riders> "Only at Warner Bros. Movie World" <Cut to a screen showing the WBMW logo in a Matrix graphical style>

Edited November 2, 2007 by Gazza

[Rollercoaster13]

< text on screen in Matrix style> "In 2003, people asked, 'what is the Matrix?' In 2009, experience it for yourself" <Cut to footage of the ride in action with plenty of cool camera angles> "The Matrix: Flight of Neo, Australias first FLYING roller coaster!" <focus camera on the expressions of a group of riders> "Only at Warner Bros. Movie World"

one word: LOL. no offence or anything Edited November 2, 2007 by PixelPushed

[sonic123488]

"In 2003, people asked, 'what is the Matrix?' In 2009, experience it for yourself" <Cut to footage of the ride in action with plenty of cool camera angles> " 'The Matrix: Flight of Neo', Australias first FLYING roller coaster!" <focus camera on the expressions of a group of riders> "Only at Warner Bros. Movie World" <Cut to a screen showing the WBMW logo in a Matrix graphical style>

Well I like the idea but the matrix is old now, what about theming it around something new,like(I'm not being serious here) a Get smart flyer. Edited November 2, 2007 by sonic123488

[ILUV SUPERMAN ESCAPE]

What I think they should do is build a Flying Coaster to tie in with the Release of Iron Man, something big silver and looping.

[sonic123488]

What I think they should do is build a Flying Coaster to tie in with the Release of Iron Man, something big silver and looping.

Iron Man Flight! Edited November 2, 2007 by sonic123488

[ILUV SUPERMAN ESCAPE]

Iron Man Flight!

IRONMAN MEGACOASTER Edited November 3, 2007 by ILUV SUPERMAN ESCAPE

[Churros]

Movieworld really missed two opportunities to install a flying coaster with their two biggest properties associated with flying. The first, naturally, is Superman. But they did a great job with Superman Escape so I'm not complaining. The second, is Batwing. They really could have created a well themed flying coaster associated with that with a good link to the current series of Batman movies. Even so, if they were to install a flying coaster in the next couple of years I think Harry Potter is out of the question due to reasons already addressed. I think Movieworld has already done the Matrix so I wouldn't anticipate them bringing that back, but I like your idea Gazza. I can't help you with future themes, but I think the best idea for Movieworld is to look at a range of movies, not just WB properties. If they are able to do so of course.

[sonic123488]

Well they could still make an addition to the Batman area, based on "The Dark Night" batman movie coming next year, but why a flying coaster, why not a stand up coaster like riddlers revenge at Six Flags Magic mountain, with a cost of about $20 milionAUD(inflation adjusted) it could be a serious option. It could be called the "Jokers's Coaster" Have a look at the one at Six Flags keeping in mind that the cost was for the the current World Tallest and fastest stand up coaster. http://www.rcdb.com/id470.htm

[Gazza]

but why a flying coaster, why not a stand up coaster like riddlers revenge at Six Flags Magic mountain

Why a flying coaster?....because IMO flying coasters are the superior ride, are a far more marketable experience, more comfortable, more enjoyable, and just way cooler. Stand up coasters are alright, but it only feels a little bit different to a normal coaster, just a higher centre of gravity for the riders. Stand up coasters aren't really suited to inversion fest's like Riddlers actually, the riding position is better suited to lots of twists and turns, like on Georgia Scorcher. One thing I might point out, Iron man is a Marvel character, not DC like Batman and Superman, If there is an exclusivity deal that MW holds with DC then an Iron Man ride might be out of the question...and If they could somehow use Marvel characters, I would build a Spiderman ride in preference anyway given Spidermans' greater popularity.

[sonic123488]

One thing I might point out, Iron man is a Marvel character, not DC like Batman and Superman, If there is an exclusivity deal that MW holds with DC then an Iron Man ride might be out of the question...and If they could somehow use Marvel characters, I would build a Spiderman ride in preference anyway given Spidermans' greater popularity.

Then why do they advertise the Iron Man movie on the big screen at movie world? also, if we were going to build a flying coaster I'd prefer it to look like Air, because when you look at the pictures the theming looks really good, even better would be theming like that of Nemesis Here's the link for Air http://www.rcdb.com/m/id1458.htm And here's the link for Nemesis(Please note this is not a flying coaster ,but the theming looks really good!) http://www.rcdb.com/m/id776.htm

[Gazza]

^What theming does air have?

[sonic123488]

^What theming does air have?

What I mean by theming on the air is stuff like going over landscapes, and pedestrians, It just looks really cool to be able to fly over peoples heads(Like in Some parts of Superman, it's also cool when you watch people flying over your head. I guess it's not theming it's really building up the need to go on it.

[Gazza]

^That doesn't count as theming, theming is:

The organization and presentation of the guest experience around a unifying idea or theme, often a fantasy theme, to give guests the illusion of being in a place and time other than “the here and now”; most often used in connection with theme parks and theme restaurants

What you are talking about is landscaping, and landscaping is:

A general term used for the means by which, where appropriate, development is made to fit visually into its surroundings by use of space and control of siting and layout and use of trees, shrubs or grass (soft landscaping) and/or fences, walls or paving (hard landscaping).

I think its a given a flying coaster would be set up like this if one were built, MW has good viewing areas for it's rides and they do a good job at making things look nice. One thing to be careful of is not making the flying coaster have too many sections close to the ground, or all it becomes is just a whole lot of watching grass whiz by at high speed. It is far cooler to be a bit higher up, to really give the feeling of being in flight. One feature I think that would be nice would be ponds below parts of the ride, so you can look down at your reflection, in effect its like a mirror which creates a feeling of greater space, making it feel like you are higher than you really are.

[Rollercoaster13]

^That doesn't count as theming, theming is: What you are talking about is landscaping, and landscaping is: I think its a given a flying coaster would be set up like this if one were built, MW has good viewing areas for it's rides and they do a good job at making things look nice. One thing to be careful of is not making the flying coaster have too many sections close to the ground, or all it becomes is just a whole lot of watching grass whiz by at high speed. It is far cooler to be a bit higher up, to really give the feeling of being in flight. One feature I think that would be nice would be ponds below parts of the ride, so you can look down at your reflection, in effect its like a mirror which creates a feeling of greater space, making it feel like you are higher than you really are.

zing

[sonic123488]

^That doesn't count as theming, theming is: What you are talking about is landscaping, and landscaping is: I think its a given a flying coaster would be set up like this if one were built, MW has good viewing areas for it's rides and they do a good job at making things look nice. One thing to be careful of is not making the flying coaster have too many sections close to the ground, or all it becomes is just a whole lot of watching grass whiz by at high speed. It is far cooler to be a bit higher up, to really give the feeling of being in flight. One feature I think that would be nice would be ponds below parts of the ride, so you can look down at your reflection, in effect its like a mirror which creates a feeling of greater space, making it feel like you are higher than you really are.

Well, yeh that's what I meant. The reason I don't like the Tatsu any more is because of the look, It just looks like a bunch of metal in the air, If you have water or grass it gives you a much more a feeling of a moulding in with the landscape feel, that's what I like about the Air. Edited November 3, 2007 by sonic123488