Super 8 Aqua Racer Temporary Closure

[Jamberoo Fan]

"Super 8 Aqua Racer will be closed for intermittent periods from 1 August until mid September due to maintenance and construction activity" - Wet 'n' Wild Water World website. Is it a new ride heading our way or not? Thoughts?...or confirmation about what is happening there? It would fit in appropiately with the 'new rides at the front on the left' trend this year lol

[themeparkgc]

I don't think this should be looked into too much. It looks like it is just for the maintenance for AquaLoop. It does say Aqua Racer will be closed for intermittent periods and that would fit with them doing work on the left two loops which partially overhang the Aqua Racer.

AquaLoop will be closed for maintenance from 8 August to 16 September inclusive and from 19 October to 4 November inclusive.

After noticing this though, is there something really wrong with the AquaLoops? They are closed for 5.5 weeks before being closed again for another 2.5 weeks. 2 months worth of maintenance seems like a lot. The situation is worse with SurfRider. It has been closed since 23 May and isn't expected to reopen until 17 September - more than 4 months of maintenance!

[www worker]

Good thing WWW didn't get them otherwise they would never run. But it is very strange

[qldtaw]

Wet 'N' Wild is a sessional park i wouldn't read into the closures too much. Especially Surfrider... no point running it if the park is not at capacity.

[Gazza]

Especially Surfrider... no point running it if the park is not at capacity.

How do you mean? It's a unique roller coaster that people would enjoy riding anytime. It's not like Mammoth or Aqualoop or Kamikaze where you can shut down one half with no issue since people get the same experience on the other half. It's also good off peak since you stay dry. (This differs to something like Calypso Beach which is too cold for most in winter) it's a bit like saying "No point running the Claw at DW off peak since the park isn't at capacity".

[rappa]

Surfrider whilst very small is just like any other coaster and demands the same maintenance. The attraction is getting on in years and is most likely due for some MAJOR maintenance. That's not to say anything is broke, just that there are periodical preventative inspections and refurbs that must be carried out and they vary in how involved they are. The problem with many rides, like those from Intamin is that most of the parks they are sold into close for nearly half the year. It's easy to do all this maintenance, unfortunately our year round parks still need to do the maintenance so that means rides must close.

[POP]

I hope they dont replace. I like the old normal slides (hello nostalgia) and I'm pissed they closed Terror Canyon. It seems like theyre slowly getting rid of the old "boring" slides for all the new types, which frankly I dont like. They need to put in more traditional slides imo.

[westical]

The attraction is getting on in years and is most likely due for some MAJOR maintenance.

Less than four years old is getting on in years?

[rappa]

Well in terms of "old and busted" and ready to retire no, but in terms of needing thorough maintenance yes. You have to remember Amusement Rides are extremely complex pieces of machinery with sophisticated control an safety systems and thousands of mechanical components all under high stress. Making them as safe as possible takes a lot of work.

[Bmull19]

^ Especially to Australia's safety standards.

[Jobe]

Well in terms of "old and busted" and ready to retire no, but in terms of needing thorough maintenance yes. You have to remember Amusement Rides are extremely complex pieces of machinery with sophisticated control an safety systems and thousands of mechanical components all under high stress. Making them as safe as possible takes a lot of work.

Whilst I agree with you entirely djrappa in regards to Amusment Park rides needing major maintenance to keep them safe, saying that a ride is "getting on in years" when in actual reality it is only 4 years old, is an exaggeration , to say the least. We all agree and know that rides as technical as Surfrider need annual maintenance. I think the point being raised however, is that Surfrider being down for 4 months is a little unusual, especially for a ride that, on the surface, appears to have more downtime than it really should.

[rappa]

Why is this point so hard to grasp? This is my last attempt and then I'm going to leave it, because it's frustrating to watch. I have a car, there is nothing wrong with it, it's far from old but it's a bit over 4 years old now. I now need to replace it's timing belt because 'it's getting on in years' and it's time to do that. That takes longer than the usual annual service my car has been getting for the last 4 years... The concept is no different with an amusement ride. In fact some rides (like cable cars for example) only get downtime every several years. That's all I'm saying.

[Jobe]

Why is this point so hard to grasp? This is my last attempt and then I'm going to leave it, because it's frustrating to watch. I have a car, there is nothing wrong with it, it's far from old but it's a bit over 4 years old now. I now need to replace it's timing belt because 'it's getting on in years' and it's time to do that. That takes longer than the usual annual service my car has been getting for the last 4 years... The concept is no different with an amusement ride. In fact some rides (like cable cars for example) only get downtime every several years. That's all I'm saying.

I am not disagreeing with what you are saying Djrappa. I said as much in my post. I agree with everything you said in regards to annual maintenance of any ride. The point "isnt hard to grasp" as you so eloquently point out. All I WAS saying is that your use of the phrase "getting on in years" is a bit of an exaggeration in this case. Using that phrase evokes the feeling that the ride is nearing its end of life cycle. I really dont think that 4 years life for a ride really qualifies it for a ride that is "getting on in years". Westical obviously came to the same conclusion.Is this to hard to grasp?? What you have said is absolutely true and I am not impinging on your knowledge in these areas. However your choice of phrase to describe this condition , led us to come to the conclusion that we have. It could have been better phrased and your analogy of the your car service is a good one. I am sorry, its frustrating to me when people say something and mean another. There is no need to be snotty about it just because you were questioned on something that you phrased in error.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I don't think he phrased it in error at all. I understood exactly what was said - and my interpretation of it was the same as his. It's not a brand new (less than 12 month old) ride that is incessantly closed for 'maintenance' (aka Aqualoop), its several years old - at a time when a lot of major components reach the end of their recommended life, and require an overhaul. Getting on in years means exactly that - 4 years qualifies as "years" in that phraseology. It's simply that YOUR interpretation of the phrase is different to MY interpretation, or DjRappa's interpretation. You're arguing a moot point at the end of the day - you agree with "everything" he's saying, but don't agree with a phrase he "said". You agree that the ride is at that time in it's life when it needs major maintenance (because thats what he was saying) so there is therefore nothing to argue about, given that the only disagreement you've been whinging over is a simple turn of phrase that you interpret differently - you still agree with his overall statement, as do i, and therefore - SHUT THE BLOODY HELL UP

[Jobe]

I don't think he phrased it in error at all. I understood exactly what was said - and my interpretation of it was the same as his. It's not a brand new (less than 12 month old) ride that is incessantly closed for 'maintenance' (aka Aqualoop), its several years old - at a time when a lot of major components reach the end of their recommended life, and require an overhaul. Getting on in years means exactly that - 4 years qualifies as "years" in that phraseology. It's simply that YOUR interpretation of the phrase is different to MY interpretation, or DjRappa's interpretation. You're arguing a moot point at the end of the day - you agree with "everything" he's saying, but don't agree with a phrase he "said". You agree that the ride is at that time in it's life when it needs major maintenance (because thats what he was saying) so there is therefore nothing to argue about, given that the only disagreement you've been whinging over is a simple turn of phrase that you interpret differently - you still agree with his overall statement, as do i, and therefore - SHUT THE BLOODY HELL UP

Really the pretensions of some people on this board can be interminable, especially if they are questioned!!! AlexB I will NOT " shut the bloody hellup"!!! I have as much right to comment on these boards as you or anyone else does. Lets examine your comments a little further. The argument here is not if what Djrappa said was correct (which it is and I have supported), but rather in what he said and how it could be interpreted.I have said that all along. You are correct that it really IS a matter of interpretation. This is true and I agree. However you deride my interpretation as being wrong because you dont agree with it. However,as I interpreted it differently and so did Westical, and because we had the temerity to voice our opinion, its being ignored or howled down? Unbelievable!! IMHO if something is described to me "as getting on in years" I immediately think of something OLDER than 4 years old. If that phrase was used to describe a car or even a person, I , and I suspect, a lot of other people, would immediately think of a car over 10 years old, or a person in their 40's, but NOT an amusement ride that is only 4 years old. Now of course this is open to intepretation, but I believe that this would be the reasonable opinion of the majority. It doesnt matter however. It was stated and 2 other people took its meaning to be something that the author didnt intend it to be. Are you going to argue that what we interpreted is wrong?? The simple fact of the matter is THAT is the way I have understood its meaning, and that I am not alone in thinking that, and we voiced our intepretation. Of course, now that Djrappa has expounded further, his meaning is made 100% clear.Great!! I was only originally commenting because I was backing Westical in his interpetation, as it mirrored my own, in a respectful manner.All we wanted was to highlight the fact that what was written could be reasonably construed in a different fashion.Is that so wrong? It was in no way deriding what Djrappa said, or arguing with his facts.Now dont get me wrong. I am not saying that what you and Djrappa have intrepreted is wrong. I can see ,after clarifying, where that interpretation has come from. All I want is for you guys to admit the same. The elucidation we had regarding the post could be also REASONABLY be interpreted the way we have seen it.Therefore, it is not a "Moot Point". Failure to recognise this borders on sheer arrogance. I have a healthy respect for people on this board and I try to ensure that shows in my posts, and I expect the same. I didnt mean for this to turn into a slugging match in the slightest but it annoys me when differing opinions or interpetations of posts are met with snide postings and arrogant, sarcastic comments.

[aussienetman]

Happy Friday lads. Have a beer and chillax

[Jobe]

Happy Friday lads. Have a beer and chillax

hehehe. Yeah probably a good suggestion aussienetman. Will do!!

[westical]

The 52 year old Matterhorn Bobsleds is getting on in years. Not Surfrider.

[Jobe]

The 52 year old Matterhorn Bobsleds is getting on in years. Not Surfrider.

Brilliant!!!! Illustrates all we have argued in a nutshell. Now thats what I call a "Moot point"!!!! Edited August 12, 2011 by Jobe

[joz]

Stuff this I'm going to the pub

[Jobe]

Joz I am already there!! I will shout you a beer if you like!!!