Will we ever see a new rapids ride in Australia?

[Jdude95]

I don't see a rapids ride getting built anytime soon but I definitely see DW getting another wet ride. There will be many more other wet rides built in Australia before we see another rapids installation.

Edited June 14, 2020 by Jdude95

[Naazon]

18 hours ago, Brad2912 said:

1. There 100% is a need for more family water rides in our parks imo, especially at DW.

2. Money controls the media. You make the differences between what you are now building and TRRR, that this is manufactured by a leading international company and not an in-house job, what safety features are included. 
 

whilst I would envisage it happening medium term, the only reason not to do it is fear, and that’s never been a good emotion to heard successful decisions on...

With the right marketing / media representation Dreamworld could put a positive spin on the story showing the "safety innovations" the new ride has ect ect. If you get (pay) the media to spin the story in a positive light it will be generally well accepted. After announcement, it will be forgotten about until its built. Once its built it will be out of the media cycle after 1-2 weeks, when a Kardashian kills someone else or a federal election is called and Mr Murdoch wants to control the outcome again.

[Zac Beckwith]

7 minutes ago, Naazon said:

With the right marketing / media representation Dreamworld could put a positive spin on the story showing the "safety innovations" the new ride has ect ect. If you get (pay) the media to spin the story in a positive light it will be generally well accepted. After announcement, it will be forgotten about until its built. Once its built it will be out of the media cycle after 1-2 weeks, when a Kardashian kills someone else or a federal election is called and Mr Murdoch wants to control the outcome again.

This is exactly what i was thinking, the GP will believe anything they see on the news, and the enthusiasts actually know what went wrong so they know that it is perfectly safe to ride

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

regardless of media, the public memory will still remember the incident. Dreamworld's plans to erect some sort of plaque will also ensure that.

No matter how much positive spin you put on something, people will still remember it - the once bitten, twice shy mentality. We know modern rapids rides are far safer, but we can never say 'perfectly safe'

[joz]

If you're DW, you probably don't want to remind people of that time 4 people died. I think if they did a rapids ride, after a few years it would be established in its own right, and the whole connection would be forgotten. There are lots of rides (even water rides) DW could build though, that doesn't instantly remind the public of what happened, so why bother with a rapids ride? Maybe in 50 years when what happened at the park 50 years ago doesn't matter they could if they wanted to; Same as Luna Park could totally build a ghost train these days, and no one would bat an eyelid.

Edited June 15, 2020 by joz

[rappa]

I'd say it's Sea World that would be an ideal park for a Rapids anyway

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

^not a bad idea at all. I reckon when they eventually come to redesign the front end, the lake could finally be resumed, with an elaborate rapids filling out the Atlantis area nicely, utilising much of the lake while still opening some parts up to other development - such as retail, event space or parade route should they desire. That front section is one of the worst pinch points in the entire park - and potentially, if they resumed the lake they could run a path down the Sea World Drive side to connect the park together and make it more of a loop than a one-way street...

[elemist]

On 14/06/2020 at 10:59 AM, Brad2912 said:

1. There 100% is a need for more family water rides in our parks imo, especially at DW.

2. Money controls the media. You make the differences between what you are now building and TRRR, that this is manufactured by a leading international company and not an in-house job, what safety features are included. 
 

whilst I would envisage it happening medium term, the only reason not to do it is fear, and that’s never been a good emotion to heard successful decisions on...

Don't disagree with the need for more family water rides. More that there's other types of family water rides that are not of the rapids varieties that could be built.

Money can control the spin on it, and i'm sure for the most part it would be a few stories in the first week when it was announced, and for a couple of weeks when it opened before it went away. The thing is why would a park do it to themselves though - there's just no need. It's not like its something essential that they just have to have to succeed, or that there's no other ride options available.

On 15/06/2020 at 5:37 AM, Naazon said:

With the right marketing / media representation Dreamworld could put a positive spin on the story showing the "safety innovations" the new ride has ect ect. If you get (pay) the media to spin the story in a positive light it will be generally well accepted. After announcement, it will be forgotten about until its built. Once its built it will be out of the media cycle after 1-2 weeks, when a Kardashian kills someone else or a federal election is called and Mr Murdoch wants to control the outcome again.

Honestly they probably could have fixed up the issues with the ride and kept it operating if it was financially viable to do so. There would have been a few weeks of stories and then people will forget. Sure some people will probably not ride it, but they won't avoid the park because of it.

There's been plenty of roller coasters that have caused deaths or injuries that reopened. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

58 minutes ago, elemist said:

There's been plenty of roller coasters that have caused deaths or injuries that reopened. 

how many were homemade copies, not made by or built in china, and had a litany of undocumented and un-assessed modifications?

[elemist]

9 minutes ago, AlexB said:

how many were homemade copies, not made by or built in china, and had a litany of undocumented and un-assessed modifications?

Ultimately - does that matter though? I mean if it was fatal it still clearly had issues. What's to say there's not more?

[Jdude95]

2 hours ago, elemist said:

Ultimately - does that matter though?

The coroner would seem to think so

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

18 minutes ago, Jdude95 said:

The coroner would seem to think so

This fucking virus had me reading that as CORONA, and thinking you spelled it wrong.

3 hours ago, elemist said:

. What's to say there's not more?

The bulldozer.

[Jdude95]

13 minutes ago, AlexB said:

This fucking virus had me reading that as CORONA, and thinking you spelled it wrong.

The Coroner, the shitty superhero who just gives you COVID

[elemist]

1 hour ago, Jdude95 said:

The coroner would seem to think so

In a legal sense - yes it totally matters.

From a public perception thing.. i don't think it does so much. The public cares that someone died or was injured, and that someone screwed up and was held accountable. 

The only reason the ride got demolished was it wasn't financially viable to repair or upgrade to current standards. Due to its age, and the way it was developed and installed it would have cost a fortune to upgrade, so more cost effective to scrap.

Take the Green Lantern accident for example - how close did that come to being a fatality? Do you think the general public even realises? Does it stop anyone riding it now?

Think how many people ride the Smiler every day at Alton Towers? In some ways you could argue permanent injuries like what was suffered on that, are worse from a public opinion aspect than a death. When there's a death, there's some sadness, but the persons no longer around to make a fuss. When people lost limbs, but lived, everything they do becomes a news story. 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

But in both of those examples, nobody DIED.

 

and despite what you might think about death vs dismemberment, most people tend to not like dying.

[elemist]

28 minutes ago, AlexB said:

But in both of those examples, nobody DIED.

2013 - Six Flags Texas - New Texas Giant - 52 Year old fell to her death. Ride still operating today..

2004 - Oakwood Theme Park - Hydro - 16 Year old fell to her death. Ride reopened and operated until 2011, when it was renamed to Drenched, and still appears to be operating today.

How about something similar - 1999 again Six Flags Texas - Roaring River Rapids. Raft flipped and ten injured, one drowned. Still appears to be operating today.

Quote

and despite what you might think about death vs dismemberment, most people tend to not like dying.

I totally agree death is worse than injury. But purely from a PR point of view, i'm not sure it is.

Edited June 16, 2020 by elemist

[ads086]

The way you do it is build a clone. Village gets cooperation from SeaWorld Orlando to build a clone of Infinity Falls at Sea World GC, do a big media effort about it including clips of the overseas model along with behind the scenes clips of this one.

To the general public it appears less risky because another park did it first and the runs are on the board.

A few years after that Dreamworld could build one. I’d recommend they don’t use the same theme or location of TRRR if they decided to.

[rappa]

Pfft Big Thunder Mountain killed someone because the park consciously cut maintenance costs and they stopped bothering to inspect things. Probably one of the most ridden coasters in the world. 
 

Don’t be saying the reason other rides have re opened is because they didn’t kill someone. 
 

PS Big Thunder was also home built in house FWIW