New Waterslide Concept

[Mikey]

Once again, this is for indoor water parks with limited vertical space. Yes, the facilities needed to build the starter tower are quite affordable. However, It gets very expensive when you have to modify roof structures to accommodate new slides. It gets very expensive very quickly, it would not take much for this design to be considered. This design requires minimal vertical space, and you can adapt the destination slides to fit into any where you needed to.

The mechanics for this ride are quite simple, using off the shelf parts and materials. The most expensive part of the design is the fiberglass and steel support structure for the base. At about $100,000 its quite reasonable. You should get some quotes from ride manufactures to see how much a 300 foot slide is these days.

[gouldy]

tackle for me then, the problem with the rotating part itself. Look at it. When rotated to take you to the top slide, you have a very unfocomfortable looking bump to navigate. Consider now the rotating section s in position at one of the bottom slides. Coming down the slide with enough speed to make it UP the bump for the top slide, would surely have you hitting your face off the top of the slide in the down position?

The idea doesn't work and it IS pointless, anywhere that could accomodate this, could certainly just accomodate three slides. The only place where more room is needed is at the top and with clever design of the platfrom at the top you could still just have one small platfrom the same size of one for a single slide.

I genuinely can't see a reason for this slide economically or otherwise.

[Mikey]

There is no up position except in the two destination slide version. (Even then, its only up in transition) I can see where that shows in the video, but in the actual design its all down hill. The curvature is adjusted based on the design. There are some pretty steep drops on water slides, I don't for see the drop becoming a problem, but it is a concern.

I can agree with your economic argument, however the nature of its thrill factor and uniqueness, for a small park, is greatly warranted. Indoor water parks are very competitive, and you want something that no one else has. Uniqueness cost money.

When the idea becomes a reality, I will invite you out to experience it.

[gouldy]

I still kind of fail to see why this is unique.

Other than not really knowing which slide you're going into, what's the difference between this and, again, just three slides? And really, how different are the slides going to be? The left one will have a left helix, the middle will be a slightly steeper drop and the right one will have a right helix? I'm not really a massive fan of water parks, but really, what is this for? I just don't get why there would be any particular draw or interest with this? Just simply three slides would interest me more.

Yeah, you haven't explained to me why the thrill is increased, and what unique experience this will bring to a park. Tornados have the very unique experience of sliding back and forth up to nearly 90* in a huge funnel...toilet bowl slides have the unique experience of blazing around in circles until your momentum drops, at which point you'll get to fall through a hole in the bowl, and trapdoor slides add tons of anticipation and uncertainty...but this does what, sends you into a slide that's the same as every other slide in the world at random? Is that worth taking rider choice away? Is it worth reducing capacity from the 3 slides? Indoor parks looking to modify their roof structures seems like a tiny demographic to me either way.

I just don't see much thought having been put into this idea, and it *seems* answers to questions are being made up on the spot.

[Mikey]

Ether you see it or you don't. I am not going to stand here and defend my product from the endless amount of rhetorical, inaccurate and prejudice questions from you guys. While this design is simple in its conception and could be classified as a one trick wonder. It is what it is, take it as you will. This attraction was designed in 2008, and was going to be installed at a new indoor water park in north eastern Idaho before the project was scrapped due to the economic decline. Since the exclusivity contract expired and has not been renewed, we can now bring this product to the general marketplace. I am confident that another buyer will come along for it at some point.

Their questions are valid, especially considering the quality of that demo video.

It's no surprise that all the engineers on here seem to think this would be a waste of money; it's essentially one slide for the price of three (perhaps two), and the added mechanical complexity provides little benefit.

[gouldy]

Originally posted by Mikey

I am not going to stand here and defend my product from the endless amount of rhetorical, inaccurate and prejudice questions from you guys.

You stand while you use your computer?

Anyway, the upshot of all this for me is thus; a lot of us on here would like to have something that we designed and developed and are able to have produced for the amusement industry, but we don't. The fact of the matter is, most of us wouldn't be able to come up with something as good as this, but even so, in the real world I don't see the market for this. I hope for your sake that you prove me wrong, but mate, I honestly don't see it.

In my job I know what it is to design, from scratch, a machine capable of meeting the requirements of a customer. But this is merely for fork lift battery handling solutions and special purpose machinery. I wish with all my heart that I was in a position where I was attempting to launch something like this to the amusement industry, so all of the best luck to you with your endeavours. But as an objective and impartial external viewer, I can't just say that this looks amazing when I feel that there is holes in design.

But yeah, good luck with it, because it's probably the closest any of us will ever come to actually having something we were behind, being produced in the amusement industry!

[hyyyper]

^I'm not really seeing any holes in the design itself. I'm sure that it would actually function when build.

But I still fail to see why a waterpark would install it. Say that you put the revolver halfway a 300ft slide. The cost would be that of 600ft of slide plus the cost of the revolver, and since there's only one launch tube, the capacity will be same as with just one slide.
Now, the only reason why the park wouldn't double the capacity for less $$, is probably the reason for Six Flags to build Kingda Ka.

And remember Mikey, there are no bad questions, only bad answers [:)]

I still say many of your answers are fabricated, and you've avoided many of our questions. There's no reason for us to be prejudiced...many of us just don't see the concept being that good of quality in originality and functionality. As hyyyper said, yes it'll work, no we don't see (or agree with) the reasoning.

[Mikey]

I cannot justify answering your technical questions in depth and risk revealing some of the proprietary technical details of the device. Most of the questions asked would have been answered with a better 3D model of the original design for the J2 project. My mistake was probably releasing the concept 3D publicly before a pretty graphic version of the device could be made.

They to mocked Disney for some of his designs, last I checked they buried him in a casket full of hundred dollar bills. Aside from the various manufacture think tanks, my company runs the only self funded development lab. Our clients are our investors, we work off of what ever funds we are given. We can't always release some far fetched $100M dream idea, its just not palatable to parks these days.

I encourage you all to pursue your dreams, and perhaps one day you to will understand the challenges behind designing, marketing, and building the theme park innovations of tomorrow.

[hyyyper]

^because everything Walt drew had mouse-ears on it, but for the rest the capacity was good.

[Mikey]

If we setup two revolver slides in tandem with two extension slides, we could quadruple the capacity beyond any current four slide setup.

2 revolver and 2 extension? I don't understand that setup. Can you clarify what you mean and how it will quadruple the capacity of any other 4 slide setup?

Just because you have an idea, doesn't mean you are or will be on the level of Disney...there are so many more factors contributing to his success than I'm sure even you know. I get your point, but I'm pretty sure he thought his ideas through more thoroughly than this one that seems to have taken 10 minutes to think of and an additional 30 mins to model and animate. I'm not sure how you can get a client in this market that seems pretty saturated with established waterslide design companies, especially with an idea like this, but congratulations for doing so.

[Mikey]

I am working on a flash animation right now to show you how it works from a capacity stand point.

Originally posted by Mikey

The three alternate safety mechanisms built into the system are still a trade secret.

the trade secret is an elastic band attached to a paper clip thats been bent into the shape of a whale thats shoved up a hamsters ass who is holding onto a switch in pure pain

[gouldy]

^ do you own the patents on that Gaz?

^^Must be English humor...

[Mikey]

So that's why Gazag was let go from his job at Drayton Manor.

[gouldy]

Originally posted by dcs221

^^Must be English humor...

He is from a dark hole that I wouldn't consider to be England, even though it is only 12 miles up the road from me

He lives in a place called Brownhills... what more do I need to say about this place? Brown... hills... read into that what you will

If he says anything about Wolverhampton, I'll slap him!

[Coasterkidmwm]

Originally posted by gouldy

If he says anything about Wolverhampton, I'll slap him!

Wolverhampton is a terrible name with a terrible climate. It's also boring.

Ta-daaa!

But anyways... Give me an example of an indoor waterpark THAT short on vertical space. If they can build one slide, they can build three.

I don't think it's a bad idea at all really. It's just in it's early designing stages. I'm sure once it's better planned, or at least better shown visually, maybe people will understand it more? I'm not saying it's the best, most exciting idea ever, but I can see it being done for sure.

[gouldy]

Originally posted by Coasterkidmwm

Originally posted by gouldy

If he says anything about Wolverhampton, I'll slap him!

Wolverhampton is a terrible name with a terrible climate. It's also boring.

Ta-daaa!

Name me a city on the face of the earth that has a better name than Wolverhampton? How well does it play into the hands of sports teams!?

But, even without ever actual having seen anything about the city, you've managed to accurately identify the fact that it's boring

Originally posted by gouldy


If he says anything about Wolverhampton, I'll slap him!

i dont need to say anything about wolverhampton. anyone whos been there knows where not to go in future