Orlando, Monday, 13 October 2025.
IAAPA Expo in Orlando showcased coordinated unveilings that signal where procurement and operations should focus for 2025. Manufacturers pushed modular attraction systems to shorten installation timelines, while media-driven integrations—most visibly drone spectacles (including a 1,571‑drone aerial image record with Disneyland Paris)—are increasingly stitched into dark rides and night shows. Suppliers highlighted incremental safety upgrades (new restraint designs and flume platforms), waterpark products aimed at throughput and OPEX gains, and platform-level guest-commerce enhancements such as ticketing and access interoperability. Strategic partnerships and confirmed 2025 delivery pipelines were prominent, but so were implied supply‑chain timing risks that could affect scheduled openings. For retail and operator buyers, the Expo frames near-term choices: prioritize modular, interoperable tech to reduce capex/time-to-market; evaluate media/drone IP tie‑ins for guest appeal and OPEX impact; and factor vendor lead times into procurement windows to avoid launch delays.
Chosen case: Vekoma’s ‘Siren’s Curse’ and the tilt‑coaster approach
Vekoma used its IAAPA Expo briefing to position a single installation as emblematic of two engineering trends: high‑theming density married to compact, innovative ride mechanics. The company confirmed a partnership to reveal a new rollercoaster — including a project named Siren’s Curse to launch at Vidanta World in Nuevo Vallarta and a Tilt Coaster slated for Cedar Point — as part of a slate of 2025 openings that Vekoma outlined at the show [1]. These announcements highlight Vekoma’s tactical use of non‑conventional elements (a tilt mechanism, per the Tilt Coaster designation) to create show moments within constrained footprints while still marketing ‘‘highly‑themed’’ guest experiences [1]. The public materials make clear Vekoma is optimizing for both narrative setpieces and operator site constraints, an approach that shifts some engineering complexity from track length to vehicle and mechanism design [1].
Technical anatomy: what a Tilt Coaster implies for track, vehicle and show integration
A Tilt Coaster concept combines a rotating or pivoting track/vehicle interface with conventional rail dynamics to produce a controlled change in ride axis that can serve as a storytelling beat; Vekoma’s announcement frames the new coaster as delivering ‘‘innovative ride elements’’ within sub‑kilometre track profiles (the report cites a 904 m / 2,966 ft track example) [1]. That configuration implies three engineering consequences: (1) a need for localized actuation and locking systems at the tilt element to safely transfer dynamic loads between ride orientations; (2) reinforced vehicle chassis and interface hardware to tolerate combined bending and torsional loads during tilt transitions; and (3) tighter integration between the ride control system and show control to choreograph the tilt as a timed narrative moment rather than a purely kinetic event. Vekoma’s materials reference the track length and the tilt concept directly, which supports interpreting the element as an engineered show node rather than a simple g‑force feature [1].
At IAAPA the prominence of media integrations was visible in multiple vendor announcements; Dronisos used the platform to underline its ongoing, multi‑year work with Disneyland Paris — including a record aerial image composed of 1,571 drones and prior productions that reached 500‑drone choreographies — demonstrating how large‑scale drone fleets are now being delivered as turnkey elements for night spectaculars and IP‑driven shows [2]. Those milestones illustrate two practical effects for attraction design: drone fleets become an external, programmable stage that must be treated as an integrated show subsystem (airspace choreography, show control timing, and IP‑synchronised projection content), and the operational model moves toward repeated deployment cycles rather than a one‑off installation. Dronisos’ disclosures show that drone systems are evolving from experimental novelties into repeatable, record‑scale show components with established delivery pipelines [2].
Water‑and‑flume engineering: Reverchon’s next‑generation Flume and restraint advances
Reverchon used its IAAPA presence to announce a ‘‘new generation Flume ride’’ and an updated individual safety restraint system intended to be retrofittable to earlier cars, signalling incremental safety and throughput priorities among water‑ride vendors [5]. The company described restraints that aim for greater rider fit flexibility while remaining adaptable to prior ride models, and it highlighted the Flume platform as a distinct new product line at the Expo, which points to engineering work on boat geometry, station loading ergonomics and water‑flow management to support both safety and operational efficiency [5]. These product claims imply engineering trade‑offs: manufacturers are seeking restraint solutions that reduce cycle‑time penalties from slow rider loading while meeting evolving safety expectations — a balance Reverchon explicitly framed as an R&D focus at IAAPA [5].
Two exhibitors exemplify how modular thinking is being applied to media attractions. Brogent showcased s‑Ride, a compact flying‑theatre derivative pitched as a budget‑friendly option that enables operators of different sizes to host a premium flying theatre experience — a productisation and modularisation of ride footprint and seating orientation that shortens capital barriers to entry [3]. Triotech announced a large‑scale media/interactive dark‑ride project developed with Saudi partner Seven and emphasised turnkey, repeatable designs intended to open at multiple locations, which manifests modular content and hardware architectures suited for multi‑site deployments [4]. Both announcements point to an industry preference for product lines and configurable modules (ride cabin types, standardized media rigs, and repeatable show packages) that reduce bespoke engineering per site and therefore compress delivery timelines [3][4].
Procurement, scheduling and implied supply‑chain timing risks
Across these vendor disclosures the practical implication for buyers is consistent: many suppliers are promoting configurable, near‑productised systems intended to shorten time‑to‑install, but that same emphasis on concentrated 2025 delivery pipelines increases the risk of supply‑chain bottlenecks for operators targeting openings the same year. Vekoma published a list of multiple 2025 openings alongside new product teasers, Triotech positioned multi‑site rollouts, Brogent invited operators to consider a lower‑cost flying‑theatre path, and Reverchon signalled retrofit pathways for restraints — a cluster of delivery commitments that concentrates workload into a narrow calendar window [1][4][3][5]. Given those overlapping commitments from major suppliers, operators should explicitly evaluate vendor lead‑times and the modularity claims in supplier documentation when creating procurement windows [1][4][3][5].
Why engineering choices matter for OPEX and guest experience
The technical choices on display — tilt mechanisms that convert footprint into narratively useful motion, drone fleets deployed as repeatable show subsystems, modular flying‑theatre cabins, and retrofit restraint kits — all change operating economics in measurable ways. Modular, repeatable systems reduce bespoke maintenance overhead and spare‑parts complexity, while media/drones introduce recurring operational costs (skilled operators, regulatory compliance for aerial systems, and periodic certification) that must be budgeted against their guest‑appeal uplift; Dronisos’ emphasis on repeated, large‑fleet shows exemplifies a model where spectacle drives ongoing operational planning rather than a one‑time capex event [2][3][5][4]. These trade‑offs mirror the industry discussions at IAAPA about aligning guest behaviour, experience design and operational models to new technology choices [6].
Uncertainties and open questions for buyers
Several points remain uncertain from the public releases: manufacturers report product concepts and delivery intentions but often with limited technical disclosure about integration lifecycles, parts‑availability schedules, or site‑specific civil works timelines — details that materially affect whether a 2025 target is realistic [alert! ‘manufacturer announcements list openings and products but do not publish full supply‑chain or site‑specific civil engineering schedules in the cited materials’] [1][3][4][5]. Buyers should therefore require detailed delivery roadmaps, spare‑parts agreements and clear scope definitions in procurement contracts to de‑risk launch timing [1][3][4][5].
Bronnen