Oh, that's also a problem I forget to mention, it takes like four+ hours to switch back. I really think they'll keep the system just because they can keep Fastpass running like 10 more minutes. Then I'd guess they get lazy and not turn it back.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Management about to change Expedition Everest
- Thread starter EpcotServo
- Start date
Lynx04
New Member
The main reason they don't run five trains regularly is because it increase the ware on more vehicles. It is more cost effective to run the least amount of trains as possible, of course the trade off is capacity. Adding another train to everest will probably increase the capacity by and addition 15 to 20 percent at least. Of course on occasions, trains may get backed up on the brake blocks, but that already happens with a 4 train configuration
Surely it`s not a surprise that a big, well funded and publicised E Ride is popular to management? Especially in a park like DAK?
Regarding Intamin, WDI like to `customise` off the shelf attractions themselves; this was a big problem in the aftermath of the Cal Soarin' incident. Intamin declared the software had been rewritten so much it was no longer one of their products.
Here`s a radical idea; build a few more D (or E!) Rides in the park as appealing as E:E.
Regarding Intamin, WDI like to `customise` off the shelf attractions themselves; this was a big problem in the aftermath of the Cal Soarin' incident. Intamin declared the software had been rewritten so much it was no longer one of their products.
Here`s a radical idea; build a few more D (or E!) Rides in the park as appealing as E:E.
GenerationX
Well-Known Member
So, the ride will be a little longer and will have more potential to backup at the end, but there will be a 15% increase in guest capacity? Sounds like a good trade to me.
mousermerf
Account Suspended
I think the potential problems are being blown out of proportion.
The risk of cascade exists at any multi-vehicle attraction really, save for perhaps simulators.
Test Track running all vehicles is really at risk, but during peak periods they try to operate the 27 vehicles. Many attractions run in very slim margins. Energy even loads 500 guests in under 3 minutes.
I can suggest from experience that the CMs are looking at more work and aren't happy about that. They might need to work harder to get vehicles unloaded rather then sitting passively on the unload station doing a safety watch - rather they'd have to participate in unloading guests quickly. Several attractions add "unload" positions for peak periods to get guests out of vehicles quickly - again, knowing that they're rsking a cascade.
So, acting like this problem is new to me implies rather that the CMs are comfortable with the operation and rejecting any change - something very typical.
The risk of cascade exists at any multi-vehicle attraction really, save for perhaps simulators.
Test Track running all vehicles is really at risk, but during peak periods they try to operate the 27 vehicles. Many attractions run in very slim margins. Energy even loads 500 guests in under 3 minutes.
I can suggest from experience that the CMs are looking at more work and aren't happy about that. They might need to work harder to get vehicles unloaded rather then sitting passively on the unload station doing a safety watch - rather they'd have to participate in unloading guests quickly. Several attractions add "unload" positions for peak periods to get guests out of vehicles quickly - again, knowing that they're rsking a cascade.
So, acting like this problem is new to me implies rather that the CMs are comfortable with the operation and rejecting any change - something very typical.
mkepcotmgmak
Well-Known Member
I agree with a lot of posts on here - BUT... at least Disney is spending money to try to allow more people to enjoy this attraction... 
Rob562
Well-Known Member
Well.... Not necessarily. Though I haven't ridden Everest yet (2 more months!), I've gotten a decent feel for the operations from a few videos I've seen online. (And used my knowledge of how coaster systems work in general).
The key factor in running the attraction at maximum capacity isn't necessarily less just because riders at the load platform have to wait for a train to come in from unload. But rather it's whether the train is loaded and locked and then has to wait for a clear signal in order to dispatch.
If the CMs can get a train loaded with passengers, locked, and they're still waiting for the computer to give a clear signal to dispatch, then they're running the attraction at the highest possible capacity. The more consistently they can get the trains loaded and ready before the first possible moment for dispatch, the higher the hourly capacity regardless of whether or not an empty train was available right away. But if the train is loaded and the earliest-posisble-dispatch point has passed, then the capacity is lowered. I believe that if you (consistently) see a train near the top of the main lift hill as another train is exiting out the front of the mountain, the ride is running at maximum capacity.
I'll use my favorite coaster (Superman Ride of Steel here at Six Flags new England) as a simpler example. Its maximum capacity is two trains. Let's say that Train 1 has just been dispatched onto the track, and Train 2 is pulling back into the station to be unloaded and then loaded. No matter how fast they load Train 2, the computer won't allow it to be dispatched until Train 1 has reached a specific point on the track near the end of the ride.
So if the employees can get Train 2 loaded quickly, and are then standing there waiting to push the Dispatch button the moment the computer gives the all-clear, they're running it at the maximum throughput for that coaster.
But if unloading and loading are slow, Train 1 will finish the ride and come in and stop on the brake run. It will then sit there and wait until Train 2 has finally left the station. (the term for this is "stacking" the trains, and it happens more often than not on Superman) Every minute that Train 1 sits on the brake run is wasted time, and detracts from the hourly capacity.
-Rob
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
For this to work there needs to be a new break area added. The break areas are as follows:
1. Load
2. Broken Track before backwards scene
3. Shadow Room before going forward for big drop
4. Right before you see Yeti
5. Right after you see Yeti
6. Unload
with 5 trains, you will almost always stop right before you see the Yeti, Unless they can add some sort of show element here to scare you further, this is a horrible decision that disrupts the pacing of the ride.
This will not increase guest capacity by 15% by any means. Consider the following: The ride is 3 minutes long, and each train has a capacity of 32 per train. I know the ride is longer than 3 minutes when you consider load and unload, but for the purposes of this calculation, disregard that. With a 3 minute ride, each train can go through the ride 20 times in an hour. With a 4 minute ride, they can go through the ride 15 times per hour.
3 Minute ride: 32 (train capacity) x 4 (total trains) x 20 (trips per train per hour) = 2560
4 Minute ride: 32 (train capacity) x 5 (total trains) x 15 (trips per train per hour) = 2400
The break even point for 5 trains to run at the same hourly capacity as 4 trains is a 3 minute and 45 second ride. Does anyone see this happening? Does anyone actually have the real ride #s for average load and unload times?
1. Load
2. Broken Track before backwards scene
3. Shadow Room before going forward for big drop
4. Right before you see Yeti
5. Right after you see Yeti
6. Unload
with 5 trains, you will almost always stop right before you see the Yeti, Unless they can add some sort of show element here to scare you further, this is a horrible decision that disrupts the pacing of the ride.
This will not increase guest capacity by 15% by any means. Consider the following: The ride is 3 minutes long, and each train has a capacity of 32 per train. I know the ride is longer than 3 minutes when you consider load and unload, but for the purposes of this calculation, disregard that. With a 3 minute ride, each train can go through the ride 20 times in an hour. With a 4 minute ride, they can go through the ride 15 times per hour.
3 Minute ride: 32 (train capacity) x 4 (total trains) x 20 (trips per train per hour) = 2560
4 Minute ride: 32 (train capacity) x 5 (total trains) x 15 (trips per train per hour) = 2400
The break even point for 5 trains to run at the same hourly capacity as 4 trains is a 3 minute and 45 second ride. Does anyone see this happening? Does anyone actually have the real ride #s for average load and unload times?
KZevchik
New Member
So here is my question:
Was the original ride design and programming made for 5 trains then scaled to 4 for whatever reason?
or
Was it designed for 4, but they figured with enough break points they can throw an additional train on the track?
Originally it was posted that E:E was only designed/programmed as a 4 train ride. I have been out of the loop for a while with keeping up with my ride designers, but as I understand it, E:E was an American Bridge off the shelf ride with minor adjustments. Does anyone know of a sister ride anywhere else?
Was the original ride design and programming made for 5 trains then scaled to 4 for whatever reason?
or
Was it designed for 4, but they figured with enough break points they can throw an additional train on the track?
Originally it was posted that E:E was only designed/programmed as a 4 train ride. I have been out of the loop for a while with keeping up with my ride designers, but as I understand it, E:E was an American Bridge off the shelf ride with minor adjustments. Does anyone know of a sister ride anywhere else?
DisneyLover10
New Member
My brother and I went on the single riders line and we were both on the same trains every single time (just in different places) only 2/6 times (in a row) did we sit together. :sohappy: I still have that memory of riding EE 6 times in a row and feeling like I just walked off of Mission:SPACE.
Lee
Adventurer
Pretty much the latter. 4 is optimum, 5 can be done with some loss of show quality. As I understand, 5 was always meant to be a VERY uncommon occurrance.
There is no sister ride.
Everest it an entirely custom design from WDI and Vekoma.
DisneyDellsDude
New Member
bob0012
Member
There are more then 5 blocks on this ride.
1. Load station
2. Approach and 1st lift
3. Ride around to and 2nd lift
4. Top of mountain and broken track stop
5. Backwards portion and shadow room
6. Drop and helix (block brakes after)
7. Yeti Room (block brakes after)
8. Wait station outside unload
9. Unload station
Block 1 is to short to really count for spacing purposes, lift would always stop if that was counted on.
Blocks 4,5,6 can be tricky because the spacing needed for the switch tracks.
5 trains can work easly, no need to slow lifts. One train in load, one in unload, on on lift, one on top, and one in drop and helix area. The only place it would really slow down the ride is you might have to wait at the wait station to pull into unload. But at the same time the load station would get a train sooner speeding up the load process so they are hopefully ready by the time the ride systen gives them the ok to dispatch.
bob0012
Member
A good ride system doesn't have the number of trains actually programed into it. It just operates with however many are on the track. The number that is hard coded is the maximum number of trains, and that's the number of blocks - 1. That number isn't alaways the best way to run it (somtimes it is) but it is the max you can run with a block system.
AEfx
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Discussion is great, that is why we are here, but this thread is simply chock full of armchair imagineering making extremely specific claims about the implications of this.
I trust that Disney isn't going to add a 5th car to an attraction that cannot handle it. I may not trust in their creative decisions universally, but with very few exceptions their reputation is exemplary in this department and before people start sounding alarms that the track will fall out from under, or that it just won't work, I think they need to give it a chance in action.
I simply don't think that people are coming up with reasons it won't work that someone at Disney hadn't already thought of and/or dealt with. I give them a little more credit than that.
AEfx
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Let's give them a little credit. This is not Journey into Imagination. If it doesn't work, they will just switch back the next day. If it does work, the lines will move faster. I give Disney credit for trying something new to reduce wait times.
sknydave
Active Member
Thanks!
LudwigVonDrake
Well-Known Member
Is this info even official? :shrug: