News Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge - Historical Construction/Impressions

[SWGalaxysEdge]

Is this land still on course for a June opening? I was hoping it would be delayed a little. We are going to California the week of July 4th and we wanted to go to Disneyland. However, with this land supposedly opening in June I would not be caught dead in the park. It will be far too slammed and people will be shoulder to shoulder.

...Since Bob openly said "June" they are gonna have to open in June, I assume, but it could be June 1...it could be June 30...Speculation based on blackout dates, puts it around the June 21-23 weekend for "something" - preview, soft opening, real thing...

 

[Incomudro]

I think it was to try and put his own stamp on it.

I honestly think that the trilogy should have had the same writer/director (or at least the same writer) for all three. The main thing I blame Kennedy for was not keeping Abrams on for at least writer for TLJ.

I agree, I was kind of shocked when I saw that Abrams wasn't going to direct the follow up to Force Awakens.

 

[DanielBB8]

They advertised Summer 2019. Start of summer is June 21. June 21 is conveniently Friday. June 28 is also conveniently Friday. Either the last 2 weekends of June should be the date they open or they postpone.

 

[MisterPenguin]

They advertised Summer 2019. Start of summer is June 21. June 21 is conveniently Friday. June 28 is also conveniently Friday. Either the last 2 weekends of June should be the date they open or they postpone.

Blackout dates for certain APers begins the 21st. So...

 

[DanielBB8]

Blackout dates for certain APers begins the 21st. So...

They can’t go? Buy a ticket.

 

[MisterPenguin]

They can’t go? Buy a ticket.

My point was that that was a telling clue as to when SWL would open.

 

[DanielBB8]

Among other concrete clues.

 

[Professortango1]

Why do you think? Just to have his own stamp/ signature on it? Or does he really think he was doing what was best for the story?

Johnson loves subverting expectations. Unfortunately, he only subverted them and never replaced them with any new compelling revelations or discoveries or mysteries. I liked his ideas on letting the past die, but he didn't bring anything new to the story other than new Force superpowers. We left The Force Awakens with a million questions and expectations. We left The Last Jedi with unsatisfying answers and very little questions or expectations. Johnson thought he was being clever and changing the direction of Star Wars, but instead all he did was stop the momentum without giving it a new direction or energy.

 

[TROR]

Debating Star Wars is for nerds

Let’s discuss literature, art, and theology like respectable individuals

 

[Stevek]

Debating Disney is for nerds

FTFY

 

[chadwpalm]

Sorry, I've been away for a couple days and I know this is replying to a subject that is several pages back. @TP2000 I'm at-ing you because you replied to this too.

Ride length doesn't matter. If you launch 1,000 people every hour for a one minute ride or 1,000 people every hour for a 5 minute ride, the throughput capacity is exactly the same -- 1,000 pph.
The only difference is that one has five times as many people currently experiencing the ride.

You are correct, but the sentence I bolded is the key. Rate is a ratio, and if you adjust one variable, you HAVE to adjust the other in order to maintain the same rate (equality in the equation). As you state, you cannot maintain throughput when you increase the length of a ride without also increasing the number of people currently experiencing the ride.......in other words, if you double the track length, you have to double the number of vehicles in order to maintain the same rate GIVEN that all things are equal for unloading and loading time. If you didn't increase the number of vehicles, even if the throughput was the same (loading and unloading-wise) you would run out of vehicles (they would all be out experiencing the ride) and there would be gaps which would increase overall wait time.

I think we are in agreement on that point, but that point only counts if both variables in the ratio are adjustable.

My comment that ride time affects capacity was specifically related to the MF attraction. There is a FIXED number of pods and a FIXED number of people in each pod, so that variable is FIXED. Changing the ride length, in this case, DOES affect capacity. In other words, if, for example, there was only one pod that holds 6 people and that variable can't be changed, then if the ride length was one hour you could only throughput 6 people her hour, and if the ride length was 30 minutes you could only throughput 12 people per hour, etc.

We are both correct, but your statement that "ride length doesn't matter" assumes that neither does the number of people experiencing the ride at the same time.

 

[Phroobar]

Is this land still on course for a June opening? I was hoping it would be delayed a little. We are going to California the week of July 4th and we wanted to go to Disneyland. However, with this land supposedly opening in June I would not be caught dead in the park. It will be far too slammed and people will be shoulder to shoulder.

Yes.

 

[mickEblu]

Debating Star Wars is for nerds

Let’s discuss literature, art, and theology like respectable individuals

I read The Canterbury Tales and got an A in Brit Lit my senior year of high school.

 

[TROR]

I read The Canterbury Tales and got an A in Brit Lit my senior year of high school.

Nice. I'm nearing the end of Perelandra, the middle book in C.S. Lewis's Space Trilogy. Also British literature.

 

[Phroobar]

Let's discuss Brandan Sanderson's Mistborn series.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Sorry, I've been away for a couple days and I know this is replying to a subject that is several pages back. @TP2000 I'm at-ing you because you replied to this too.



You are correct, but the sentence I bolded is the key. Rate is a ratio, and if you adjust one variable, you HAVE to adjust the other in order to maintain the same rate (equality in the equation). As you state, you cannot maintain throughput when you increase the length of a ride without also increasing the number of people currently experiencing the ride.......in other words, if you double the track length, you have to double the number of vehicles in order to maintain the same rate GIVEN that all things are equal for unloading and loading time. If you didn't increase the number of vehicles, even if the throughput was the same (loading and unloading-wise) you would run out of vehicles (they would all be out experiencing the ride) and there would be gaps which would increase overall wait time.

I think we are in agreement on that point, but that point only counts if both variables in the ratio are adjustable.

My comment that ride time affects capacity was specifically related to the MF attraction. There is a FIXED number of pods and a FIXED number of people in each pod, so that variable is FIXED. Changing the ride length, in this case, DOES affect capacity. In other words, if, for example, there was only one pod that holds 6 people and that variable can't be changed, then if the ride length was one hour you could only throughput 6 people her hour, and if the ride length was 30 minutes you could only throughput 12 people per hour, etc.

We are both correct, but your statement that "ride length doesn't matter" assumes that neither does the number of people experiencing the ride at the same time.

You're right about Smuggler's Run, because you can't insert extra vehicles to keep the "launch rate" the same if you lengthen the ride time.

In a boat ride, if you launch every 20 seconds to keep the boats separated, and then lengthen the ride, you can add more boats to keep up rate of launch. And so, in that scenario, if you're looking just at PPH, lengthening the ride doesn't affect PPH if you add more RVs.

However, the analogue for Smuggler's Run would be to add another turntable in order to keep up dispatch rate. While you can't add another pod to the turntable to keep up dispatch rate for when you lengthen the ride, you could add a whole other turntable with another 7 pods.

Using idealized and theoretical lack of constraints...

 

[britain]

Sorry, I've been away for a couple days and I know this is replying to a subject that is several pages back. @TP2000 I'm at-ing you because you replied to this too.



You are correct, but the sentence I bolded is the key. Rate is a ratio, and if you adjust one variable, you HAVE to adjust the other in order to maintain the same rate (equality in the equation). As you state, you cannot maintain throughput when you increase the length of a ride without also increasing the number of people currently experiencing the ride.......in other words, if you double the track length, you have to double the number of vehicles in order to maintain the same rate GIVEN that all things are equal for unloading and loading time. If you didn't increase the number of vehicles, even if the throughput was the same (loading and unloading-wise) you would run out of vehicles (they would all be out experiencing the ride) and there would be gaps which would increase overall wait time.

I think we are in agreement on that point, but that point only counts if both variables in the ratio are adjustable.

My comment that ride time affects capacity was specifically related to the MF attraction. There is a FIXED number of pods and a FIXED number of people in each pod, so that variable is FIXED. Changing the ride length, in this case, DOES affect capacity. In other words, if, for example, there was only one pod that holds 6 people and that variable can't be changed, then if the ride length was one hour you could only throughput 6 people her hour, and if the ride length was 30 minutes you could only throughput 12 people per hour, etc.

We are both correct, but your statement that "ride length doesn't matter" assumes that neither does the number of people experiencing the ride at the same time.

Sounds like you are using length with regards to time, which would affect the fixed MF set up. Most of the thinking on this thread is referring to length as distance (a mile long coaster vs a short coaster) which is just another way of discussing a NON fixed set up.

 

[Suspirian]

Im sorry If this has already been talked about but are there any rumors on whats to become of Star Tours?

 

[SuddenStorm]

Im sorry If this has already been talked about but are there any rumors on whats to become of Star Tours?

No credible rumors.

 

[chadwpalm]

However, the analogue for Smuggler's Run would be to add another turntable in order to keep up dispatch rate. While you can't add another pod to the turntable to keep up dispatch rate for when you lengthen the ride, you could add a whole other turntable with another 7 pods.

Using idealized and theoretical lack of constraints...

Correct, but at this point, we know that the ride is built and the number of turntables, pods, and seats are now set. It's not a variable anymore, it's a constant. So because of that, assuming again that loading time is also somewhat fixed (which we know is not cause there are numerous ways for load time to stall, but assuming a perfect scenario) the only variable that would change the rides throughput capacity is ride length. Since it's a software-based simulator, that is something that can be altered just by changing the scenario. If the total ride time was 1 minute, the hourly capacity would be smaller than if the ride was 10 minutes. That's all I'ma tryin' to say. I'm not generalizing, I'm being specific to MF.

Sounds like you are using length with regards to time, which would affect the fixed MF set up. Most of the thinking on this thread is referring to length as distance (a mile long coaster vs a short coaster) which is just another way of discussing a NON fixed set up.

Yeah, rates can be based on time, quantity, length, etc. I just wanted to clarify that I understand that hourly capacity is a rate that shows how many people move through a line (on average if you don't want to head into Calc territory), not how long a ride is, which is what MisterPenguin originally pointed out. What I was challenging is the statement that ride length is not a factor in hourly capacity. It is, but you have to make other adjustments to other variables. In this case, have enough vehicles to keep constant loading without gaps. That's the key factor. That's the actual rate that needs to be accounted for. The amount of time between when each vehicle takes off multiplied by how many people are on that vehicle, per hour (on average). Again, you can only assume that ride-length time is irrelevant if and only if (now we are in discrete math territory) you assume that there are enough vehicles to fill the hourly capacity.

Perhaps if I have time later I can derive an equation that takes in all of these variables. In simplistic terms, you can just use an easy equation that has a rate within a rate like:

hourly capacity(a rate) = time between when one vehicle launches to when the next one does(another rate) * riders per vehicle

You can expand out the rate on the right side of the equation to include ride length (in time or track length) and number of vehicles on the track (or in a fixed space like MF) at a given time, but it's not really necessary since that rate can just be derived with a stopwatch .