Toy Story and Soarin Rumors

[GrumpyFan]

That difference is only 4300 people a day, so that is 23,000 into DCA which has a ton of attractions and shows, and 27,000 into DHS which is lacking in both attractions and shows. DCA has like 5 E tickets, RSR, ToT, California Screamin, Grizzly River Run, and Soarin'. What do we have at DHS, RnRC w/ Aerosmith, ToT, and maybe you can include Star Tours. So we have longer lines in the attractions that DHS does have. Add to Pixar Place and add Star Wars Land and then it would be about comperable.

First, those are estimated totals for the year. So, the 23,000/27,000 are averages based on the estimated total for the year. Depending on the day, the numbers could actually be much higher. Also, you can't just look at the number of E ticket attractions to make the comparison. The other rides and shows in the parks weigh in to the equation as well, especially when you look at the two big theaters in DHS for Indy and LMA, which can accommodate a lot of people at once. The point being, it's not an apples to apples comparison even with the suggested additions.

I do agree though, that DHS could use more attractions to help balance out the park and increase capacity overall, not just at one attraction. I think the park could use at least two more high capacity, high turnover type attractions. They don't necessarily have to be E-ticket attractions, but they should be something that people would line up for. Maybe a family coaster of some type, and/or a dark ride like an Omnimover, EMV or water-based ride thru attraction.

 

[sjhym333]

Soarin at EPCOT was built with adding a 3rd theater in mind. Not sure if it has already been mentioned but a 3rd theater would be straight behind the merge position inside the attraction. A 3rd theater has long been a rumor and was being talked about when I worked at EPCOT when Soarin first opened. The attraction could definetely use a 3rd theater but not sure it will happen at this point

 

[DVCOwner]

You are talking about two rides that almost everyone going there wants to ride, so I do not see how adding additional rides to the parks would make a great decrease on the lines at those rides. I am sure there would be some small decreases, but overall the only way to end the wait problem at these two rides would be to increase capacity at them. I sure hope Disney does this for both rides.

 

[azox]

Now Screamscape is reporting a rumor about Soarin' adding not 1 theater but 2 more in a much larger expansion.

Yeah and it kind of makes sense to just do 2 more and eliminate the capacity issue all together. They are planning to do 4 theaters for Avatar right?

 

[dstrawn9889]

Yeah and it kind of makes sense to just do 2 more and eliminate the capacity issue all together. They are planning to do 4 theaters for Avatar right?

different kind of ride system, and all 4 are in the same building for avatar.

 

[doctornick]

different kind of ride system, and all 4 are in the same building for avatar.

....assuming those are still the current plans for what is being build at DAK. (The blueprint leaks date to a period before the project was finalized and greenlit.)

 

[CJR]

I have to agree with majority here. This TSMM would not solve the underlying issue, there just aren't enough rides at DHS.

Disney, invest in more rides and the capacity issue at TSMM would take care of itself. It would probably not become a walk-on ride, but the demand for the ride is solely due to the lack of demand for other things in the park. Invest properly in the park and stop worrying about the capacity for a single attraction. How long ago did this open again? And it's really still the most new notable attraction in the park? There's your problem right there: lack of proper investment.

 

[dadddio]

I have to agree with majority here. This TSMM would not solve the underlying issue, there just aren't enough rides at DHS.

Disney, invest in more rides and the capacity issue at TSMM would take care of itself. It would probably not become a walk-on ride, but the demand for the ride is solely due to the lack of demand for other things in the park. Invest properly in the park and stop worrying about the capacity for a single attraction. How long ago did this open again? And it's really still the most new notable attraction in the park? There's your problem right there: lack of proper investment.

Given that there are other good rides in the park who do not have wait times like TSMM, I don't believe that merely adding additional rides will solve the issue of wait times for TSMM. It might actually make the issue worse as additional rides would tend to attract additional guests to the park. These guests would also want to ride TSMM, after all.

It is no doubt that DHS needs additional attractions, but the capacity issue of TSMM should also be addressed.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

Given that there are other good rides in the park who do not have wait times like TSMM, I don't believe that merely adding additional rides will solve the issue of wait times for TSMM. It might actually make the issue worse as additional rides would tend to attract additional guests to the park. These guests would also want to ride TSMM, after all.

It is no doubt that DHS needs additional attractions, but the capacity issue of TSMM should also be addressed.

Besides TSMM what other ride in HS is great for small children?
If people with small child had other options, TSMM would have less demand. People would still want to ride it but it wouldn't be the only ride for small children.

 

[dadddio]

Besides TSMM what other ride in HS is great for small children?
If people with small child had other options, TSMM would have less demand. People would still want to ride it but it wouldn't be the only ride for small children.

As you say, people would still want to ride it.

If/when they build more rides in DHS, it will definitely make DHS a better theme park. It will further likely generate more visitors to DHS. Those people will also want to ride TSMM. This increase in demand will drive wait time upward unless something is done to increase capacity for this ride.

 

[PrincessNelly_NJ]

As you say, people would still want to ride it.

If/when they build more rides in DHS, it will definitely make DHS a better theme park. It will further likely generate more visitors to DHS. Those people will also want to ride TSMM. This increase in demand will drive wait time upward unless something is done to increase capacity for this ride.

Ok, let me put it this way.
When we visited Sept 2012, TT was closed for refurb. Everyone gravitated towards Soarin and it had a massive line.
When we returned in Sept 2013, TT was open and Soarin had a shorter line.

Having more options for children will help spread the wait times.

 

[Skip]

Let's be clear - both sides are right here.

You open up a new, popular family attraction at DHS, total attendance at the park will increase, driving additional guests to TSM in addition to the new attraction; however, the enlarged crowds *will* be somewhat distributed between the two.

You add capacity to TSM (and assuming nothing else substantial is added to the park), roughly the same demand for TSM - driving lines significantly downward. However, DHS doesn't get any real, new additions, only an added convenience to an existing attraction.

The question then becomes - would the brand new attraction draw *too many* people, resulting in identical waits at TSM (or even larger?) Or would a more incremental increase achieve the desired result of spreading the crowds, meaning an incremental decrease on average waits at both attractions?

 

[dadddio]

Ok, let me put it this way.
When we visited Sept 2012, TT was closed for refurb. Everyone gravitated towards Soarin and it had a massive line.
When we returned in Sept 2013, TT was open and Soarin had a shorter line.

Having more options for children will help spread the wait times.

As long as you have interest that exceeds capacity, you will have long wait times. The solution to that is to add capacity to the ride. Adding additional rides will increase park capacity, but won't necessarily reduce wait times in TSMM because all you are going to end up doing is increase the number of guests in the park and, therefore, the number of people trying to ride TSMM.

 

[dadddio]

Let's be clear - both sides are right here.

You open up a new, popular family attraction at DHS, total attendance at the park will increase, driving additional guests to TSM in addition to the new attraction; however, the enlarged crowds *will* be somewhat distributed between the two.

You add capacity to TSM (and assuming nothing else substantial is added to the park), roughly the same demand for TSM - driving lines significantly downward. However, DHS doesn't get any real, new additions, only an added convenience to an existing attraction.

The question then becomes - would the brand new attraction draw *too many* people, resulting in identical waits at TSM (or even larger?) Or would a more incremental increase achieve the desired result of spreading the crowds, meaning an incremental decrease on average waits at both attractions?

In order for adding a ride to reduce the times at TSMM, the guests riding the new ride would have to not be interested in riding TSMM. Those guests would have to choose to skip TSMM instead of going on both rides in order for an additional ride to push down the wait times of an existing ride.

 

[GoofGoof]

Let's be clear - both sides are right here.

You open up a new, popular family attraction at DHS, total attendance at the park will increase, driving additional guests to TSM in addition to the new attraction; however, the enlarged crowds *will* be somewhat distributed between the two.

You add capacity to TSM (and assuming nothing else substantial is added to the park), roughly the same demand for TSM - driving lines significantly downward. However, DHS doesn't get any real, new additions, only an added convenience to an existing attraction.

The question then becomes - would the brand new attraction draw *too many* people, resulting in identical waits at TSM (or even larger?) Or would a more incremental increase achieve the desired result of spreading the crowds, meaning an incremental decrease on average waits at both attractions?

I agree that both sides are correct to a point.

They could be looking at doing both. The highly optimistic observer could say they are adding capacity to TSMM in anticipation of Star Wars Land and other additions in the park. Increased attendance will meal an even higher demand for an already highly popular ride. You could look at it like building a bigger parking lot of expanding the rest rooms. You can't add the new attractions which will draw the crowds and then stop to build the facilities it will need.

My gut says that if this is true it's more about FP+ capacity than anything else. These are 2 of the 3 rides that made the tiers necessary. If you eliminate the bottleneck at TSMM you can eliminate the tiers at DHS (just like AK). Not sure about EPCOT. There is no way to increase TT capacity so they may be stuck with the tiers.

 

[GoofGoof]

In order for adding a ride to reduce the times at TSMM, the guests riding the new ride would have to not be interested in riding TSMM. Those guests would have to choose to skip TSMM instead of going on both rides in order for an additional ride to push down the wait times of an existing ride.

Yep, unless some people are riding more than once and choose to just ride once. Either way since the daily capacity is much lower than total park guests there will always be supply/demand issues unless you add more capacity.

One thing that could help a little with standby lines is if they add more E-ticket type rides (maybe Star Wars) people may choose them for FP+ instead of TSMM. If the FP line is shorter it means more standby riders per hour. Of course it means more guess in the standby lines too so maybe not that helpful.

 

[matt9112]

I've seen a lot of folks comment like this and I don't agree really. There is a trend to diminish the potential quality of the Frozen ride as just being an "overlay". I've seen the words "cheap" and "value engineered" used constantly as well. We don't really know the details or scope of the ride yet and it's quite possible that a very well done ride could be done in the Maelstrom space. In fact, there was at least some talk about axing the the theater (using it as a queue) and doing load/unload near the theater while using the current load as an additional show scene. Doing that, plus potentially adding some show to the lift hill (now just in darkness with Oden in front of you) could make for a pretty decent fleshed out ride experience -- Maelstrom currently is a 4.5 minute ride, so it's not like it's that short and it would be longer if they added on another room.

Please note: I do not like the idea of putting Frozen in Norway or losing Maelstrom. I am not in favor of the idea. I just think that it is too early with too few details to dismiss it as being a poorly developed ride at this point.

so we will get the most cutting edge blow my money out of my wallet ride quality by reusing the most advanced ride system 1988 had to offer...oh wait.

 

[DinoInstitute]

The question then becomes - would the brand new attraction draw *too many* people, resulting in identical waits at TSM (or even larger?) Or would a more incremental increase achieve the desired result of spreading the crowds, meaning an incremental decrease on average waits at both attractions?

Most likely, say the original wait time was 100 minutes, with a new attraction, each one would be 65-ish minutes

 

[doctornick]

so we will get the most cutting edge blow my money out of my wallet ride quality by reusing the most advanced ride system 1988 had to offer...oh wait.

Who said anything about "cutting edge"? A ride doesn't have to be "cutting edge", using some complicated new fangled tech to be quality. I think this board too often focuses on the idea of groundbreaking experiences for rides. You can use tech from 50 years ago, but if it has quality show and good music/dialogue, a ride can still be an excellent addition.

It's absolutely possible to use the layout of Maelstrom and change the scenes to Frozen and have to be a quality addition to the park. Especially if they use the theater for the queue and convert the current loading area to an additional show scene. I'm not saying it is going to be good -- it certainly might be cheap and suck -- but I think it is pointless to dismiss the quality of the potential Frozen ride without knowing anything about specific details of what it entails. With memorable characters and some great songs, there's certainly the potential to make a great ride in the Maelstrom space.

(Regardless, the Frozen ride is out of place in Norway/Epcot. It shouldn't be built there. But the placement is a different topic entirely than the execution of the Frozen ride itself.)

 

[RSoxNo1]

Not sure how much duplicating a ride would do. This seems more like a short term bandaid than looking at the cause of the problem. The issue is that their are only a few rides so the capacity is split across all those rides. By doubling the capacity of TSMM they are simply cutting that rides wait time in half but those same people will just be on to wait in the next ride quicker or head to a different park faster.

They would be better off duplicating the ride with a completely different theme. There have been a ton of Pixar films, they have to be able to pick just one more that would work. Even if it is the same ride with a different theme and set of games it would not directly cut the wait time down but it would entice everyone waiting in line to then try the other increasing the overall time people would spend in the park. You would still have some that choose to only do one since they are similar so that would still create an overall decrease in the wait tome for each ride while increasing the overall park value.

You're right, it's a bandaid, but bandaids aren't all bad. This bandaid is coming with a refresh to the attraction as well. My hope is a Star Wars to Star Wars 2.0 type upgrade.

Having said that, this doesn't fix the problem that Epcot needs more marquee attractions. Like it or not, Frozen will serve this purpose.