Extra trains for roller coasters?

[Gazza]

*trim brake, not block zone on this model.

[themagician]

I thought it was a bloke brake?

[Slick]

4 minutes ago, Gazza said:

*trim brake, not block zone on this model.

I wonder why that is?

[Naazon]

If its only a trim brake why would it need evac stairs?

[Gazza]

Because this will only have two trains so there won't be a need to stop a train there, and I think the stairs just come with it by default.

It still needs to have a trim brake there since the latter half of the layout is designed to be taken at lower speed.

3 train models have a set of pinch brakes.

2 train models omit them, and note no air boxes for the brakes either.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Gazza

[Slick]

3 minutes ago, Gazza said:

Because this will only have two trains so there won't be a need to stop a train there, and I think the stairs just come with it by default.

It still needs to have a trim brake there since the latter half of the layout is designed to be taken at lower speed.

 

That makes sense. I did a quick Google and found that Europa Park's Blue Fire has 5 trains and can operate with 4 at any one time, leaving 1 spare. Mental.

[rappa]

Another big mistake for an Australian park only getting 2 trains. 
So reduced capacity in peak times, and 1 train ops most of the rest of the time due to maintenance. 
You’d think people would learn from the 3 hour waits of a few weeks ago. 

[Gazza]

Yeah, Blue Fire is mental, they can have two trains in the station, 1 in the dark ride / launch and 1 on the course.

[Slick]

1 minute ago, rappa said:

Another big mistake for an Australian park only getting 2 trains. 
So reduced capacity in peak times, and 1 train ops most of the rest of the time due to maintenance. 
You’d think people would learn from the 3 hour waits of a few weeks ago. 

You're not wrong. These rides are all clearly designed for seasonal operation, meaning you have a nice 3-4 month stretch to do maintenance in, which is totally different compared to our all year round model with peak seasons every 2-3 months. I'd be amazed if Village weren't looking into a third train for Rivals to keep as a spare so that they can guarantee two trains during peak periods. There's simply a point at which long waits are detrimental to guest spending throughout the day - it's why Disney design their parks (and operations) to ensure you can do at least 10 "things" a day - anything less and folks aren't out spending.

[Jdude95]

When you're already spending millions on a coaster, surely an extra train wouldn't blow the cost out that much.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

Don't get me wrong - i'm a big fan of having multiple trains - but Jet Rescue came with 2, and after the first 6-8 months they stopped pulling out the second train for all but the busiest christmas days. Arkham survived with 1 train despite the original red and blue trains spec'd for Lethal back in the day - which was 'purpled' years prior to the refurb, and did just fine. Supermand and Rivals both regularly have only one train running, and outside of peak holiday periods, one does just fine.

It seems rare that our coasters NEED two trains (and its unforgiveable that the parks wouldn't have both trains available during school holiday periods) - but MORE than two trains? From random discussions and reading (don't ask for a source i've no clue) i'm pretty sure modern coaster trains are about a million bucks each. While we all bang on about guest experience that it's easy to say "what price on guest experience" to justify buying a third train for "just in case" but end of the day all our parks are businesses and they're in this to make money.

the economics of doing so don't make sense to me, even though the enthusiast in me says that they should. Right?

[Slick]

25 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

the economics of doing so don't make sense to me, even though the enthusiast in me says that they should. Right?

Let's say by having three trains you can guarantee you can always have two trains running during the busiest 100 days of the year. If that second train conservatively improves hourly throughput by 200 (on Rivals it'd be much more), that's 1400 people back in the park potentially spending money on stuff on a typical 7 hour day. Let's say ultra-conservatively then that 50% of them spend an extra $20 on literally anything instead of waiting in a queue (my own knowledge suggests it's more like $50-70, but we'll go with worst case scenarios), that's an $14k extra a day. Over roughly 100 peak days of the year where the train will be running, that's 1.4m in additional revenue, which means a third train pays for itself in under a year. Even at a third of my already conservative numbers, you have an investment that pays for itself in under three years and generates six digit revenue every year for the life of the coaster. There's also additional on-flow effects from smaller queue times during peak periods which is best summarised as when you have high satisfaction rates with guest experience, folks spend more.

25 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

but Jet Rescue came with 2, and after the first 6-8 months they stopped pulling out the second train for all but the busiest christmas days. Arkham survived with 1 train despite the original red and blue trains spec'd for Lethal back in the day - which was 'purpled' years prior to the refurb, and did just fine. Supermand and Rivals both regularly have only one train running, and outside of peak holiday periods, one does just fine.

Rivals has been doing 2+ hour wait times over the easter break. Arkham Asylum was consistently one of the worst waits in the park during peak periods. The years after Jet Rescue opened are widely panned as some of Sea World's worst. 

25 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

but end of the day all our parks are businesses and they're in this to make money.

Exactly my point. Personally I reckon Dreamworld are fine for the next year or two with two trains - but as the crowds continue to come back in huge waves like they've done at Movie World the maths does check out.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Slick

[Naazon]

1 hour ago, Gazza said:

Because this will only have two trains so there won't be a need to stop a train there, and I think the stairs just come with it by default.

It still needs to have a trim brake there since the latter half of the layout is designed to be taken at lower speed.

3 train models have a set of pinch brakes.

2 train models omit them, and note no air boxes for the brakes either.

Good to know.

This will likely never happen but looking at the photos it looks like retro-fitting block brakes there would be a somewhat easy job? looks like the track is built with the brakes in mind?

 

In the super rare case DW decide an extra train and having 2 on course is a good idea, that is. (never gonna happen)

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

 

I will say - you're assuming that a more efficient ridership results in more people doing non-ride things, instead of simply lining up for another ride, or re-riding the same efficient ride again because the queue is short.

You've made concessions, but I dont think you've made enough concessions to allow for things like locals who spend next to nothing no matter what their day is like, and if you're banking on non-locals, many of those already spend their limit so more time wandering the park won't necessarily increase that.

You refer to Disney, but Disney has merch people want to buy, and they change it often, and people go to their parks JUST to buy the new merch and ride nothing. So the comparison isn't going to work here with our atrocious merch offerings that rarely offer even a POLO SHIRT! Our parks are not Disney - and i'm sure that you already know that.

I debated a long rebuttal with many facts and analysis to explain my different opinion, but much like playing chess with a pigeon, there isn't much point in me making any more detailed arguments - and i'm in no mood to clean the chess board.

Either our current park leadership are idiots throwing away millions of dollars a year, or they don't think the economics make sense either.  

[rappa]

It really depends what price you put on guest satisfaction (which is really the only product a theme park sells). 
For me, I’d certainly value that at 1 million for an extra train. 
 

And I really think its a long perpetrated myth that ‘locals spend nothing’ in the parks. The majority of guests are ‘locals’ these days. 

[Slick]

16 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

I debated a long rebuttal with many facts and analysis to explain my different opinion, but much like playing chess with a pigeon, there isn't much point in me making any more detailed arguments - and i'm in no mood to clean the chess board.

Two paragraphs earlier you had stated locals spend next to nothing with no facts to back you up either. Those in glass houses and all that jazz, you know? 😉

Pass-holders naturally spend less than interstate guests, but it's not "next to nothing" and the gap between interstate and pass-holders isn't as big as you imply. The figures i've used are based off generally established, broad-spectrum insight from years of working in the industry that account for that average. And you're right, folks will try and get as much done as possible out of each visit. And when they get more done, guest satisfaction goes up, and they spend more as a result. And just to cement the point further, guess which type of guest leaves early when queues become full? Yup, pass-holders. Clearly other parks around the world get the economics - the aforementioned Blue Fire has 4 trains and 1 spare. This isn't conjecture for the sake of conjecture.

Side-note, no need to be disrespectful for the sake of being disrespectful. I used just as many words and just as much analysis. 😄

Edited April 29, 2021 by Slick

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

22 minutes ago, rappa said:

It really depends what price you put on guest satisfaction (which is really the only product a theme park sells). 
For me, I’d certainly value that at 1 million for an extra train.

I haven't seen that for sale at a gold coast park in a long time, much as I wish that wasn't the case. I value that very much - but I don't feel valued by either GC park chain at present. I look forward to a day when that changes.

14 minutes ago, Slick said:

Two paragraphs earlier you had stated locals spend next to nothing with no facts to back you up either. Those in glass houses and all that jazz

I don't see what that has to do with what you quoted - I simply said I wasn't going to waste time on a detailed and thoughtful analysis that would take far longer to write, because historical fact shows that it didn't matter what I said, or what evidence I provided, folks would disagree with me, which you did. 🤷‍♂️ History also says i'd then spend far too long rebutting your rebuttal of my rebuttal, and I just don't care that much anymore to engage in pointless bullshit. I just voiced my opinion and asked a question.

It's fine. I'm not suggesting anyone is wrong, or right. I started my original reply with 'i'm a big fan of multiple trains' - i'm just questioning the economics of having a third, when history has shown every park on the coast has never felt the need for more than two (save for multi-train coasters like Scoob), and you've voiced your own thoughts which are different to mine.

Clearly, we're all much smarter than the folks running these parks. (I could give some examples but it'd probably break some forum rule or something) - but we've long proven that our very smart ideas never get put into practice by the parks, for.. reasons? So I guess if we want 3 trains on Rivals or Taipan or Leviathan our best bet is probably to delete this whole thread and hope it comes to them in a dream or something so it can be their idea... ?

Honestly the only park i've ever seen see something on Parkz and go "great idea! let's do that!" was Adventure World - and they were too stupid to keep on the very person who was listening to their biggest fans. 

 

/rant.

 

[Gazza]

Yes, its not as simplistic as 'guests either go on rides or spend money in shops" and operators/designers do not try to "balance" those behaviours.

As Rappa points out, guest satisfaction / entertainment is still the core product, and for that there are definitely some good quantative metrics used by industry leaders that design or operate parks to ensure that the average visitors does enough "things" over the course of a visit to feel as though, at the end of the day they got their moneys worth (It varies by the type of park)

Guests that are being fed a good stream of entertainment will be happier and spend more, and linger longer and spend more. If they're not having fun they'll go home early.

Excessively short queues are only a problem insofar as that you might be over investing and spending too much running a park that doesn't need all that, but if a visitor is experiencing 1 hour waits per ride, you can definitely say they won't get enough entertainment in their visit and investment in capacity is warranted (Eg extra trains, new rides etc)

Edited just now by Gazza

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

37 minutes ago, Gazza said:

Excessively short queues are only a problem insofar as that you might be over investing and spending too much running a park that doesn't need all that, but if a visitor is experiencing 1 hour waits per ride, you can definitely say they won't get enough entertainment in their visit and investment in capacity is warranted (Eg extra trains, new rides etc)

Thanks Gazza, that's really well put. I guess the only question i've got is - if the guest is experiencing 1 hour waits per ride only on the busiest holiday days of the year - does that justify the additional capacity? or does that  start to become 'over-investing and spending too much' ?

I know you do a lot of work around transport - public transport and highways and such - should a park be investing in infrastructure to handle the 5pm peak hour? or the Park Average?

[Gazza]

You invest based on your "design day".

https://www.theparkdb.com/blog/peaking-theme-park/

There are some days per year where you will be over that, but that should be like 20 days per year max.

[rappa]

I would say 15-30mins (max) waits on quiet days are acceptable and expected. 
And 60-90min waits on the busy days are also acceptable. 
I base that upon the ‘payoff’ that Australian rides offer (this is not Radiator Springs Racers or Pirates after all), comparable wait times of similar (say Magic Mountain or Knott’s) parks overseas, and historic wait times for Gold Coast parks up until several years ago. 
 

Now I think 40min waits are fairly common on quiet days and obviously 3 times that or more on busy days. 
 

I don’t think that is the mark that should be being aimed for. 
As Dapto Guy says above ‘he hasn’t felt that product (guest satisfaction) in a long time’. 

And this is my point and why change is needed. You need to he planning for worst case, not apologizing when it happens. 

[joz]

The other issue for Australian parks is the busy days are spread out. You can't rebuild a train in a school term, so you're guaranteeing that some of those busy periods you're always screwed. Look at MW the past holidays and tell me that the parks only need to buy 2 trains because they're only busy enough to use them 20 days a year.

[Jdude95]

Let's be real here. The actual advantage to having 3 trains is that when you have to cannibalise one train to fix another in 5-10 years time, you still have a spare train... unlike the Lethal Weapon/Arkham situation 

[Cactus_Matt]

Not to compare any of our Aussie parks to the Disney or Universal parks but the longest I've ever waited for a ride in my life was during one of my multiple visits to Disneyland and DisneySea in Tokyo. I've waited 70 minutes for Pooh's Honey Hunt, 80 minutes for Tower of Terror and 90 minutes for Journey To The Center of the Earth. Most other rides were round the 60 minute mark. I'd never wait for more than 60 minutes on any current Australian theme park ride. Just sayin...

[Ogre]

38 minutes ago, Cactus_Matt said:

Not to compare any of our Aussie parks to the Disney or Universal parks but the longest I've ever waited for a ride in my life was during one of my multiple visits to Disneyland and DisneySea in Tokyo. I've waited 70 minutes for Pooh's Honey Hunt, 80 minutes for Tower of Terror and 90 minutes for Journey To The Center of the Earth. Most other rides were round the 60 minute mark. I'd never wait for more than 60 minutes on any current Australian theme park ride. Just sayin...

The longest I queued was for Crush's Coaster at Disneyland Paris. I think it was around an hour? Guess I've been pretty lucky in my park trips so far, wait time wise.