DaptoFunlandGuy

It's a dry park. Splash pad play isn't the core activity for the area so dealing with a handful of parents with toddlers in swimmers and asking them to change is a lot different to having literally every person in the park soaking wet. I've visited plenty of water parks and can't say arcades have featured highly in any of them.

I'm not sure we want kids in wet swimmers playing with electronic games - but even if that was ok, I don't really want to sit down in a wet seat for a car race either. Arcades do not belong in waterparks.

If they go with a lazy river, that increases capacity immensely. They've already got 4 of their slides SBNO for entire seasons, so anything to increase capacity would be great. The best thing is something like a lazy river is going to be quite disruptive to park overall, but as they're seasonally closed, they can build freely without needing to work around guest accessible areas.

Let's be honest, the AW bounty was a HUSS yawn... installed a year after Wonderland put in a starship of the same name. But if AW puts in a looping starship to replace the old Huss Pirate, i'm booking flights.

I mean he looks good for 44ish.

Just in case anyone missed the entire site plan posted back in October Both entry and exit pathways are ramped up from street level, while the RideExpress lane does have a short set of stairs up to the grouping area.

Isn't the model T on that rubbery play flooring stuff too? so not quite as hard as blacktop?

I totally get this, and used to film experiences like this frequently until one day I took a step back and realised I rarely watched my own recordings - sure, I might open up the hard drive and trawl back through old stuff every so often - I still like to re-experience them every now and then, and believe me I wish more people had recorded rides we've since lost to history, like at Wonderland, or even LTRR, Bermuda, etc....but online POVs on YouTube now do a much better job, and with much better equipment than I have, so i've stopped holding the camera up so much, and just try to take it all in outside the confines of a tiny screen. I really enjoy the time and experience (and the look on the little guy's face) much more that way - i'd encourage you to put the phone down and just enjoy it - someone else has definitely already done a POV that captures it much better than we ever could!

Yeah no, IMO the first impression is standing quite a bit further back from that. But that's just it - you can't even see the temple for all the jungle that comes before it. The climate changes before you even enter the temple as you delve deeper underneath the jungle canopy. This is a photo opportunity, not a temple. It just feels artificial. And despite DisneySea having a great respect for sight lines, the temple is visible well outside the delta. Just my opinion

I mean, Tokyo is 6 years newer than Anaheim, and OLC do tend to throw way more money into upkeep. Plus they had 6 years to learn their mistakes before building it. I saw Anaheim's version in the first 12 months of opening so i've also seen it working at it's best. Maybe it's just the purist in me preferring the original over the copy - but it's really hard for me to explain the differences (I don't go through cataloguing "oh, snake effect #4 isn't working properly today" and I couldn't tell you scene for scene what the differences are in each either) so it's a certain je ne sais quoi feel between the two - despite having 25 years to 'grow in' - DisneySea's location for the ride just felt artificial. The immersion wasn't there, Whereas walking into adventureland, passing the jungle cruise, walking down the outside queue with boats passing by the lush jungle... the atmosphere before you even enter the interior queue just felt 'different'. The ride being in english helps a lot too.

I enjoyed B&TB, and paid for DPA to ride it a second time (first included in our package). I think it deserves some of the kudos it gets but it isn't all that and a bag of chips. As for trackless darkrides, I still personally prefer Mystic Manor over B&TB. Now that i've done it, I can't say i'd be willing to line up the 3+ hours it gets. I'm not even sure i'd pay the $20 a second time - unless I was visiting with someone who hadn't been - in which case sure - experience it once, but I think people overhype this attraction *just a tad*. I think the setting at Disneyland, nestled amongst the jungle cruise and treehouse tops it. The ride experience itself isn't much different from California - and it's in English. ^This. total dark horse. We didn't ride it until towards the end of our last day - and wish we'd done so earlier so we had more time to go back and do it again It's a fun little coaster and packs a punch but it isn't anything to write home about. The disney setting is cool, and the view near the top is breathtaking - but the experience itself is rough - you're not missing much (though for a 9yo coaster junkie, it delivers that adrenaline fix in amongst the more experiential rides).

I can see everyone else is trying to explain it but feel like it could be made clearer. During two train operation one train faces each way. On departing the station, each train enters the turntable. each train departs the track on the loop-back that returns it to the turntable. The turntable then drops the train onto the final leg back to the station. Each train returns to the station facing exactly the same direction it left. Train 1: Forward>Backward>Forward Train 2: B>F>B During one train operation only one train is on the track. In order to offer the alternating experience, the train must return to the station facing the opposite way to how it departed. In this course, it leaves the station, enters the turntable, departs onto the loop-back circuit into the turntable again, however in this situation the turntable drops the train back onto the loop-back circuit for a second time, before dropping onto the final leg. As it completed an extra loop back, the train returns to the station the opposite way. In one train operation, due to the extra leg completed, the ride time is longer and you get to see the loop-back section from both directions. Train first dispatch: F>B>F>B Train second dispatch: B>F>B>F I feel like if you experienced one train operation first, I can understand why the two train operation experience feels 'less' because the ride time is shorter. For everyone who rode under two-train ops, getting to ride the one-train circuit feels like a 'bonus'.

Let's just be clear here - modifying rivals is never going to happen. The ride is approaching 8 years old. It is still quite popular. The main reasons rides get retrofitted or upgraded are either a defect on opening, or a refresh to drive ridership to an older ride that is losing popularity. There is no reason to throw any money at it at this point as there is unlikely to be any ROI. It would be nice to see the parks invest in capacity and efficiency in their next attraction - however given WOZ, I don't know that they're interested in that. We may have to wait for a change of management \ ownership before the focus shifts.

Some do it without compromising safety because it's possible to do. Your clear inefficiency? it's not really an efficiency because it isn't improving throughput. You need to identify efficiencies in your busiest days, not your quietest ones. This particular suggestion sounds like you're having a sook about having to re-line up. The trouble here is that it breaks 'normal'. When you start doing things outside of normal, you can forget things because they aren't in muscle memory. Did I properly check his restraint before his next re-ride? Can't remember. Whoops. Additionally for your suggestion on loading flow - it also breaks normal. Why? You said yourself "in many cases it's not a safety issue" but in some cases it is. So ops who run different rides have the added complexity of trying to remember which ride they're running to determine when to open the gates? I think it's a shit system, but because a ride \ some rides require the gates to be held, it is better to hold all the gates because then there is only ONE rule to follow. One of the biggest criticisms of the TRRR accident was the number of administrative controls put into place by the park to manage risks, as the operators weren't capable of maintaining so much oversight of the ride system and better controls (elimination as one example) weren't considered first. Adding complexity to a ride ops job description by giving them different procedures for different rides is a sure-fire way for someone to forget which ride they're on and do the wrong thing. The metal detectors don't change. the x rays don't change. the rides do. and this is why your comparison is shit.

Let's not. A very poor assumption at best It is clear by the math \ logic you're using that you have zero clue how to run a theme park. It was a great concept for the ride but like everything else - another set of moving parts for something to go wrong. If it doesn't get it right every time, it's better to turn it off.