Benin Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Doesn't Fastpass+ essentially make you plan out your entire holiday about 4 years* in advance? Very different to what Reserve n Ride is, and indeed the entire implementation of it is different, the two are pretty much incomparable... Wouldn't be surprised if it was the big push in the near future though, given that the Thrill Paradise brand didn't work, the current brand seems so generic and bland, they will look to having that magical USP to sell the park (rather than you know, creating a great Value For Money experience that makes people want to revisit)... *Might be over-exaggerating pognoi, Ricky, pluk and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon81uk Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Alton Towers had vitual queue on mobile phone about 10-12 years ago. It was big news on Midlands Today! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Wasn't altons system paper based. Which I think should raise the question in why did they stop it. I think that the main reason it was stopped is because it didn't work. The only thing that has changed between now and then is that the paper has become a smart phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 https://www.thorpepark.com/tickets-passes/reserve-n-ride/overview/- This page states it will be back next year, on the top 5 coasters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Lets hope they have changed the way it works to you go up to the ride you want to ride and you stand in a queue for it. However the queue can become long so you have the option to go stand in another queue which could be shorter. pluk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPJames Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Lets hope they have changed the way it works to you go up to the ride you want to ride and you stand in a queue for it. However the queue can become long so you have the option to go stand in another queue which could be shorter. Is it just me or does this not make sense...? Kerfuffle, holtjammy16 and pognoi 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I think you have missed the point. What I was describing is standard queuing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPJames Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Even if it is describing standard queuing it still does not make any sense whatsoever!? Care to explain? pognoi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I basically said that I hope that they changed RnR so it is just a fancy name for normal queuing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holtjammy16 Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 I basically said that I hope that they changed RnR so it is just a fancy name for normal queuing. well that seems logical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coaster Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Why not just shift normal queues as much as possible so RNR isn't needed? TPJames 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan9 Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Why not just shift normal queues as much as possible so RNR isn't needed? Weird comparison. With the problems (a lot of which are self-made) they intend Rn'R to solve, pushing staff to get an extra 100 an hour isn't really going to change much. Staff usually attempt high throughputs regardless of which system is being run more for morale-purposes. Bigger issues than that are a) Fastrack allocations b.) Priority passes c) The types of rides they choose to build in the first place. Mark9 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 A new ride with 1200pph is good and all but the swarm could have been 100m longer and could possibly have run 3 trains so could have potentially achieved 1700pph. Then storm surge with its terrible 400pph or less. Then saw with it barley reaching 900pph. They shouldn't be installing any major ride with a throughput lower than 1200. Alton are just as guilty though. Poor ride choices have lead to massive queues. They added rides to attract new people which is great but didn't find a way to deal with them all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshC. Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 A new ride with 1200pph is good and all but the swarm could have been 100m longer and could possibly have run 3 trains so could have potentially achieved 1700pph. Nope. If Swarm had been 100m longer, they'd have gone over the pre-agreed maximum coaster length set out in the MTDP (why they set it to a maximum of 850m, who knows?). I'm sure Thorpe will want as high throughput additions as they want, but under the constraints, I doubt Swarm could really achieve any more than it already does. pognoi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnD Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Adding a third train doesn't automatically increase throughput by 50%, if Swarm was slightly longer and had 3 trains you'd just be sat on the brake run for ages. Max throughput would probably be around 1300-1400. pognoi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan9 Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 The Swarm itself is fine, if it's held back by anything it's the batching area design, as well as the whole backwards thing and standard fastrack woes (but less of a problem here with more premium pricing and a higher throughput ride in general). I don't mind backwards though, just the station design never really accommodated for it in the first place. Bigger problems come from relying on rides like Storm Surge, Depth Charge and Samurai to be the major filler rides outside of the top coasters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 The swarm is 775m so it could be 850m. Also I never said it would increase to that it could if designed well. Thorpe just has too many low throughput rides. The sooner they renegotiate the length of the coasters the better because its come to the point where they need very high throughput rides. The whole RnR should never have come into existence if they invested wisely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPJames Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Unfortunately I believe the problem of queues can only be resolved by adding high throughput attractions. High throughput attractions reduce queue lines as a whole and RNR can only work with a significant amount of shows and high throughput attractions to accommodate the people virtually queueing, otherwise it just simply shifts queues like thorpe are doing at the moment. Basically thorpe need to start investing in things which actually take a decent amount of people per hour instead of having massive queues... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 RnR will always just shift the queues. That is how it works. High throughput attractions are always the solutions to long queues. No matter what system you get that will always be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark9 Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 Even if Thorpe added high throughput attractions, the allocation of fastrack would ensure that queues for these rides would still be a ridiculous length. Besides, the one high throughput ride isn't going to make that much difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benin Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 The swarm is 775m so it could be 850m. Also I never said it would increase to that it could if designed well. Thorpe just has too many low throughput rides. The sooner they renegotiate the length of the coasters the better because its come to the point where they need very high throughput rides. The whole RnR should never have come into existence if they invested wisely. Coaster length does not equal a higher throughput, just look at T'Ultimate to see how flawed that argument is... As said, it's the filler rides that need the higher throughputs, doesn't every major coaster at Thorpe apart from Saw get over 1000pph? Or at least relatively close to that in cases like Stealth and Colossus? pognoi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 Coaster length does not equal a higher throughput, just look at T'Ultimate to see how flawed that argument is... As said, it's the filler rides that need the higher throughputs, doesn't every major coaster at Thorpe apart from Saw get over 1000pph? Or at least relatively close to that in cases like Stealth and Colossus? Believe that is correct - and I doubt Saw is far from 1000pph either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Project LC Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 But 1000 is still low for a major park. They should be in the 1200+ region while the flats should be over 600pph. Coaster length does benefit a coaster and makes it easier to achieve high throughputs. It's not a direct correlation but it does help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldFarmerDean Posted January 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 I don't partuarly like RnR and they really cannot run it correctly... It just won't work in a park like Thorpe for every guest... What I have noticed though on the occasions it's been trialling is that it's set up to buy it, RnR will be a replacement of fast track and its actually a good idea as it can be more controlled, but it needs to be tested and made right before it gets used to guests paying for it. That's just my opinion but can't/wouldn't want to see it implemented in any other way, if not at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pluk Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 But 1000 is still low for a major park. They should be in the 1200+ region while the flats should be over 600pph. Coaster length does benefit a coaster and makes it easier to achieve high throughputs. It's not a direct correlation but it does help. A longer coaster will reduce throughput if it doesn't have a block in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.