Originally Posted By ChiMike >>There are two new seats in each sub.<< Well there you go.. Was there an unused porthole, new porthole, no porthole?
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>What kind of delusional world do those people live in? Everyone knows that Disneyland has long line.<< And I agree, I was responding to the idea that NOT everyone knows Disneyland has long lines. >>The notoriously slow loading and unloading procedure will only add to what is likely going to be major congestion for years to come. As another poster said, this is bad show.<< I completely agree with you and others regarding this. Other than that it is bad show. For me, it's the reality of a theme park - especially during peak seasons. My contention, which could be wrong, is that there are some regular DL'rs who have forgotten this reality. Will people complain? I'm sure. I just think this is one issue where Disney isn't doing something wrong.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Was there an unused porthole, new porthole, no porthole?>> New porthole.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Ohh, yeah one more thing. >>It isn't as simple and jolly as you try to make it sound<< No it certainly isn't. I'm not the best example because I purposely visit when crowds are expected to be low. This past December, I was certainly wrong and it didn't cause me to complain to anyone.
Originally Posted By Skippy >>I wanna ride on top and surf my way around the ride! YEEHAW!!! increased capacity << They call that the "Indiana Jones Seat"
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "I'm not the best example because I purposely visit when crowds are expected to be low." You and me both. I learned my lesson about 10 years ago when I made a huge mistake: I went to DL on the Fourth of July. As my sister says, "It was the worst day of my life".
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL >>>I disagree and that there is one fix. That would be to transform the storage dock of the sub area into a real loading dock. Put a ramp over the first dock to get to the second one and you could then load 4 subs at a time rather than just the two.<<< Not feasible. There are actually 3 Subs in load/unload not 2. All 7 subs can and were used at the same time in the past. If you have a good crew and the guests are moving in and out of the vessel at a good clip, then the third sub in load is just leaving dock as the fourth sub is emerging from the caverns. There is no way that capacity can be improved on this relic. And adding 2 seats per sub is kind of a joke.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Also, wouldn't it be impossible to have a gangplank going to the other dock because of the cabins on top of the subs? Unless they routed the track to the outer side of the storage dock...still, it's not happening anyway, so we'll have to deal with what they created.
Originally Posted By idleHands "If you have a good crew and the guests are moving in and out of the vessel at a good clip..." This is the part that concerns me, since this attraction rehab was announced. When Nemo Subs opens next summer, nine years will have gone by since its closing. And much has happened to the resort and the guests in those nine years. Cast member motivation, professionalism, and competency have declined as the turnover rate has increased. So one of the qualifiers, "good crew," is fairly subjective at this point, given these changes. And over the past decade, obesity levels in this nation have risen dramatically, especially among teens and young adults. So the image of riders "moving in and out of the vessel at a good clip" is not one I can easily imagine. Did no one at WDI or TDA think about how slowly many folks will need to navigate that narrow spiral staircase, getting in and out of the subs? Not to mention the cramped seating arrangements, given the average increase in adult girth since the subs closed? I believe the average load/unload times of yesteryear for the subs are now history. And adding two seats will be a drop in the hourly capacity bucket, when the other two conditions of reduced cast member efficiency combined with reduced load/unload times are factored in. Because of the low capacity for subs, I feel the decision to spend over $60 million to refresh this attraction will be one which TDA will eventually regret.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Well, I suppose it it's really a nightmare situation for TDA, after a few years, they may just totally do away with the lagoon and create something new. That's the thing about Disneyland, things can always change. Even if we have to deal with it for several years, if it's a problem it will have to change.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Oh, sorry for the negativity there, I'm just being honest. I do however really really look forward to the new Nemo Subs. No matter the capacity, I think it looks fun and can't wait to ride. We'll just have to wait and see how the capacity issue plays out.
Originally Posted By DlandDug I agree that people have come to expect shorter wait times. Long lines have always been the norm at Disneyland, but our society has changed. People today expect everything NOW. When the submarines were created in 1959, public expectations regarding entertainment were quite different. Disneyland stage shows were longer, and developed more slowly. Take the Tiki Room of 1963. This was considered "fast paced" at the time. Yet, in WDW it has been substantially altered, and in DL, even trimmed by one number, it's still considered slow. A generation raised on the frenetic pace of Sesame Street and MTV has different expectations when it comes to entertainment. The longer the wait, the better the pay off had better be.
Originally Posted By DlandDug That said, I do not agree that capacity is going to so negatively impact the Nemo Subs as to threaten their future. Peter Pan in Fantasyland has always had a mind boggling wait time. Yet, people line up and patiently wait, 365 days a year.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Yes, I don't think it is a waste of money and I don't think Disney will regret the decision. For what is occurring, 60 million is chump change compared to the range of past project costs like DL Pooh, TL98, Snow White Musical, M:S, Light Magic, SGE, and the list goes on... I really think the "guest anger" factor is overestimated. Many guests will refuse to wait and some others will wait and not think the wait was worth it; which is fine. It's not going to be able to serve 30,000 people a day anyways. To follow Doug's example, I know I won't stand in line for Peter Pan when the wait is more than 10 minutes. I won't wait in line for a new, expensive Disney attraction like Test Track either. However, both attractions DO get very long lines, continually - every day. Will there be more fat guests riding than 9 years ago. Probably. I just think it will have a very small impact on the hour to hour, day to day operations. It will be a bigger deal than it was in 1989 or 1959, just not so big that it makes the 60 million investment questionable. I believe the whole guest satisfaction thing will really not be anywhere near the scale of, say, a Light Magic uproar.
Originally Posted By ni_teach >>>I disagree and that there is one fix. That would be to transform the storage dock of the sub area into a real loading dock. Put a ramp over the first dock to get to the second one and you could then load 4 subs at a time rather than just the two.<<< TMICHAEL said: >>> Not feasible. There are actually 3 Subs in load/unload not 2. All 7 subs can and were used at the same time in the past. If you have a good crew and the guests are moving in and out of the vessel at a good clip, then the third sub in load is just leaving dock as the fourth sub is emerging from the caverns. There is no way that capacity can be improved on this relic. And adding 2 seats per sub is kind of a joke. <<< I could be wrong, but my memory of the ride was that the hold up was always at the loading and unloading process and this is what would slow down the whole ride. I can remember many times as a kid where the subs would back up waiting for the front sub to get that last guest into the sub and move so that the rest could move forward. I think that two loading docs would give longer loading times, but would dispatch out the sub in a more timely fashion.
Originally Posted By bean "You're forgetting city hall. It's a virtual certainty that there will be a big marketing campaign behind the new and improved subs, and it will likely be very effective in whetting the appetites of the nemo-loving public. Once they get to the park and find out that it's a two-hour-plus wait in line, they're going to be unhappy - and understandably so. " i do not understand why they should be upset or even blame Disney for this. Do people expect to have attractions opened up just for them. Every theme park that opens up a new attraction usuually has long lines when they open. Wasn't "X" at Magic mountain at times 4 or more hours waiting. i remember when it opened my nephews said they went on two attractions because they waited for "X" the majority of the day. These long lines are expected. Fastpass would just had made the standby time longer. Besides most of the times when disney opens up a new attraction and sees the lines are long they will adjust the hours to allow the line to clear up even if it goes past park closing hours or would even compensate those inlines if the time goes beyond reasonable closing times.
Originally Posted By gadzuux But in this circumstance the long lines aren't just due to the popularity of the new ride, but because the attraction itself is incapable of handling the demand. It's an inherent design flaw, and you can't expect the paying public to just chalk it up. The idea behind any marketing campaign supporting 'nemo' is to say to the public "come to the park and see our latest and greatest". Yet on a 50k to 60k weekend day, only about 20% of that day's guests will ever get on. It's a virtual certainty that more than 20% will want a ride on it. Sorry, but they can't - it's just not physically possible. And some people cannot physically wait in a three to four hour line, even if they want to. Tough luck for them, huh - they'll never get to ride. And you can't say - "oh well, come back another day, maybe you'll have better luck next time" because nothing will have changed. The ratio between the attraction's capacity and the daily headcount will always remain relatively constant. And what happens when one or more of the subs goes 101? After all, it's not practical to expect every vehicle to be working at all times, seven days a week. Capacity is then reduced to less than 1k per hour. So now it's a question of where you draw the line. Is 1200 pph okay, but 700 isn't? Is 1000 okay but 900 isn't? Is three hours wait time okay, but five hours isn't? Is it unfair to "blame" disney for creating a big new family friendly attraction that can only accomodate a tiny fraction of the visitors? I don't think it's unfair at all. If things pan out the way I predict, what disney has done is to build a $60 million "attractive nuisance".
Originally Posted By berol Depends how they market it. If it's the only thing they advertize, it would be more of a pain than if they say 'see our new fireworks, fantasyland theater show, rock it mtn,... oh, btw, nemo.' Factor in multi-day visitors and AP's that can avoid trying to ride on 50K weekdays, people that don't care if they ride or not, the line eventually shrinking to a more managable level, etc. Maybe they'll have to advertize "hey! don't ride nemo!" and show Pirates skeletons in line to make it work.
Originally Posted By berol I don't think it'll automatically be a giant headache, tho maybe. People should generally be aware that new rides mean long lines while it's the big thing and when it's not the big thing, it won't be a must-ride and not as big of a deal to miss in people's minds. As long as there is popcorn, everything will be ok.
