The Six Flags Magic Mountain (SFMM) Discussion Thread

[ajinaz]

Can't they put up signs telling people that to speed up the line they have to exit faster? People will listen, who likes long lines?

 

As strange as it sounds, I think part of the reason that the exits are taking so long is because of how cool the ride is. I witnessed this during the rides I have taken.

A group of more than two seems to be the problem. This splits the party up so that they can't talk while waiting for the previous train to dispatch. When they do get off the train they tend to wait for the entire party to walk out together so they can talk about how much they loved the ride.

Robb reported that he has seen 90 second dispatches this week so perhaps they have become more forceful about making guests clear the deck. If they can hustle like that consistently I think that three trains may work.

[RIP Psyclone]

I think twin loading stations would really be the only way to run 3 trains without constant stacking. Before I rode X2 yesterday, I thought they were just being lazy. Now that I've seen the operations, there just isn't a lot of time they could cut from the dispatch intervals. However, as fast as the line seems to be moving at times, hourly capacity is still below 1000. Tim Burkhart said his goal was a capacity of about 1100 per hour. I hope they do find a way.

 

Anyway, X2 is probably the most complete roller coaster experience out there, aside from ones at Disney parks. From the TVs in the queue, as you enter the station and hear the music, ambient noises, and voices ("Is everybody in?" and the echoed "X2"), and up until you ride it, it's a completely themed ride package. The ride itself feels pretty much the same, but the other things really do add to it, as Robb has said.

[wrs28330]

However, as fast as the line seems to be moving at times, hourly capacity is still below 1000.

 

Can you please cite a source for this information. I don't doubt you, I would simply like to know the source.

 

Thanks!

[ebl]

I wonder if they could unload riders in the old unload station at the same time as loading riders in the load station. That way, once the full train leaves, the now-unloaded one could pull into its spot and load while the third train is just finishing its run and coming back in.

 

Did that make sense, or did they already try it?

 

Eric

[RIP Psyclone]

However, as fast as the line seems to be moving at times, hourly capacity is still below 1000.

 

Can you please cite a source for this information. I don't doubt you, I would simply like to know the source.

 

Thanks!

 

It's just simple math. 3 minute dispatchs is 20 dispatches per hour. 20 times 28 = 560 riders per hours. There have been 2 minute intervals, so let's say the average is 2.5 minutes. 2.5 minute intervals amounts to 24 dispatches per hour. 24 times 28 = 672 riders per hour. Even an average of 2 minute intervals, 30 per hour, 30 times 28 = 840 riders per hour. To crack 1000 riders per hour would require 36 dispatches in that hour, each averaging 1:40.

 

I'm just saying, I hope you guys can find a way.

[RIP Psyclone]

I wonder if they could unload riders in the old unload station at the same time as loading riders in the load station. That way, once the full train leaves, the now-unloaded one could pull into its spot and load while the third train is just finishing its run and coming back in.

 

Did that make sense, or did they already try it?

 

Eric

 

Yeah, it seems having one train unloading, one loading, and one making the run at all times would theoretically work. I think making the old unload area into a secondary load/unload area may have the best results, though.

[PeoplemoverMatt]

Having side-by-side loading stations (or multiple load/unload locations) only works when/if the park decides to staff every area. Even Disneyland doesn't bother doing that for Screamin' and Indy during the weekdays anymore (or at least didn't for the entire month of May). Really frustrating when a park actively chooses to make people wait longer because they can't be bothered to run their attractions at optimum capacity, yet charges the same for admission 365 days a year.

 

For 5 consecutive weeks I saw Screamin' loading one side running with 2 trains on Mon/Tues. On weekends, it was 5 trains loading both sides. I always thought Disney crews held themselves to a higher standard but I guess on weekdays they go back to "if it's good enough for Six Flags" mode...

 

-- PMM

[TheBannedKid]

We have a much smaller budget on off-season weekdays than on weekends. To practically double the budget by double our staff would not be allowed. Also we usually use the weekdays to work on our trains and therefore most of them are tagged out and non-operable.

[robbalvey]

^ Well, say what you will but times have certainly changed at Disneyland from when I worked there 20 years ago. Today the crews are far less efficient, spend more time chatting with other employees and not paying attention to guests, and I see lower throughput at both parks.

 

For example, during an off-season day in 1991, you'd never see Big Thunder Mountain run less than three trains even when there was no line. Recently I've seen BTM down to two trains on a "moderate" crowd day with 20 to 30 minute waits.

 

And sure you may say that a "30 minute wait is acceptable" but there used to be a day when that wasn't the mentality.

 

I'm not saying that Disney operations are bad, they just aren't what they used to be.

 

--Robb

[TheBannedKid]

I agree 100%, just thought I would explain that Disney, like every other theme park, has a budget to adhere to and therefore you're not going to see them running at full capacity all the time.

 

Anyways, I too was at SFMM on Thursday and had a blast. We didn't spend the whole day there and still got on everything. My last visit was sometime last year and it was a definite improvement altogether. I'm glad to see Magic doing so well.

[RIP Psyclone]

If the old unload section was turned into a new load/unload section, it would help, as there would be pretty much as trains 1 & 2 would ready to go at all times, after the 3rd train had cleared the coarse. The 2nd train may move to a temporary spot just after the front loading area until the 3rd train, the train now in the front load spot was ready to go and had cleared the course, giving trains 2 and 3 room to unload/load. The 2nd train would dispatch as soon as the 1st trained has cleared the course, just as the 2nd train would be dispatched as long as the first train has clearned the course. The 3rd train would move straight up to the front unload/load area right away, and the process would continue. Of course, Tatsu style would work better, but the width of the station would be prohibative.

 

Trains 1 & 2 unloading and unloading while train 3 is in the course.

Train 3 catches up, train 1 is dispatched, train 2 moves forward out of the load area until until train 1 returns.

 

So basically: 1 & 2 unloading/loading, 3 making the run.

3 & 1 unloading/loading, 2 making the run.

2 & 3 unloading/loading, 1 making the run.

 

And so forth. This would be so there would always be a locked and loaded train ready to go.

[NYTrojan]

If the old unload section was turned into a new load/unload section, it would help, as there would be pretty much as trains 1 & 2 would ready to go at all times, after the 3rd train had cleared the coarse. The 2nd train may move to a temporary spot just after the front loading area until the 3rd train, the train now in the front load spot was ready to go and had cleared the course, giving trains 2 and 3 room to unload/load. The 2nd train would dispatch as soon as the 1st trained has cleared the course, just as the 2nd train would be dispatched as long as the first train has clearned the course. The 3rd train would move straight up to the front unload/load area right away, and the process would continue. Of course, Tatsu style would work better, but the width of the station would be prohibative.

 

Trains 1 & 2 unloading and unloading while train 3 is in the course.

Train 3 catches up, train 1 is dispatched, train 2 moves forward out of the load area until until train 1 returns.

 

So basically: 1 & 2 unloading/loading, 3 making the run.

3 & 1 unloading/loading, 2 making the run.

2 & 3 unloading/loading, 1 making the run.

 

And so forth. This would be so there would always be a locked and loaded train ready to go.

 

Maybe I'm missing something but wasn't this how the old X was designed to run but things just didn't work out? The problem was that when a train pulled into the unloading section it had to stop, rails had to go up, seats had to rotate, people had to leave and fully clear the area (creating a new dispatch event where operators had to give the thumbs up that the train could proceed), then the rails could go down, the seats could rotate back to prone position, and move to the loading position. This just took so long that when you had 2 trains running you still ended up with one stacked before the unloading train could make it to the loading section.

[Mechanic]

I believe his point was to have 2 loading/unloading platforms operating simultaneously. That is, unless I'm mistaken.

[RIP Psyclone]

^I first stated how dual loading stations would be the best way to go, then I shared what I believe would be the best way to unload/load in separate areas as was done before.

[NYTrojan]

a dual loading station (linear, like Maverick or Top Thrill Dragster, not split like Tatsu) would be nice, but can't work unless you have a place for the fully loaded but not yet ready to dispatch train to go.

 

For example, if you are loading two trains at once, and they are both ready, you can only send the first one off. Then the next train, fully loaded, has to go somewhere while the dispatched train rolls. If the only place for it to go is right where the previous train loaded... you're back down to one place that can actually load.

 

There are 3 trains, 1,2, and 3, and two loading stations. A is closest to the lift, B is behind A. Trains 1 and 2 load in stations A and B. Train 1 dispatches, train 2 moves forward.... to loading station A. Train 3 can load in station B, but station A is stuck. And will remain stuck as train 2 is dispatched and train 3 takes its place in station A.

 

You need an empty spot before the lift (like TTD and Maverick have) to do it.

 

All in all, I think this is as good as X is going to get without a pretty complete overhaul of the ride's station. It is definitely better than it ever was. The ride used to be prohibitively slow. Now it is pretty close to other slow loading but not end-your-day slow. It's pretty close to Tatsu and faster than Deja Vu. It's no magic bullet, but I am pretty darn impressed with what they were able to accomplish.

[nagro5]

^Yeah, I think this is as good as we're going to get with X2. Besides, if we do that method, it's basically like stacking before the ride even starts.

[PeoplemoverMatt]

I agree 100%, just thought I would explain that Disney, like every other theme park, has a budget to adhere to and therefore you're not going to see them running at full capacity all the time.

 

You call it running on a budget, I call it being cheap. As Robb said, operations aren't what they used to be. The top brass actively choose where not to spend money, knowing full well what the consequences will be, and it comes down to you as running on a budget. I get it, but I still don't like it, especially when Disney did just fine not doing that in the past.

 

I can understand trains breaking down affecting capacity. I can understand configuration of a system basically setting what the capacity will be. What I have a very low tolerance of is any theme park charging as much as possible for parking/admission, etc and then turning around and purposely cheaping out on those guests. This can be done by not running more than 1-2 trains on weekdays. This can be done by hiring minimum wage slackers who'll spend more time chatting with each other & on a cell phone than actually doing their job. This can be done by building two loading stations for your attraction, and then rarely, if ever, using both sides. It's very transparent when it does happen. That's why people complain about it & have complained about Six Flags doing it for years.

 

To see Disney taking the cheap way out is just flat depressing. Magic Mountain is at least saying they're trying to do their best with what they have, and Six Flags is pretty deep in debt. Disney is hardly having financial problems. For them, budget is no excuse IMHO.

 

-- PMM

[Bolliger&Mabillard]

^One thing I can (and always have) applaud Magic Mountain for is their ability to operate yearround outside of peak season. Many people may like coasters and things relating to coasters but not have an actual understanding of how to run a park.

 

Tatsu, Scream, Riddler's Revenge, Goliath, Ninja, Viper and X all have 3 trains, but these rides may not be able to run all three trains at once. It is a maintainece requirement that once a train reaches 10,000 cycles it has to be rehabed. The wheels, shocks axels have to be replaced/serviced. This can take up to 30 days to do. Magic Mountain does not have the advantage as other parks to say "We're closed for 7 months while we fix everything, sorry." They have to rehab the park while being open at least weekends, so MM has somewhat of an excuse. Paying nearly 70 bucks for just Disneyland, 11 bucks for parking to stand in line for Space mountain for 45 minutes with them running 6-7 rockets....slightly more upsetting.

[Bolliger&Mabillard]

The CSI show is going to be in Magic Moments Theatre, right?

[nagro5]

^Yes.

[Jew]

I agree 100%, just thought I would explain that Disney, like every other theme park, has a budget to adhere to and therefore you're not going to see them running at full capacity all the time.

 

You call it running on a budget, I call it being cheap. As Robb said, operations aren't what they used to be. The top brass actively choose where not to spend money, knowing full well what the consequences will be, and it comes down to you as running on a budget. I get it, but I still don't like it, especially when Disney did just fine not doing that in the past.

 

I can understand trains breaking down affecting capacity. I can understand configuration of a system basically setting what the capacity will be. What I have a very low tolerance of is any theme park charging as much as possible for parking/admission, etc and then turning around and purposely cheaping out on those guests. This can be done by not running more than 1-2 trains on weekdays. This can be done by hiring minimum wage slackers who'll spend more time chatting with each other & on a cell phone than actually doing their job. This can be done by building two loading stations for your attraction, and then rarely, if ever, using both sides. It's very transparent when it does happen. That's why people complain about it & have complained about Six Flags doing it for years.

 

To see Disney taking the cheap way out is just flat depressing. Magic Mountain is at least saying they're trying to do their best with what they have, and Six Flags is pretty deep in debt. Disney is hardly having financial problems. For them, budget is no excuse IMHO.

 

-- PMM

 

There's a difference between being cheap and being efficient. Back in the 80's the capacity/attendance trends/economy were different. Times have changed since then. A park has to find that balance between efficiency and fiscal responsibility. If the park is only predicting 10,000 guests, it doesn't make sense to run more than 3 trains (or whatever the number might be).

 

I'm OK with a park doing what you call "being cheap" as long as they react accordingly to any crowds/lines that do build up. It's being smart with their money.

[nursemelis374]

My brother and a friend of his returned to SFMM last Tuesday after more than 10 years of absence. He said they had a great time and the park felt much less ghetto than it did before. His only complaint was the cost of parking but he did say that the cheap admission more than made up for that.

 

On a funny note he told me that they were in line for a coaster and the girls in front of them tried to get on with their cell phones and water bottles. The operator told them they needed to get a locker. They were redundant about getting out of line and paying for a locker so my brother offered to hold it for them and give it to them when they got back. They agreed and him and his friend ended up spending the afternoon with them. My mack daddy little bro (who is 26 and not really little) even ended up getting one of their numbers. So, all you that are asking how do you meet girls, here you go.

 

I think this proves one thing. Jay and his team are not interested in making money of the lockers, but rather helping all you coaster fans out there meet the ladies. You should be thanking them.

[PeoplemoverMatt]

There's a difference between being cheap and being efficient. Back in the 80's the capacity/attendance trends/economy were different. Times have changed since then. A park has to find that balance between efficiency and fiscal responsibility. If the park is only predicting 10,000 guests, it doesn't make sense to run more than 3 trains (or whatever the number might be).

 

I'm OK with a park doing what you call "being cheap" as long as they react accordingly to any crowds/lines that do build up. It's being smart with their money.

 

This is another topic for another thread, so I'll leave it with this:

 

It's just amazing to me that any park would take the 10,000 guests they managed to get for granted like that, when operations would suddenly be different if those 10,000 all brought a friend with them. Joey I know you're a manager, and I'm not, but it seems to me like being smart with your money is giving those 10,000 people the time of their lives so they'll come back AND bring a friend with them. Might cost a little more initially, but that money will come back if done right. Making them wait 45mins when they don't need to doesn't accomplish that goal. That's all I'm going to say in principle about that.

 

Fortunately, it looks like Magic Mountain is at least trying to show that in some places, they're taking more of the 'give the 10,000 we have a great time' route. They're not perfect at it. There are some gaping holes still. But I hope the kind of 'invest in WOW' thinking they've been using eventually finds its way into all facets & all nooks & crannies of the park. That will be nice to see.

[Jew]

^10,000 guests don't NEED 5 trains. 10,000 guests can have the same wait with 3 trains and a 4th ready to go if it's needed. Theme parks wouldn't be able to stay in business if they subscribed to your business model.

 

But getting back to the topic....Magic Mountain has a long way to go if they want to live up to your standards. Because you won't find Magic running 3 trains when it isn't needed either. I haven't seen Tatsu or RRv running 3 trains in ages. I've only seen it on Viper and Goliath. Which is something, but still...

[ebl]

^ They were running three trains on X2 last night for ERT, but stacking miserably. I did run my "use the unload area" by Jay, and he just said that once the new OSTRs loosen up, things will flow better.

 

Eric