• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

PortAventura: General Discussion

Enter Valhalla said:
Huracan Condor has three sit down sections and two stand up sections, yet one big queue for everything.

This system actually can increase wait times for people who don’t want the more popular sections. On Apocalypse you’ll often see one section with a longer queue than another. Say if more people wanted the sit down section, why should people who want the stand up section have to wait longer with all the people who want the sit down section? This seems unfair as it is, but even more unfair when you consider that at the front of the queue, these people may end up being directed to a section of the ride that they didn’t even want.

I really like PA as a park and frequently stand up for them when they receive unfair criticism from people on this forum. But unfortunately there are many things, like this, where PA just don’t help themselves. It could be so easily changed at very little cost. But for reasons known only to PA they choose not to. This leads to even more annoyance with the park and a greater feeling of ridicule towards their operations.
Click to expand...

I get both of your points, and it wouldn't bother me which way the queue was, my point is by splitting them you'd end up waiting longer to ride.

The ride is run in a way where it's random to whether you have a sit down tower or a stand up tower. That's how it is, that's the ride, so if it bothers some people that much you're probably better off not riding.

Tower of Terror at Disneyland Paris now has a different drop sequence for each tower, can you imagine the queues if they started letting people decide which one they wanted?

I get what you're both saying and it wouldn't bother me either way which it was, because I don't care if I'm on sit down or stand up in the first place. But jumping back to the point that started all this, if you did split the queues, meaning you got to decide which you rode, you're more than likely extending your wait time, which will make it longer than it is now, especially if a tower breaks down. Imagine the queue if only one stand up tower was out of service? You'd be waiting for 1 tower instead of 4 as you would be now.

Before someone pipes in and says I'm being a fan boy, it works the same with Apocalypse the other way around. The ride rarely has a queue anyway which is probably why people are saying the two queues work. But if the ride was busy then your wait time would be quicker using all 5 towers than 2 or 3.

*and breath*
 
Before I start, let me make perfectly clear that I’m posting this as someone with no vested interest, who has never visited PA, nor has that much interest/enthusiasm in it.

———

I think the simple fact of the matter is would you rather wait 15 minutes for a ride only to not enjoy it the way you hoped, or 30 minutes and get exactly what you want. We’re not talking about a minor difference like which colour tracker (and therefore lighting and sound package) on Rock n Rollercoaster. We’re talking about two very different actual ride experiences in terms of intensity and thrill level.

A split queue could, and probably would result in one side waiting longer than the other due to popularity, as is often seen with Apocalypse. However, if guests are getting the exactly experience that they want then I’d say that is an acceptable trade off. What harm does it do by offering it?

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer to this. Some people may well look at it and say “sod it, we’ll just do the sit down side ‘cause it’s shorter”, but I think the key point here is that it is their decision, rather than something forced upon them. It’s the same reason front and back row queues exist. If people are willing to wait that bit longer they have the choice to do so, but others will be quite happy to settle for an alternative if they deem the additional wait unnecessary.

I do think though with such a different ride experience as standing and sitting it seems illogical to not offer the choice, when it requires very little additional work to implement. Surely there must be some guests as well who may be willing to ride while sitting but not standing? Are they completely alienated for this at the moment or is it a case that someone perhaps distressed about the prospect of standing may be moved to sitting, but not the other way around?

On the subject of ToT at DLP, I’ve both found and witnessed that if you ask you can select which version you ride (though some cast members will huff and puff about it). I can understand this not being something they actively promote, given the setup of the ride. But I do think that for your average guest it’s fairly immaterial as there is little/no expectation as to the story and ride you receive (you can’t tell the difference from off-ride for example, and aside from marketing material where really is it actually highlighted when on the ride?).

Ultimately, although the story and sequence varies, the physical ride experience is consistent across the board (albeit with some variance in intensity and force I'm sure some would argue). Therefore, I’m not sure it’s a 100% fair comparison to draw with a sit down/stand up tower.
 
Ian said:
Before I start, let me make perfectly clear that I’m posting this as someone with no vested interest, who has never visited PA, nor has that much interest/enthusiasm in it.

———

I think the simple fact of the matter is would you rather wait 15 minutes for a ride only to not enjoy it the way you hoped, or 30 minutes and get exactly what you want. We’re not talking about a minor difference like which colour tracker (and therefore lighting and sound package) on Rock n Rollercoaster. We’re talking about two very different actual ride experiences in terms of intensity and thrill level.

A split queue could, and probably would result in one side waiting longer than the other due to popularity, as is often seen with Apocalypse. However, if guests are getting the exactly experience that they want then I’d say that is an acceptable trade off. What harm does it do by offering it?

There’s no one-size-fits-all answer to this. Some people may well look at it and say “sod it, we’ll just do the sit down side ‘cause it’s shorter”, but I think the key point here is that it is their decision, rather than something forced upon them. It’s the same reason front and back row queues exist. If people are willing to wait that bit longer they have the choice to do so, but others will be quite happy to settle for an alternative if they deem the additional wait unnecessary.

I do think though with such a different ride experience as standing and sitting it seems illogical to not offer the choice, when it requires very little additional work to implement. Surely there must be some guests as well who may be willing to ride while sitting but not standing? Are they completely alienated for this at the moment or is it a case that someone perhaps distressed about the prospect of standing may be moved to sitting, but not the other way around?

On the subject of ToT at DLP, I’ve both found and witnessed that if you ask you can select which version you ride (though some cast members will huff and puff about it). I can understand this not being something they actively promote, given the setup of the ride. But I do think that for your average guest it’s fairly immaterial as there is little/no expectation as to the story and ride you receive (you can’t tell the difference from off-ride for example, and aside from marketing material where really is it actually highlighted when on the ride?).

Ultimately, although the story and sequence varies, the physical ride experience is consistent across the board (albeit with some variance in intensity and force I'm sure some would argue). Therefore, I’m not sure it’s a 100% fair comparison to draw with a sit down/stand up tower.
Click to expand...

One thing I've just realised from reading your post about people not knowing about the different shafts on ToT...

It's not promoted anywhere in marketing (or around the ride for that matter) that Hurakan Condor has sit down and stand up towers, and as you can hardly tell from viewing the ride in operation either, the average guest wouldn't even know the different towers exist.

Therefore the only people who would know would be fans or people who have ridden a few times. The only times I've known them to move people is due to height restrictions as some towers have a lower requirement.
 
A very easily solution to this is having one big main queue for both sides, then splitting the queue near the station so you then choose what side you want to pick. That way the main queue is being fed by all sides of the tower, then when only a minimal amount of people are left in the queue, you pick what side you want to ride.

In the same way a front row queue works.
 
owentaylor121 said:
A very easily solution to this is having one big main queue for both sides, then splitting the queue near the station so you then choose what side you want to pick. That way the main queue is being fed by all sides of the tower, then when only a minimal amount of people are left in the queue, you pick what side you want to ride.

In the same way a front row queue works.
Click to expand...

It would be quickest and easiest to implement, but I think it causes quite significant problems.

If you have 20 minutes of guests from the split, all wanting to ride stand-up, you’ve effectively closed the sit-down towers for 20 minutes. Imagine being stood in that line, wanting sit down, but seeing it sat idle while you queue. You’re dramatically increasing the wait time for those guests, and you remove the option for spontaneous guests who will happily change side if it means a shorter wait (and who therefore actually stop the busy line from getting longer still).

On many coasters with front row queues you have a significant number of riders who are not sitting in the front, so your main queue keeps moving efficiently and feeds people to the split quickly, but if you’re effectively talking about halving your ride’s capacity, which you could be doing with a tower like this, then it becomes more problematic.

From a commercial point of view it isn’t particular economical either having towers staffed and powered up but doing nothing. All it will lead to is a situation like with Winjas at Phantasialand where they end up forcing guests down one path at the split to actually get the ride running and staff doing something. This is a ride which used to run two separate queues but had them later condensed into one with a last minute split. It isn’t uncommon to see guests arguing with staff when they are told they must change side to ride the other coaster. I think it would be naïve to say that comes as unexpected if someone waited 45-60 minutes for one coaster, went to ride the other, waited another 45-60 minutes and was then told no, you must ride the same thing again. It’s a massive chunk out of your day as a guest.

Don’t get me wrong, this is still something which could happen with completely separate queues, but you can at least hope that some guests are attracted by the shorter wait, which isn’t possible with a shared queue.

Anyway, that’s my two cents on the whole matter. Regardless of if you love the park or not I don’t think it is unfair to acknowledge the fact that the current system is flawed in that it ultimately results in disappointment for some riders. I see a lot of criticism of PA, and I agree that some of it is perhaps harsher than it needs to be, but I don’t believe that this discussion is completely unfounded. No park is perfect and progress is never made if issues are not acknowledged :)

Peace out.
 
siralgenon said:
Imagine the queue if only one stand up tower was out of service? You'd be waiting for 1 tower instead of 4 as you would be now.
Click to expand...

But there wouldn’t be as many people in the queue. The people who want the sit down seats would be waiting in the other queue. You’d be waiting for 1 tower as opposed to 2, not 1 tower as opposed to 4 which you are suggesting. I really don’t see how you’re not getting this logic.

I personally have seen guests asking staff for specific seats, the staff refusing and then standing there arguing thereby slowing down the queue for everyone. Separate queues would resolve this issue.

As already mentioned, it would be such an easy thing to put in place. You’re saying that most people don’t know that there are different types of experience. Well then why have two different experiences in the first place then? Just make them all sit down and save the bother.
 
Ian said:
It would be quickest and easiest to implement, but I think it causes quite significant problems.

If you have 20 minutes of guests from the split, all wanting to ride stand-up, you’ve effectively closed the sit-down towers for 20 minutes. Imagine being stood in that line, wanting sit down, but seeing it sat idle while you queue. You’re dramatically increasing the wait time for those guests, and you remove the option for spontaneous guests who will happily change side if it means a shorter wait (and who therefore actually stop the busy line from getting longer still).

On many coasters with front row queues you have a significant number of riders who are not sitting in the front, so your main queue keeps moving efficiently and feeds people to the split quickly, but if you’re effectively talking about halving your ride’s capacity, which you could be doing with a tower like this, then it becomes more problematic.

From a commercial point of view it isn’t particular economical either having towers staffed and powered up but doing nothing. All it will lead to is a situation like with Winjas at Phantasialand where they end up forcing guests down one path at the split to actually get the ride running and staff doing something. This is a ride which used to run two separate queues but had them later condensed into one with a last minute split. It isn’t uncommon to see guests arguing with staff when they are told they must change side to ride the other coaster. I think it would be naïve to say that comes as unexpected if someone waited 45-60 minutes for one coaster, went to ride the other, waited another 45-60 minutes and was then told no, you must ride the same thing again. It’s a massive chunk out of your day as a guest.

Don’t get me wrong, this is still something which could happen with completely separate queues, but you can at least hope that some guests are attracted by the shorter wait, which isn’t possible with a shared queue.

Anyway, that’s my two cents on the whole matter. Regardless of if you love the park or not I don’t think it is unfair to acknowledge the fact that the current system is flawed in that it ultimately results in disappointment for some riders. I see a lot of criticism of PA, and I agree that some of it is perhaps harsher than it needs to be, but I don’t believe that this discussion is completely unfounded. No park is perfect and progress is never made if issues are not acknowledged :)

Peace out.
Click to expand...
Geek essay of the year nomination please.
Detailed geekery of the highest order.
 
Enter Valhalla said:
But there wouldn’t be as many people in the queue. The people who want the sit down seats would be waiting in the other queue. You’d be waiting for 1 tower as opposed to 2, not 1 tower as opposed to 4 which you are suggesting. I really don’t see how you’re not getting this logic.

I personally have seen guests asking staff for specific seats, the staff refusing and then standing there arguing thereby slowing down the queue for everyone. Separate queues would resolve this issue.

As already mentioned, it would be such an easy thing to put in place. You’re saying that most people don’t know that there are different types of experience. Well then why have two different experiences in the first place then? Just make them all sit down and save the bother.
Click to expand...

I meant if they had split the queue you'd be waiting to ride on one tower as opposed to four. I'm not going to keep typing the same thing over and over again, as Ian said the same queue set up has been removed from other rides due to it not working.

It doesn't bother me either way as I'll ride whichever, you've also got to take into consideration (nearly?) each tower has something which makes it unique to the others, whether it be floorless, stand up, stand up tilting, sit down tilting, so where do you draw the line of how many queues for which ride experience.

I think if the notion of not being able to choose bothers someone that much they might be best not riding. It's a very popular ride so I don't think too many people are losing sleep over it.

Plus don't get into an argument with a ride host, it's their job to tell you where to sit.

@Enter Valhalla that's not all aimed directly at you it's just a general overview. That's my last post on the matter because it's getting a bit tedious.
 
I often DON'T ride to avoid the risk of being stuck with the inferior sit down version after a long wait. Splitting the queue would avoid this.

Ian said:
We’re not talking about a minor difference like which colour tracker (and therefore lighting and sound package) on Rock n Rollercoaster
Click to expand...
Sweet Emotion completely kills that ride and I will not be convinced otherwise.
 
John said:
I often DON'T ride to avoid the risk of being stuck with the inferior sit down version after a long wait. Splitting the queue would avoid this.
Click to expand...

Hit the nail on the head. Why should I, John and so many other people be deprived from experiencing the stand up sections of the ride when this is something which we are keen to do? Why should we queue an hour or longer only to end up with an experience which we didn’t want?

@siralgenon You say you don’t want to keep repeating yourself, but you’re failing to listen to or take into account the many valid arguments which have been presented to you. Whilst you may have responded to some of them, people have explained why your logic is not correct.
 
Last edited:
Enter Valhalla said:
Hit the nail on the head. Why should I, John and so many other people be deprived from experiencing the stand up sections of the ride when this is something which we are keen to do? Why should we queue an hour or longer only to end up with an experience which we didn’t want?

@siralgenon You say you don’t want to keep repeating yourself, but you’re failing to listen to or take into account the many valid arguments which have been presented to you. Whilst you may have responded to some of them, people have explained why your logic is not correct.
Click to expand...

I fully understand other people's comments and I've read every one. But as I've said unless the people are split 30% / 70% standing to seated, then it would result in you waiting longer. And as Ian said other rides have had this queue set up and it's been reverted back.

I just don't think the throughput is high enough to warrant two separate queues. If it was the Thrill Towers in Ferrari Land, fair enough because it's two separate towers with more seats.
 
siralgenon said:
I fully understand other people's comments and I've read every one. But as I've said unless the people are split 30% / 70% standing to seated, then it would result in you waiting longer. And as Ian said other rides have had this queue set up and it's been reverted back.

I just don't think the throughput is high enough to warrant two separate queues. If it was the Thrill Towers in Ferrari Land, fair enough because it's two separate towers with more seats.
Click to expand...

I honestly don’t see how the throughput has anything to do with it. One separate queue will be longer if it’s not a 50/50 split of course. But the ride would run more efficiently and, from a customer service point of view, it is much better to give people the choice rather than telling them they HAVE TO sit in specific seats which they may not want.

As I said, this is an example of something where PA just don’t help themselves. I love the park and disagree with most of the negativity. But there are some things which the park do which could be so easily remedied and would make perceptions of their operations so much better. It baffles me that they choose to operate in this way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: D4n
This is being way over complicated :tearsofjoy:

It comes down to this:
Some people would rather queue 30 minutes to be guaranteed a ride on a stand-up drop tower than 20 minutes for a lottery.

Paying customers should be afforded that choice.

If that means that the queue is shorter for people wanting to (choosing to!) ride the sit-down version of the attraction that's better still.

The idea that the queue will suddenly become massively longer if you give people the choice is absurd. Roughly the same number of people will be riding the ride (and ride queues tend to find their own equilibrium - if the stand-up towers have a 5p minute wait and the sit-down towers are virtually walk-on then people will almost invariably choose the latter). No issue.
 
I only rode Apocalypse because it let me pick my riding style. I wasn't brave enough to ride stand-up the first time. If I didn't have the choice I'd have probably simply not ridden.

siralgenon said:
...as Ian said the same queue set up has been removed from other rides due to it not working.
...
Click to expand...
You keep cherry picking this example from Ian's post because it fits your narrative but this was not the overall point Ian was making. Yes 1 very specific ride had a split queue that didn't work because 1 side is significantly superior to the other. But as Ian also points out the removal of this causes arguments between staff and guests, so it could be argued they should have kept both queues.
Personally I was glad to have 2 queues when I went because it let me experience both without leaving it to luck. This was not the case with Talocan, where I ended up with the less impressive backside both times. However in that rides case they just need to make the both sides an equal experience rather than giving the guest a choice.
 
I don't get what everyone is getting so worked up about, if you don't agree with my opinion that's fine, but I stick by it's better how it is. I rather enjoy getting to the front of the queue and it being a 'surprise' of which tower I get, the same as if you were waiting for a coaster and you just get put in the front row as opposed to waiting specifically for it.

As I said, I understand why people would prefer two queues, but at the end of the day it has one, and if you're going to be painstakingly heartbroken and have to have an argument with the ride host then maybe it's not the ride for you.

Again it's nothing to do with it being at PortAventura, the situation wouldn't bother me anywhere, whether it comes down to a level of geekyness I don't know but I just enjoy a ride for what it is and if I don't then I don't ride it in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top