There are many reasons why Nemesis is better but there's pros for both rides. Not bothered about people preffering Nemesis as it's a very good ride but saying Smiler is bad just isn't true. Even if you don't like the ride it's far from bad it's very unique
-
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.
The Smiler - General Discussion
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
Dave
TS Founding Member
It can ride bad and it’s aesthetic is horrid, the layout is fine.
If an orchestra is playing a beautiful symphony but someone’s phone is ringing you can’t pay attention to anything other than the phone, The Smilers layout is great but the roughness is not ignorable for a lot of people and distracts from that.
You also have the dire throughput, depressing queue line. Add those to the mix and it becomes a roller coaster I rarely bother riding. But each to their own.
Danscott22
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- The Smiler
Thing is, as much as I like the ride personally, I can completely see why others say it's bad.
Blackhole_Sun
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Black Hole
That’s an interesting insight actually, I hadn’t thought about moving smiler to level ground and what it would do for the ride. Looking at it on Sunday it’s clear they have done nothing to it in years. Mould on the inside, queue is disgusting, track is mouldy and rusty.
Needs a lot of care and attention. It may well get after nemesis is done and project Horizon is complete (if it lasts this long).
It's not that far off Wicker man when they're running it properly. Smiler on 4 trains could maybe hit 57 dispatches per hour and wicker man on 3 will reach about 40. So that's approx 912pph on Smiler and 960 on Wicker. Both rides are in the 900s so I think that's ok. None of towers rides have Disney level throughputs tbf
Dave
TS Founding Member
As John says Wickerman consistently gets close to theoretical, Smiler does not.
They don’t need Disney levels but Nemesis consistently gets 1200-1300 an hour without breaking a sweat.
As I say I have nothing against the Smiler, if the transitions where better and the stall issue sorted, get an exit station to up the throughput and boost the theme quality then it would probably be a must ride for me.
As it is now if I can guarantee no more than 15-20min in the disgusting concrete prison themed queue then I will ride, otherwise I will have a pint instead
Presumably more dispatches = more opportunities for slippage, right?As John says Wickerman consistently gets close to theoretical, Smiler does not.
They don’t need Disney levels but Nemesis consistently gets 1200-1300 an hour without breaking a sweat.
As I say I have nothing against the Smiler, if the transitions where better and the stall issue sorted, get an exit station to up the throughput and boost the theme quality then it would probably be a must ride for me.
As it is now if I can guarantee no more than 15-20min in the disgusting concrete prison themed queue then I will ride, otherwise I will have a pint instead
Might be me being dumb here but surely adding an offload station to Smiler would increase throughput greatly? I had an evac last year from one car behind the loading area. There is more than enough room and the station platform goes back far enough for it to be safe. They would just have to modify it in closed season to actually allow the restraints to release in that area, and also put a fixed barrier at the back of the station for safety reasons. A simple thing like that could easily up Smiler’s throughput over the 1000pph mark as people getting on could just sit straight down and off u go (assume bagage hold is open).
Anyone see a reason why this is a bad idea/can’t be done?
Anyone see a reason why this is a bad idea/can’t be done?
Could work but Rita has an offload platform and the throughput is still terrible
RIPCorky
TS Member
Yes Merlin won't be able to sell fast tracks for it.
George W
TS Member
I think they mean if the queue is less consistently over an hour less people would buy fast track for it, it'll always sell fast track on proper peak days regardless.
Rick
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Crux
I am not sure how beneficial a separate off-load would be given the number of trains that they run sometimes.
If you're running 3, for example, it's probably more efficient to load and unload from the same station (park, unload, load), rather than park / unload / move / park / load.
On four trains, maybe ?
If you're running 3, for example, it's probably more efficient to load and unload from the same station (park, unload, load), rather than park / unload / move / park / load.
On four trains, maybe ?
Yeah I agree that with 3 trains there is little benefit, but with 4 I think it could add 200ish pph. Just thinking of how they could improve it without spending much (merlin’s favourite way 
). But as has already been said, it’d cost them by selling less fast track so that’s probably the biggest reason they haven’t done it.
). But as has already been said, it’d cost them by selling less fast track so that’s probably the biggest reason they haven’t done it.
AT86
TS Member
I very much doubt fastrack sales play a factor in decisions like this. But for arguments sake let’s say they did - someone prepared to drop £10 on a fastrack ticket to skip a 60 min queue is highly likely to do the same for a 50min queue if throughput was to improve with such a change, so I doubt there would be any material impact to fastrack sales.
It’s far more likely that this kind of change hasn’t been implemented because it wouldn’t actually increase throughput that much in real world scenarios relative to what it would cost to make the changes and the potential requirement for an extra staff member for the off load platform to have to pay for.
It’s far more likely that this kind of change hasn’t been implemented because it wouldn’t actually increase throughput that much in real world scenarios relative to what it would cost to make the changes and the potential requirement for an extra staff member for the off load platform to have to pay for.
John
TS Member
- Favourite Ride
- Steel Vengeance
To expand on Rick's point - offload only makes sense if the ride is running enough trains to guarantee that the empty train still has to wait for onload to clear after guests have disembarked. If the onload station is waiting for a train to arrive because it's sat at offload then it's a waste of time.
Most of last year Smiler was on 3 trains resulting in times when there was no train in the station at all. Even on 4 there'd be little or no benefit as the trains rarely stacked long enough to have unloaded before onload became free - you'd need 5 to get any real benefit.
Even with ideal conditions the difference can be marginal. Blue Fire operates with or without a separate offload platform and the achieved throughput seems to be very similar either way.
Most of last year Smiler was on 3 trains resulting in times when there was no train in the station at all. Even on 4 there'd be little or no benefit as the trains rarely stacked long enough to have unloaded before onload became free - you'd need 5 to get any real benefit.
Even with ideal conditions the difference can be marginal. Blue Fire operates with or without a separate offload platform and the achieved throughput seems to be very similar either way.
Steve74
TS Member
I've got 33 or 34mph in my mind, whether that's gusts or not I don't know