Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Splash Log(Jammer)s

Collapse

Ad Widget

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Splash Log(Jammer)s

    From what I have gathered from the CM's working Splash Mountain, you are no longer allowed to sit in the last seat in ALL of the logs (not even single riders) due to the additional weight causing the logs to jam frequently. One CM even pointed out how they had spent so much money and now they can't even use them for what they were intended to do. Fortunately, I had 2 opportunities to sit in the rear before they stopped loading it...so at least I know what it's like (more exposed to on coming water and slick hard plastic, not rubber, seats). What are your thoughts?

  • #2
    Ughh imo the older logs had more leg room than these new ones in the first 5 seats, and it would be fine for them to spend hundeds of thousands of dollars to increase the capacity significantly like originally intended, but now that we're back at the beginning but with less legroom is a very unfortunate situation.

    Comment


    • #3
      I just can't believe this! Maybe I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't the new log design have been tested to make sure it worked before they changed all of the logs? It seems that somebody really messed up here...

      Comment


      • #4
        Well, they did test the logs. There are dozens of fan photos on the net showing these tests. Did they just not properly weigh down the logs during the tests? It makes no sense.

        Of course, this doesn't effect me too much, considering I have never been on Splash Mountain and I never plan to be on it (me + big drops = no way).
        My Blu-rays/DVDs
        "Every view they hold on you's a piano out of tune
        You're an angel, you're a demon, you're just.... human." - James, Lullaby

        Comment


        • #5
          How did the smaller logs float before with more people in them than these larger (and presumably more buoyant) logs with fewer or the same amount of people (compared to the original logs)? Maybe all the additional seating stuff has made them heavier? or the fact that they had been putting two people in the back had made it lower than the front?

          Comment


          • #6
            Does anyone know if Disneyland will fix the problem before May 5th or will they just continue to have people not sit in the very back? I always enjoyed sitting in the very back seat of the log. :confused:
            I See SPOTS!!!!!!
            :yea: :bow: :lol: :thumbup:

            Magic Kingdom 1992 and 2008
            Disneyland 1984, 1987, 1993 (3x's), 1998, 2005, 2007 :yea:

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by 101 Dalmatians Rule
              Does anyone know if Disneyland will fix the problem before May 5th or will they just continue to have people not sit in the very back? I always enjoyed sitting in the very back seat of the log. :confused:
              Well, we have yet to see the old logs up on Disney auctions so I guess there still is hope for them to fix this problem! Hopefully someone will realize something is up. And with how lucky we have been with recent things... hopefully it will be CM Matt?

              Comment


              • #8
                This is unbelievable. I cannot believe they did not do adequate testing. I say bring back the ORIGINAL logs. Can I get a witness?
                "She's taking everything. She's taking the house, she's taking the kid, she's taking the dog. IT'S NOT EVEN HER DOG. IT'S MY DOG! SHE'S TAKING . . . MY DOG!"
                - Ron Livingston, "Band of Brothers"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by grvtydefy
                  I just can't believe this! Maybe I'm overlooking something, but shouldn't the new log design have been tested to make sure it worked before they changed all of the logs? It seems that somebody really messed up here...
                  Maybe the CMs on Splash were incorrect. It's makes more sense than to sit here and bang your head over how this was tested and doesn't work. What it really comes down to is, no one is really sure just yet what the problem is.

                  - FNDA
                  ~ Tasty, yet morally ambiguous! ~

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by revol yensid
                    How did the smaller logs float before with more people in them than these larger (and presumably more buoyant) logs with fewer or the same amount of people (compared to the original logs)? Maybe all the additional seating stuff has made them heavier? or the fact that they had been putting two people in the back had made it lower than the front?
                    I would guess that both the longer length of the new logs, combined with the extra weight combine to provide a double whammy for the logs.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Are the newest logs the same diameter and length as the previous logs? If they are the larger, navigating through the flume would result in more bumping against the flume walls, yet would provide extra buoyancy for the extra weight. If, however, the logs are the same size, they'll probably sink into the water more with the additioanl weight of another person and/or whatever was added to the log. Either way, it could be a problem.

                      If only a competent mechanical engineer could have handled this ..........right, Gwyren?
                      "She's taking everything. She's taking the house, she's taking the kid, she's taking the dog. IT'S NOT EVEN HER DOG. IT'S MY DOG! SHE'S TAKING . . . MY DOG!"
                      - Ron Livingston, "Band of Brothers"

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I loved the original logs, with just a bench seat and handles.
                        Every size person could fit.
                        Now didn't they space people out when they went to those other logs, were they putting larger people in the back?
                        This concerns my husband and myself (more him than me)!
                        But really, how is all this going to affect us larger people?
                        Goin around the world...and back to Disneyland!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Giant Panda
                          Are the newest logs the same diameter and length as the previous logs? If they are the larger, navigating through the flume would result in more bumping against the flume walls, yet would provide extra buoyancy for the extra weight. If, however, the logs are the same size, they'll probably sink into the water more with the additioanl weight of another person and/or whatever was added to the log. Either way, it could be a problem.

                          If only a competent mechanical engineer could have handled this ..........right, Gwyren?
                          They are definitely longer. I cannot tell if they are larger in diameter and either Splash Mountain has become wetter, the new logs are designed to "enhance" the weeting effect, or they ride lower in the water. I have a feeling they ride lower in the water, but have no proof of that.

                          The logs do not seem to have as much open area inside of the log either. I would not be surprised to learn that they weigh more per unit of length compared to the old logs.

                          I would love to see the assumptions made in building these logs. The goal of upping ridership is laudable, but to spend money for nothing is something only governments try and do.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gwyren
                            They are definitely longer. I cannot tell if they are larger in diameter and either Splash Mountain has become wetter, the new logs are designed to "enhance" the weeting effect, or they ride lower in the water. I have a feeling they ride lower in the water, but have no proof of that.

                            The logs do not seem to have as much open area inside of the log either. I would not be surprised to learn that they weigh more per unit of length compared to the old logs.

                            I would love to see the assumptions made in building these logs. The goal of upping ridership is laudable, but to spend money for nothing is something only governments try and do.

                            Hey! I work for the government, I'm only here to help! Big businesses with huge bureaucracies often have the same problems ....
                            "She's taking everything. She's taking the house, she's taking the kid, she's taking the dog. IT'S NOT EVEN HER DOG. IT'S MY DOG! SHE'S TAKING . . . MY DOG!"
                            - Ron Livingston, "Band of Brothers"

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The only jam that I have witnessed was the return of a rather overburdened log (every seat taken and two in the far back and all in the group adults/large) making the bend just before going under the bridge into the station appeared to be low enough in the water to wedge a bumper or ledge at the bottom of the log caught under some mechanical or support parts just before the conveyor belt. Did the older logs have any parts that went out further than the log itself under water? The new ones appear to in the front and the back (as well as the wheels).
                              Last edited by revol yensid; 04-03-2005, 05:47 PM. Reason: clarifying

                              Comment

                              Ad Widget

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X