AVATAR land - the specifics

[Coaster Lover]

it may be more efficient as well and not need as much water...maybe? haha

Tough to say... if the boats are free floating like in any of the other three and are smaller/more buoyant than the boats on Pirates, they wouldn't displace as much water and therefore would not require as deep of water (granted the water in Pirates isn't that deep to begin with. If that was the case, then that would change the numbers dramatically. If the boats are actually on an omnimover type system (as they are using in Shanghai for Pirates there), in theory there could be very, very little water (just a couple inches would be more than sufficient in a room that will otherwise be mostly dark) and in that case the ride would be huge. Does the original permit have a scale that you could estimate the length of the ride in feet/meters? That might be a better estimate of length than looking at water usage.

 

[Marc Davis Fan]

So, just in total gallons, the Avatar attraction would be 1/4 the total water usage. If we apply that figure to everything else, we assume then that the total length of the ride is 1/4 the length of the POC at Disneyland, which is a 16 minute ride, which results in this ride being about 4 minutes long (give or take a minute or so of course).

We should also take into account that POTC uses a lot of water beyond the flume's path. For example, the Blue Bayou and the ship/fort scenes have water extending out past the flume, into what are essentially ponds. If this attraction doesn't include features like that, I could imagine it being an additional maybe 1-3 minutes (making it say 5-7 minutes).

Also, does anyone know the depth of DL's POTC flume, and whether a more modern flume (MK's Splash?) is built differently?

 

[G00fyDad]

It would be nice if the water was able to be pumped to the top of the floating mountains so that it could waterfall down from one to another.

 

[A foolish mortal]

It would be nice if the water was able to be pumped to the top of the floating mountains so that it could waterfall down from one to another.

I thought it was? :O

 

[mikeh]

An interesting South Florida Water Management Permit was submitted today for Avatarland.
View attachment 130058

Shows what I assume will be cast parking too

 

[Coaster Lover]

After what I've seen they are using the same system as Shanghai

But would an omnimover based attraction have what clearly looks to be a maintenance bay? I mean, we have not yet seen the system in Shanghai, so I doubt it's possibly to say for sure, but none of the non-aquatic omnimovers have a maintenance bay similar to this. I guess there may be the possibility/necessity to remove some boats from the omnimover base and free float them into a maintenance bay either for repairs or for in the slower time when they may want to have more distance between boats... all hypothetical of course...

 

[A foolish mortal]

But would an omnimover based attraction have what clearly looks to be a maintenance bay? I mean, we have not yet seen the system in Shanghai, so I doubt it's possibly to say for sure, but none of the non-aquatic omnimovers have a maintenance bay similar to this. I guess there may be the possibility/necessity to remove some boats from the omnimover base and free float them into a maintenance bay either for repairs or in the slower time when they may want to have more distance between boats... all hypothetical of course...

You are right.. its hard to say. I just had this picture in mind (looking at the tracks) But I'm not really familiar with the look of the systems so i have NO idea

 

[danlb_2000]

Shows what I assume will be cast parking too

Yes, which I mentioned in my post.

 

[peter11435]

But would an omnimover based attraction have what clearly looks to be a maintenance bay? I mean, we have not yet seen the system in Shanghai, so I doubt it's possibly to say for sure, but none of the non-aquatic omnimovers have a maintenance bay similar to this. I guess there may be the possibility/necessity to remove some boats from the omnimover base and free float them into a maintenance bay either for repairs or for in the slower time when they may want to have more distance between boats... all hypothetical of course...

Omninovers do have maintenance bays. They are just typically not filled with water.

 

[mikeh]

Yes, which I mentioned in my post.

I rarely read. Not even sure I can sometimes.

 

[danlb_2000]

Tough to say... if the boats are free floating like in any of the other three and are smaller/more buoyant than the boats on Pirates, they wouldn't displace as much water and therefore would not require as deep of water (granted the water in Pirates isn't that deep to begin with. If that was the case, then that would change the numbers dramatically. If the boats are actually on an omnimover type system (as they are using in Shanghai for Pirates there), in theory there could be very, very little water (just a couple inches would be more than sufficient in a room that will otherwise be mostly dark) and in that case the ride would be huge. Does the original permit have a scale that you could estimate the length of the ride in feet/meters? That might be a better estimate of length than looking at water usage.

There is no scale on the drawing, but someone should be able to estimate it based on other features in the drawing and comparing them to the aerials in Google Earth.

 

[Master Yoda]

So, just in total gallons, the Avatar attraction would be 1/4 the total water usage. If we apply that figure to everything else, we assume then that the total length of the ride is 1/4 the length of the POC at Disneyland, which is a 16 minute ride, which results in this ride being about 4 minutes long (give or take a minute or so of course). By comparison, Grand Fiesta has a ride time of about 7.5 minutes and Maelstrom had a ride time of about 4.5 minutes.

The gallons used in the attraction is not enough information to determine its size, ride length, or really anything of tangible value in regards to the experience.

If you were to somehow drop the water level just an inch in POTC, you would drastically reduce the water volume used, but the ride length and time would remain un-changed.

 

[Timothy_Q]

Also interesting to see that it doesn't match the old layout we had seen in the blueprint

 

[ABQ]

So with no knowledge at all about anything, I've run some distance comparisons of the Pandora boat ride based on what we see in that new permit and juxtaposed it against, say, Living with the Land using @marni1971 's fine schematic found here http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/living-with-the-land-schematic-diagram.603663/#post-4168116
Obviously LwTL is much longer, running about, what, 15 minutes to ride? In pure ride distance, completely and utterly estimated, no claims of accuracy given, LwTL appears three times longer. If the current were to flow at a similar speed, it may be a 5 minute boat ride. Again, total speculation.

 

[ToTBellHop]

So with no knowledge at all about anything, I've run some distance comparisons of the Pandora boat ride based on what we see in that new permit and juxtaposed it against, say, Living with the Land using @marni1971 's fine schematic found here http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/living-with-the-land-schematic-diagram.603663/#post-4168116
Obviously LwTL is much longer, running about, what, 15 minutes to ride? In pure ride distance, completely and utterly estimated, no claims of accuracy given, LwTL appears three times longer. If the current were to flow at a similar speed, it may be a 5 minute boat ride. Again, total speculation.

View attachment 130070 View attachment 130071

Good work. 5-7 min. is the estimate I was given.

 

[Timothy_Q]

I have hopes that boat speed, atmosphere, special effects and themeing will make this a great ride.
AK doesn't need another disappointingly short water ride

 

[twebber55]

It has been acclaimed for its visuals. However, its plot has been panned. I am planning on seeing it in Tampa next month, so I'll be able to judge for myself then.

thats interesting because the complaints i ve read is that it has too much plot and not enough acrobatics etc...

 

[Cesar R M]

It has been acclaimed for its visuals. However, its plot has been panned. I am planning on seeing it in Tampa next month, so I'll be able to judge for myself then.

I actually wonder if the change of venues (they are in a tour) do affect their production.
Because they have to move a lot of stuff via cables

 

[disney4life2008]

Avatar sounds like an amazing bore! While adding a nice relaxing boat ride is great, what a waste of space! It better have some drops. Disney has missed the mark on avatar

 

[DisDan]

Avatar sounds like an amazing bore! While adding a nice relaxing boat ride is great, what a waste of space! It better have some drops. Disney has missed the mark on avatar

LOL I think you are missing the WHOLE point of that boat ride.