NobodyElse
Well-Known Member
I wonder where this notion came from?
It's just a structure - not a real mountain.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Realistically, How Much Time Does Matterhorn Have Left?
- Thread starter Mr. Sullivan
- Start date
Disney Irish
Premium Member
No doubt its just a building in the end. But even buildings have minimum requirements. Now maybe its been overblown or even mixing up different building codes. But as I mentioned in a subsequent response to that post, I don't expect it to even be something even considered anytime in the future, at least not while I'm alive.
Andrew25
Well-Known Member
I still think we're a few years from this ever being approached, but the likely scenario is that Disney might completely remove the attraction part of it, and keep the structure.
If they deem the ride unusable, they can "expand" the foothill of the mountain into the nearby areas (mainly the submarine lagoon) for more ride space. Still keep the mountain structure, but limit it's interior use of a ride system. I don't think there will ever be a Matterhorn-less DL, but the ride itself is questionable.
If they deem the ride unusable, they can "expand" the foothill of the mountain into the nearby areas (mainly the submarine lagoon) for more ride space. Still keep the mountain structure, but limit it's interior use of a ride system. I don't think there will ever be a Matterhorn-less DL, but the ride itself is questionable.
britain
Well-Known Member
I used to think that if the time ever came that they couldn't keep the Matterhorn functioning safely, or if it just became too costly to keep doing these band-aid repairs, they'd tear it down and rebuild one more or less just like like it.
Now, knowing Disney a little better <coughROAcough> once that day comes, they will simply use the space for some new IP-based attraction they think will sell more lightning lanes and merch. It might not look remotely like the Matterhorn, it could be low to the ground, or maybe it will still be some form of snowy mountain. Who knows?
(Maybe that's why DL has yet to get a Frozen ride...)
Now, knowing Disney a little better <coughROAcough> once that day comes, they will simply use the space for some new IP-based attraction they think will sell more lightning lanes and merch. It might not look remotely like the Matterhorn, it could be low to the ground, or maybe it will still be some form of snowy mountain. Who knows?
(Maybe that's why DL has yet to get a Frozen ride...)
PiratesMansion
Well-Known Member
I think they'd sooner turn it into Frozen Mountain than tear it down completely. It's so iconic.
It can be maintained for as long as Disney wants to maintain it. That an old structure requires significant maintenance from time to time shouldn't be surprising and shouldn't automatically be taken as a sign that it's removal or death is imminent.
And a kind request for all the skinny-as-a-rail people to kindly STOP suggesting RMC anything in its place. RMC has already taken over everywhere else, y'all already have TWO RMCs at Magic Mountain, please go there if you want to RMC fanboi-gasm. Let's keep them away from Disneyland so that my tall, fat self can still have one theme park operator completely free of their restraints from hell (and the redone Fire in the Hole at Silver Dollar City proves that even on gentle rides they're not any better at restraints or legroom than if they were to build Iron Gwazi 2 instead).
Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one here who still rides Matterhorn every single day I'm in the parks and considers it an irreplaceable attraction experience. Sure it's not smooth, it's an old Arrow and that's how they come. I still love it.
It can be maintained for as long as Disney wants to maintain it. That an old structure requires significant maintenance from time to time shouldn't be surprising and shouldn't automatically be taken as a sign that it's removal or death is imminent.
And a kind request for all the skinny-as-a-rail people to kindly STOP suggesting RMC anything in its place. RMC has already taken over everywhere else, y'all already have TWO RMCs at Magic Mountain, please go there if you want to RMC fanboi-gasm. Let's keep them away from Disneyland so that my tall, fat self can still have one theme park operator completely free of their restraints from hell (and the redone Fire in the Hole at Silver Dollar City proves that even on gentle rides they're not any better at restraints or legroom than if they were to build Iron Gwazi 2 instead).
Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one here who still rides Matterhorn every single day I'm in the parks and considers it an irreplaceable attraction experience. Sure it's not smooth, it's an old Arrow and that's how they come. I still love it.
I’m sorry you got turned away from FITH. Except for the Texas duo and their T-Bar restraints I haven’t been on an RMC in years, but I and all of my party could all fit on FITH. We thought they were significantly more forgiving. That said, I don’t want RMC at DL.
DrStarlander
Well-Known Member
I think the most practical way to preserve the Matterhorn as a park landmark while updating the ride system and experience to be more comfortable, reliable, safe, etc., is to add a modern coaster show building "plinth" structure wrapping around the south-to-east sides.
The original mountain would be largely gutted (preserving the exterior) and much of the coaster ride would be located within this 20,000+ sq. ft. show building.
This show building would be thematically dressed with rockwork like the Frozen show building at Tokyo DisneySea Fantasy Springs, and create a layered, forced perspective visual effect for the Matterhorn. (This is, it will make the mountain seem larger than it currently does). It could have waterfalls, etc., as well as "ice tunnels" where the walkways circulate around the mountain base, as well as for the Monorail.
The walkway behind Buzz Lightyear is an un-thematic back-stage space now so this new icy tunnel will be an improved transition to the Tomorrowland lagoon, possibly with a mountaineering S.E.A. theme (and maybe the Submarines could get an S.E.A. theme for an explorers/adventurers mini-land vibe). The new icy walkway around the lagoon could feature openings to see out onto the Submarines, and waterfalls could enhance the lagoon scenically.
Possibly the entry/queue could be moved into the base of the mountain, accessible from the ice tunnel behind Buzz Lightyear, freeing up the Fantasyland side for use in a future Autopia/Spaghetti Bowl replacement. (Thus the mountain itself would serve for queue/load/unload/lift).
While this may seem to some like a unfeasible project, we've seen Disney significantly modify Splash Mounting and the Hong Kong castle, as examples of working to preserve and update complex existing landmarks.
The original mountain would be largely gutted (preserving the exterior) and much of the coaster ride would be located within this 20,000+ sq. ft. show building.
This show building would be thematically dressed with rockwork like the Frozen show building at Tokyo DisneySea Fantasy Springs, and create a layered, forced perspective visual effect for the Matterhorn. (This is, it will make the mountain seem larger than it currently does). It could have waterfalls, etc., as well as "ice tunnels" where the walkways circulate around the mountain base, as well as for the Monorail.
The walkway behind Buzz Lightyear is an un-thematic back-stage space now so this new icy tunnel will be an improved transition to the Tomorrowland lagoon, possibly with a mountaineering S.E.A. theme (and maybe the Submarines could get an S.E.A. theme for an explorers/adventurers mini-land vibe). The new icy walkway around the lagoon could feature openings to see out onto the Submarines, and waterfalls could enhance the lagoon scenically.
Possibly the entry/queue could be moved into the base of the mountain, accessible from the ice tunnel behind Buzz Lightyear, freeing up the Fantasyland side for use in a future Autopia/Spaghetti Bowl replacement. (Thus the mountain itself would serve for queue/load/unload/lift).
While this may seem to some like a unfeasible project, we've seen Disney significantly modify Splash Mounting and the Hong Kong castle, as examples of working to preserve and update complex existing landmarks.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Why are you assuming that a critical problem is the location of the coaster inside the mountain?
Forced perspective isn’t magic. Plopping something between two buildings provides context for scale and will make things just look like they’re small, not further way. Same is true when you drive a vehicle through.
DrStarlander
Well-Known Member
True, I'm making some assumptions. I'm assuming that the current coaster within the mountain doesn't adhere to modern clearance and safety egress and fall protection standards. That's the sense I get from riding the coaster and looking at POVs. And I'm reacting to rumors that there are mechanical/structural issues about the relationship between the coaster and the mountain that could require a significant re-work and trigger code-related requirements. If there are no such issues then ignore my post.
I was visiting the Matterhorn in Switzerland last week and I think the foreground element could enhance the illusion of scale and realism, mimicking the surrounding foothills you encounter there, which have waterfalls and greenery. It could be very cool. When you see the conical Disneyland Matterhorn from the very top all the way down to the walkway -- unobstructed -- you can judge quite easily how tall it is. But with a foreground cliff/foothills element I think it will make it harder to understand how tall the mountain is and make it look taller/more believable -- such as the approach used for Frozen lands, Cars Land, etc.
PiratesMansion
Well-Known Member
It wasn't that I didn't fit-I did. But it was noticeably less comfortable than the previous cars with notably less legroom. I didn't really have the room to just put my feet flat on the floor.
It's probably unrealistic to expect a 1:1 with the old trains, but still. People are taller now than they were in the 70s!
PiratesMansion
Well-Known Member
I'm seeing multiple places (Reddit, Disney Tourist Blog) say that Matterhorn has hours again beginning July 24th.
Too Many Hats
Well-Known Member
I appreciate the compliment but this isn’t exactly my situation either
Since apparently my suggestion has irritated several people, I’ll point out that I’ve never even never ridden a RMC single-rail coaster and have no allegiance to them; it just seems like an example of a coaster track that could plausibly fit within the narrow constraints of this structure (and a vehicle that would somewhat resemble the existing iconic vehicles).I’m open to any and all suggestions that could improve the ride experience for more guests and could keep the thing operating for another 65 years. But I disagree with those saying the ride is fine as is; it could be way more accessible for more guests, and certainly more reliable from an operations perspective.
DrStarlander’s posts in this thread articulate fantastic proposals much more intelligently than I could.
The scaffolding is all down. From the monorail I didn’t see any areas except the station where there was construction equipment. The splashdown pools are also filled with water.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
A roller coaster doesn’t have to have a clear path of egress along its entire track like a dark ride. Egress paths only have to be from points where the vehicles will be stopped and because of that the number of people using a path will be lower allowing the use of the exemptions to 44” minimum clear width. Clearance envelopes can be widened as is being done right now on Big Thunder Mountain Railroad at the Magic Kingdom.
Work on the structure has been ongoing for years.
The illusion would be thrown off by the adjacent castle walls and Buzz Lightyear show building as they would provide a reference point. The same with the monorail going through. You’d be able to directly see that this new structure isn’t very tall.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
Yep. App shows it off Refurb list on July 24th.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
No one is irritated, but now knowing you've never ridden an RMC, seems funny to suggest a track type you've never ridden, for all we know it would make it worse in that type of configuration. As I've mentioned prior plenty of track types that can work here. But why replace the tubular track with another track type at all. Just smooth out the existing track and update the vehicles again and the ride would be fine. From what I recall the dual passenger cars worked just fine and the ride was smooth back prior to the current iteration. And while I don't think they'd bring back the dual passenger cars, there are ways to make the current cars more comfortable, like with more cushions for example. So it is possible to update and keep the existing tubular track type for many decades to come.I appreciate the compliment but this isn’t exactly my situation either
I’m open to any and all suggestions that could improve the ride experience for more guests and could keep the thing operating for another 65 years. But I disagree with those saying the ride is fine as is; it could be way more accessible for more guests, and certainly more reliable from an operations perspective.
DrStarlander’s posts in this thread articulate fantastic proposals much more intelligently than I could.
BTW, while I have no information, it remains to be seen on what exactly they did during this refurb, but they could have done some track resurfacing during it as well. So we'll have to see if the ride is smoother or not in what looks to be 3 weeks.
DrStarlander
Well-Known Member
Admittedly I don't know about egress requirements from coasters, but unlike most coasters Matterhorn seems very flat inside, almost like a dark ride, so I thought it could have more potential to get stopped along the track versus a coaster with a lot of incline/decline and obvious places the coaster will come to rest. Anyway, if Matterhorn is fine, leave it be. My posts are only for if it needs to be addressed.
As for the illusion, I don't think the Arendelle castle walls have any negative impact on the perception and appeal of the rockwork cliff as seen in this image:
As for the monorail, I think it would go into a tunnel, as in this volumetric concept image (not showing sculptural rockwork, waterfalls, etc., but showing cutouts along lagoon path and Monorail tunnel).
And I think it could look very evocative of how the trains in Switzerland go through so many tunnels in cliff faces:
Nirya
Well-Known Member
They would likely just rebuild the coaster and mountain so that they are two separate systems rather than the combined one they are now. This might require a little more space, but they'd likely just take up some more area to the north and east (though I also assume any eventual rebuild would coincide with an eventual usage of the Motorboat Cruise area and ultimately sub).