AVATAR land construction progress

P_Radden

Well-Known Member
Quit trolling clown. You seem to be here to do that given your comment history.

I was thinking the same thing. All his comments are giddy & immature.


Back on topic: So as far as we know the land will only include the 2 rides correct? If the third ride was scrapped due to budget constraints, could they still have something else in the works like a smaller ride? Or perhaps reallocate that part of the budget to the other parts of the land?
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Back on topic: So as far as we know the land will only include the 2 rides correct? If the third ride was scrapped due to budget constraints, could they still have something else in the works like a smaller ride? Or perhaps reallocate that part of the budget to the other parts of the land?

WDW1974 indicated their would be a "third attraction" but did not say more than that. I've seen no indication that there is going to be a third ride, but there will probably be some sort of "attractions" beyond that -- walking path, M&G, a show, etc.
 

DVCOwner

A Long Time DVC Member
I have no inside knowledge on this, but if the new movie is a hit and the two new rides draw people into the park in the numbers I think it will, I would be surprised if a third ride is not on the planning board. This project is taking so long because it was made public well before most are. No advance planning. If the third ride is already developed during the construction of the first two, the time to from it being made public to opening will be half what the first two are taking.
 

ChrisM

Well-Known Member
That's what I can't wait for that 4D epic stuff.
Question though. Where was your profile picture taken? Who was it? I just thought it was a little strange seeing how your profile says your a 51 year old guy. I do not mean to be in any way rude I'm just curious.

Is your plan of attack to respond to every post made in these fora within the past 24 hours? Because if not, you're dang close, so don't stop now.
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
I would not have. That's Tony Baxter's original concept for the ride, he never disappoints when given a decent budget and left to his own devices to bring his ideas to life. I would have loved it. I'm quite sure most other people would have as well.

I also would not complain about it. It may have been re-imagined as an omnimover because of throughput issues. The "Flying Boat" effect and single launch position on a 4 minute attraction would have had to incorporate moving sidewalks for load/unload to counter it. Peter Pan suffers more than a bit because of load/unload. Other wise the attraction presented is superior while still retaining similar elements..

*1023*
 

MerlinTheGoat

Well-Known Member
I also would not complain about it. It may have been re-imagined as an omnimover because of throughput issues. The "Flying Boat" effect and single launch position on a 4 minute attraction would have had to incorporate moving sidewalks for load/unload to counter it. Peter Pan suffers more than a bit because of load/unload. Other wise the attraction presented is superior while still retaining similar elements..

*1023*
I don't even think the changeover to omnimover can be blamed for the ride's issues, there are truly awesome omnimovers out there after all. It's really down to the execution of the scenes, the dumbing down of the track layout and messy pacing. Lots of problems, none of which I think are the fault of the ride system.

I actually think it entirely possible to convert the Tony Baxter version into an omnimover without even compromising anything of major importance scene-wise. The most interesting and unique thing about the concept's ride system was how it could transition between two levels within the same scene, the transparent layer that separated the scenes allowed you to see into the other scene above or below you. Omnimovers are entirely capable of multi-leveled layouts. World of Motion's track (a somewhat similar variant of omnimover) originally passed over the entrance to the queue at the beginning, guests walked underneath the track. So it stands to reason that you could easily have multiple layers of omnimover track intersecting one another, same as Baxter's concept.

The only alterations needed (which I would consider relatively minor IMO) would be to the track layout used for upper level scenes above the water surface. A suspended track makes it easy to hide the mechanical parts in the ceiling, but omnimovers require a somewhat thick track base underneath the vehicles, something that wouldn't look good if built on top of a transparent faux water surface that you're intended to peer through at the scenes above or below. But even that has a simple solution- just keep the track on the upper level up against the walls so it doesn't actually travel directly over the transparent water surface. One could logically and effectively disguise the mechanics against the wall with rockwork and/or coral reef.

I will however mention in favor of suspended rides- If Peter Pan was longer and had higher capacity vehicles (and perhaps sped up a little), it could probably eat through crowds much more effectively. Even Baxter's Mermaid concept was over a minute longer than Pan. It also showed two rows of seating, WDW's Pan only has one row on its vehicles. Paris' version of Peter Pan uses higher capacity ride vehicles with an additional row of seats compared to the versions in Florida or California.

EDIT- I'm sorry for getting offtopic here, kind of drifted with the mention of Mermaid...
 

1023

Provocateur, Rancanteur, Plaisanter, du Jour
I don't even think the changeover to omnimover can be blamed for the ride's issues, there are truly awesome omnimovers out there after all. It's really down to the execution of the scenes, the dumbing down of the track layout and messy pacing. Lots of problems, none of which I think are the fault of the ride system.

I actually think it entirely possible to convert the Tony Baxter version into an omnimover without even compromising anything of major importance scene-wise. The most interesting and unique thing about the concept's ride system was how it could transition between two levels within the same scene, the transparent layer that separated the scenes allowed you to see into the other scene above or below you. Omnimovers are entirely capable of multi-leveled layouts. World of Motion's track (a somewhat similar variant of omnimover) originally passed over the entrance to the queue at the beginning, guests walked underneath the track. So it stands to reason that you could easily have multiple layers of omnimover track intersecting one another, same as Baxter's concept.

The only alterations needed (which I would consider relatively minor IMO) would be to the track layout used for upper level scenes above the water surface. A suspended track makes it easy to hide the mechanical parts in the ceiling, but omnimovers require a somewhat thick track base underneath the vehicles, something that wouldn't look good if built on top of a transparent faux water surface that you're intended to peer through at the scenes above or below. But even that has a simple solution- just keep the track on the upper level up against the walls so it doesn't actually travel directly over the transparent water surface. One could logically and effectively disguise the mechanics against the wall with rockwork and/or coral reef.

I will however mention in favor of suspended rides- If Peter Pan was longer and had higher capacity vehicles, it could probably eat through crowds much more effectively. Even Baxter's Mermaid concept was over a minute longer than Pan. It also showed two rows of seating. Paris' version of Peter Pan uses higher capacity ride vehicles with an additional row of seats compared to the versions in Florida or California.

EDIT- I'm sorry for getting offtopic here, kind of drifted with the mention of Mermaid...

You and I agree on all points. I merely submitted some speculation on possible concerns. I think either ride system could have served the attraction presented in the youtube clip. Alas, we ended up with something different and the ability to clone....

I also apologize for thread drift....

The AVATAR boat experience is what I am hoping they hit a home run with. I wish we had some low angle shots of construction to get a feel for the layout...

*1023*
 

HauntedMansionFLA

Well-Known Member
You and I agree on all points. I merely submitted some speculation on possible concerns. I think either ride system could have served the attraction presented in the youtube clip. Alas, we ended up with something different and the ability to clone....

I also apologize for thread drift....

The AVATAR boat experience is what I am hoping they hit a home run with. I wish we had some low angle shots of construction to get a feel for the layout...

*1023*
Hopefully those low angle shots come soon.
 

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Low angle, High Angle, Long Shot...Aerial Shot.... Gimme a shot....

*1023*
image.jpg
 

twebber55

Well-Known Member
No kidding. It's been several weeks since we've seen anything. I was on nearmap.com but nothing has been updated since December 2014. I would like to have some information about the boat ride. I hope Disney actually upped the budget on this part of the project.
I don't expect to hear anything from Disney regarding avatar until August
hopefully we get some new aerials soon
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom