Purduevian
Well-Known Member
Is the actual track smaller? I knew it was mirrored, but I always thought they were identical.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Movielover
Well-Known Member
Yes. think of it as Disney took the plans for the WDW version which was designed first. Placed those plans in photoshop and mirrored it then scaled it down 10 percent. Its the same layout but they built the Disneyland version first and scaled it to fit the available space.
RCDB states the track lengths as:
DL - 2,671.0 ft
WDW - 2,780.0 ft
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
From @marni1971's fantastic Big Thunder Mountain video (part 2!):
That video is worth every second of the watch, by the way, especially if you're interested in such minutiae. I'd encourage anyone on this website to watch his entire series of videos, really:
pdude81
Well-Known Member
What about the part up top where you cruise past the model houses? I always assumed DL had to be longer because of thise section . Looking at the layouts posted after this it seems like it must just be a slight change and not a major departure.
Movielover
Well-Known Member
You mean the ending break run? yeah its the same shape on both coasters, just at Disneyland they run the que down below and around it where as at WDW you are much further away from that area up in the station house
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I heard from someone in the know (same person who told me last July that Tron wasn't going to have guests on it till March) that Frontierland (and Country Bears) is not going away, but TSI will definitely be affected by the Beyond Big Thunder plans. CBJ might get hit by the inclusivity team, but the attraction itself and the Frontierland around it is NOT being replaced, from what I've heard.
Last edited:
Elijah Abrams
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
We don’t know yet if Disney has greenlit those Beyond Big Thunder plans yet. The recent layoffs are most likely to put those plans on hold for a while.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
The insiders here have suggested that if the "beyond thunder mountain" plans come to pass it will likely involve some shortening/re-routing of the RoA and maybe a loss of some of TSI (probably the northern edge) similar to what happened at DL.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
They won’t impact the $17 billion considering the layoffs were announced before the $17 billion. Employee payroll and capital expenditures are funded independently of one another. This is why my college can be threatening layoffs while building a new academic hall……….the students will love walking past new, locked classrooms, I’m sure.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Lots of labor is capitalized. Generally speaking, if you're working on a project that can be capitalized, your labor is capitalized as part of the cost of the project.
Disney is cutting 7,000 headcount; they never said how much of that is operating headcount versus capital headcount.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
Are you suggesting they are lying about the $17 bn they announced or are you agreeing that they definitively will have staff on hand to actually complete those projects given that they were announced many months after the layoffs?
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
The latter.
7,000 heads at $200,000 per head (I have no idea the real average, that's totally a guess) is only $1.4 billion, lots of which isn't Parks, and lots of which isn't Domestic. Whatever Parks' share of the 7,000 headcount reduction is, it's a tiny fraction of the $17 billion investment.
I was agreeing with your main point, just offering a slight correction of the accounting of the thing.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Here's a suggestion: put a variation of Beastly Kingdom in the Expansion Plot behind Big Thunder Mountain...sounds crazy, but not really. I'd rather they not update it with IP but if that's what it takes: Dragon Tower = Maleficent roller coaster, Fantasia boat ride stays the same (with Chernabog involved somehow), and retheme the hedge maze to something else.
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
I'd rather have Beastly Kingdomme in Animal Kingdom, to be honest. There's still hope..
And I know the thread kind of moved past this subject, but I agree with some folks here in that villains wouldn't be my preference for a 5th gate. I think a villains land sounds great, but an entire park..? Eh, it never really appealed to me that much.
And I know the thread kind of moved past this subject, but I agree with some folks here in that villains wouldn't be my preference for a 5th gate. I think a villains land sounds great, but an entire park..? Eh, it never really appealed to me that much.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
The thing with Disney Villains is that they don't really have enough in common to support a unified "theme" park. A few are alike enough in sensibility that it's fun to see them palling around, but that's not really enough to support a whole park.I'd rather have Beastly Kingdomme in Animal Kingdom, to be honest. There's still hope..
And I know the thread kind of moved past this subject, but I agree with some folks here in that villains wouldn't be my preference for a 5th gate. I think a villains land sounds great, but an entire park..? Eh, it never really appealed to me that much.
People always talk about "Dark Kingdom", but what really would that be? Disney Villains tend to hail from totally different locales, with only a few that are similar enough aesthetically to shove together in a way that doesn't feel completely random. Those are mostly the older ones - Maleficent, Chernabog, The Wicked Queen, Captain Hook, and maybe The Horned King (not that I expect them to acknowledge him at all) could have a cohesive little Villainy Village formed out of their lairs and locations. A hive of skullduggery among rocky outcroppings with crumbling towers and creepy cottages, and other Villains could make appearances within that. But if you tried to bear that out across a whole park you quickly run out of places that both make sense to have in proximity and that guests are really dying to visit.
Other parks shove together disparate locations, but they do it under an overarching theme that's greater than "Imagine if these guys were all neighbors". The lands in MK are culturally aspirational in a way that, like, Cruella's House or Hans' Southern Isles just aren't. The list of strong, popular, and merchandisable Villains with great themed attraction potential really isn't all that long . . . not long enough to support a whole park.
Add to it that Disney hasn't really invested in creating a really good, really bad Villain character in almost 15 years, and it suggests a whole park is not something they could commit to no matter how fun it is to imagine. And it is fun. But a land makes more sense.
Not to mention that it'd be a total odd man out among the given themes for the existing four parks at Walt Disney World - A Magical Kingdom, a Magical Movie Studio, the Natural Realm, Whatever they think EPCOT is anymore, and . . . Mean People?
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
pdude81
Well-Known Member
I don't see why different villain lands would need to tightly mesh. What does Tomorrowland have in common with Frontierland? And if the villains aren't related enough for their own disparate lands, why would it make more sense to basically put them in dorm?
I would love them to build a darker (but still family friendly) gate like that, with a forbidden mountain castle that doubled as an attraction. If they were really going to consider adding villains to MK that could have been an awesome retheme of Splash.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
To that end, one wonders if they would even go the direction people want if they did build a full villains park. Like, would it actually celebrate the wholly evil villains of old, or would it be Descendants-level stuff? I suspect the latter given their core demographic. There's a reason the Halloween party is billed as not-so-scary.