Cameron has given the OK ...

Tom

Beta Return
Per Vekoma's website
http://www.vekoma.com/index.php/specialities-and-attractions/panoramic-flight-simulator


Specifications 90 Seat I-RIde

Size in total (LxWxh): 22x23x17.5m
Base Vehicle (LxWxh): 5.60x2.10x2.70m
total number of passengers: 90
passenger carrying unit: 10-seat gondolas
Allowable passenger size: 1.0 to 1.95 m
Maximum capacity 900 pph
(hourly capacity may vary depending on film duration)
Available in various configurations for 90 or 160 passengers with 2 DOF or 6 DOF as well as custom designed to your specifications.

See my post #1017, which I posted while you were typing this one. Disney will buy a customized version of Vekoma's system. The stats on Vekoma's site are if Joe Amusement Park wanted to just click "Add to Cart" and buy the stock model. Disney doesn't do that.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Tim's assessment is correct. The Vekoma site just shows their standard model, and a few images of other's they've installed.

If Disney does indeed use this system, it appears as if they would customize it to only have 2 carriages per floor, and 3 floors per theater. If you look at the plans on the web, it LOOKS like there are 8 individual seats per carriage.

So, 8 seats per carriage X 2 carriages across x 3 tiers = 48 guests per performance/ride. Or 192 guests per performance/ride if all 4 theaters are running.

Why would they customize it to have such a lower capacity? Or to put it a different way, what is the purpose of fewer seats per gondola and fewer gondolas per row? I guess the idea might be that you need them more centered to have the full effect and potentially that fewer ride vehicles allow for more space for increased movement.
 

unkadug

Follower of "Saget"The Cult
Did anyone else notice the size limitations on Vekomas website?

Allowable passenger size: 1.0 to 1.95 m

3'3" - 6'4"

Since when did they start having a maximum height allowed?
 

Prototype82

Well-Known Member
As fun as a bike coaster sounds, I really just want to fly. This in no way sounds like a Soarin'-ripped cheap out. A ride with a ride system as simple as Star Tours converted to pristine 3D made goosebumps stand up on my arms. Imagine those effects with a Vekoma simulator. Does anyone have any idea why there will be multiple theaters? More capacity or possible rooms with sets and animatronics? And if it has been discussed before, my mistake. Quite a few pages here...
 

Bolna

Well-Known Member
I'm going to chime in again, if for no other reason than to clear up a few of the misnomers and misconceptions being batted around. Lee and others have done a nice job giving yes and no answers to specific details, but since these drawings have obviously saturated the web already, there are hundreds or thousands of people interpreting them improperly.

I'm not boasting, but since I draft, design and build commercial buildings for a living, I feel like topics like this are my one and only time to shine and call myself an "expert". I am by no means an insider. I just know exactly what I'm looking at when I see collections of documents like the ones people are seeing today.

Speaking of these drawings, the few sheets being posted on the web seem to have been acquired from sources completely separate from the venue through which my copy was delivered. Also, many of those out on the web have been photoshopped, had watermarks whited out, and are very low resolution.

The version I have on my computer is full-sized, original PDF files. The Architectural Plans are 48" wide by 36" tall blueprints - and I just printed a full size copy on our office plotter today. Those little color-coded plans are from an 8.5x11 document that the mechanical engineer produced, showing how many air conditioning units would be needed for the project. Those colored areas are actually HVAC zones, and mean nothing else. And the plans that those colors have been placed on are not exactly identical to the working drawings, but they do imply portions of the ride system, where the architectural ones do not.

There is also a complete set of foundation and structural steel drawings. There are massive foundations with 80' deep auger-cast piles under each of the four ride apparatuses. This tells me that the ride system is very similar to soarin, in that there is a massive undercarriage that holds up what will likely be a moving set of seats. Whether it just tilts like Soarin, or is on a series of hydraulic cylinders like Star Tours - I don't know. There flat out is NOT enough detail on these plans, no matter what anyone on here says. Period.

With this said, I would like to offer some bullet point facts (and inferences) that should clear up some of the questions, and bad information being circulated:

  • As of this moment in time, the set of plans and narratives that contractors possess are limited only to this one large building, which contains what Disney is calling an E-Ticket and a C-Ticket. Those words are used throughout the entire set of documents.
  • The C-Ticket APPEARS to be a boat ride, given the meandering course of the ride path as it comes into and leaves the northeast corner of the main building. The vehicles look like boats as well. Calling it a C-Ticket on the plans doesn't give me warm fuzzies. They couldn't do anything less than a Pirates type attraction (which I consider to have extensive theming), but I'm wondering if they'd use their new boat maneuvering patent which allows them to turn a boat and aim guests like an Omnimover does. That would make a lot of sense if they're taking you on a tour through Pandora.
  • The E-Ticket has four isolated theaters, with four isolated ride systems. In no way, shape or form will guests move from one theater to another. They will operate exclusive of each other and there are four purely for the sake of crowd control and throughput. There is one queue that splits guests, via ramps, to one of 3 tiers of loading platforms in each theater. Very similar to soarin, except you board on 3 levels instead of one, and there are 4 theaters instead of 2.
  • There are comments in the narratives that explain to the contractors that the following components of this land will exist, but have not yet been drawn: E-Ticket Retail, QSR, Area Retail, Area Restrooms, Conditioned Queue for C-Ticket.
  • There is also a note in the narrative that the north face of the building will interface with rockscape. And given that the structural steel at the top of the 76' tall building is tapered inward, it becomes clear that this will resemble a mountain of some sort and will literally be covered in rockwork and other thematic elements.
  • The C-Ticket boat ride is only shown in part (a very small part of what can be assumed to be a much longer boat ride). The rest of the ride will likely be under the exterior part of the mountain (north face of building), since guests for the E-Ticket climb a ramp (with a 1:13 slope - making the entire queue wheelchair accessible) and enter the main show building at the 3rd floor, 23' above ground level.
  • The C-Ticket will have it's own queue, and the E-Ticket clearly has its own queue, and all theaters exit down stairways and usher guests back out a single exit point at the north face of the building. There is no cross connection between these two attractions. They are mutually exclusive, and one is not a pre-show for the other.
  • Again, the ride system for the E-Ticket is not clear at all. In the Mechanical Narrative, seats can be identified, but quantities are indiscernible. It is 100% clear that each theater will have 3 tiers of seating, each 12' apart, vertically. It is likely that the carriage may in fact travel up and down, but all guests are looking forward at one arced screen, like in Soarin.
  • The E-Ticket is most assuredly a 3D experience, simply because there are rooms on the floorplan labeled GLASSES STORAGE and GLASSES CLEANING. Kind of a dead giveaway.
  • There are many ride control rooms, a control tower, and several Electrical Rooms on the lower BOH (Back of House) levels. If they're going to use a Jim Cameron produced film using his Morpho technology, they will indeed have the massive electrical and telecommunication infrastructure to operate it.
  • This attraction/land will require a large Cast. There are multi-seat restrooms, a cast break room, and even a cast deployment room. The BOH floor in this building will likely be the home base for all Cast working this land.
  • And to reiterate, what is shown on these plans could be for literally anything. It could become a Little Mermaid attraction. It could become Avatar. It could become a giant flight simulation movie putting the guest in the role of a butterfly. It could be for something none of us have even dreamed of. Perhaps even concepts from Beastly Kingdom. Regardless of the rumors, insider information, renderings, talks of Cameron being in Anaheim - these drawings have absolutely NO firm reference to or promise of an Avatar land. I can't make that more clear. These plans have been so carefully prepared that this facility could have any video plopped into the projectors with a new ride vehicle program - and it becomes anything. And a boat ride.....in an Animal Park.....could be ANYTHING.
Everything I've said above is true and factual (except for my obvious editorials and assumptions, which I've called out). This is not opinion. This is fact based on my professional review of the plans, narratives, scopes of work, and other documents - as of this moment in time.


Nothing has been filed with the drainage board. I don't believe any site development plans have been issued to anyone. All we know is that FotLK might move, and they flew one test balloon in the area where this would go. That's all we know, until Disney says otherwise, or they actually build it.

If anyone would like additional clarifications, or if I missed one of the misnomers going around, feel free to reply (or better yet, PM me). I will not disclose how I obtained the drawings, but I will make note that the construction industry can be tight knit. Florida and Indiana and California may be worlds apart geographically, but not in the electronic world.

The end.

Seems like it could be helpful for the newcomers to this thread to repost edwardtc's fantastic post. So here it is.
 

cba

Well-Known Member
A great way to miss the really valuable information!
Well, then I find it out by going to page 50 and 49 and seeing people quoting posts. I also read posts that are long and looks like it has a lot of info. Whatever it is, I usually find those posts that are full of info sooner or later.
 

spacemt354

Chili's
I know I'm a little late to the party here. But I have to say, after reading this entire thread, I'm really excited for this project. When it was first announced in 2011, I was skeptical. I was one that thought Avatar didn't have very much potential from the get go. I thought that Disney was making a mistake and taking a risk on a project because while the visuals of the film were very appealing, the story didn't scream Disney to me. And despite the film's universal box office success, I thought it would alienate (pardon the pun) the Disney fanbase and wouldn't live up to the success of WWoHP and/or HP Phase II.

Then some time when by. Nothing was heard and rumors were spreading that Avatar might not happen. While I didn't think it was the best concept, I would have rather had something over nothing. Stitch's Great Escape is not my favorite. But I wouldn't have known that if I didn't ride it in the first place. So of course I would visited Avatar whether I liked it or not.

Then Carsland opened to rave reviews. Cars was not my favorite film. In fact it was probably my least favorite Pixar film. But Disney's ability to recreate Radiator Springs with such detail and realism made that land one of the most immersive lands ever created. This gave me hope, because Avatar was not my favorite film either, yet with the setup of Pandora (ie the bioluminescence, the scenery, the animals, the effects) I thought the land could look truly amazing if pull off well.

Now I come to this week, and I'm really excited. I've seen the articles regarding the ride system for the simulator, and from what I've seen, this is absolutely not Soarin' 2.0. This has a lot of potential to be amazing. It's 3D, it's a more advanced ride system, it's James Cameron approved, and it will have the Pandora scenery that I loved from Avatar. And the C-ticket boat ride is just what AK needs. I don't think it needs another coaster, at least at this point. It needs a family ride, and a boat ride I believe is one of the best ways to accomplish that. And I understand that Phase II's rarely ever happen at Disney, but if Avatar turns out to be a success, I wouldn't be surprised if the bike coaster actually becomes a reality. I honestly can't blame them for being skeptical about the bike coaster. I'd rather leave room for expansion in Avatar than go all in on the first try.

Things are getting exiciting. Pandora, DHS expansion with Carsland, Monster Inc, on top of the already impressive first look at the FLE. Not jumping to conclusions, but if all of these concpets go as planned, HP Phase II turns out as awesome as it sounds, we have a real theme park war on our hands. And that can only be good for us, the guests! It's going to be a very interesting next couple of years.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Yeah, I think that the standard response to the news is that "they cut the bike coaster", which is true but isn't an accurate summary of the changes. It's more like "the cut the bike coaster and upgraded the walk through to a boat ride" which is much more like a compromise. Now, I'd have preferred the boat ride and the bike coaster, but that wasn't going to happen so... I think a good way to look at it is that we are getting two legit rides plus theming with either plan, the walk through was just superfluous. So, the trade off is losing a more thrilling ride that would be a big draw in exchange for a more accessible ride that would have more "show". I don't think it's as bad a tradeoff as it seems superficially.
No, all three were on the table. Disney cut 20% of the budget and with it went the coaster. They and Cameron fell out over it, Cameron and co offered personal money, threatened to pull the plug, then strangely it seems did a complete U turn and agreed. I still can't get to the bottom of why he suddenly and completely changed his mind.
 

Beholder

Well-Known Member
No, all three were on the table. Disney cut 20% of the budget and with it went the coaster. They and Cameron fell out over it, Cameron and co offered personal money, threatened to pull the plug, then strangely it seems did a complete U turn and agreed. I still can't get to the bottom of
why he suddenly and completely changed his mind.


Do you think it's possible that this so called "Soarin 2.0" was made much more compelling for JC using maybe some new/innovative approaches? Perhaps Disney, realizing that this could blow up in their face (JK Rowling), put WDI to the task of making another proposal irresistible? If that's the case, then this E ticket could be pretty great. Your thoughts?
 

AndyMagic

Well-Known Member
Everyone will admit that the first time the rode Soarin, they were wow'd. If you don't say that, don't even bother replying to my post because I'm not interested in your negative opinion.

I can say without a doubt I was not "wow'd" by Soarin' the first time I went on it and like all film-based rides, it only gets more boring the number of times I ride it. It's a quality attraction that provides a pleasant sense of flight but even when it opened there was nothing "wow" about it. Amazing Spider-Man was "wow." Tower of Terror was "wow." Indiana Jones was "wow." Soarin' was simply "cool" and that was a decade ago. Now it is a snooze-fest.
 

unkadug

Follower of "Saget"The Cult
I can say without a doubt I was not "wow'd" by Soarin' the first time I went on it and like all film-based rides, it only gets more boring the number of times I ride it. It's a quality attraction that provides a pleasant sense of flight but even when it opened there was nothing "wow" about it. Amazing Spider-Man was "wow." Tower of Terror was "wow." Indiana Jones was "wow." Soarin' was simply "cool" and that was a decade ago. Now it is a snooze-fest.
I guess you didn't read his second sentence! :D
 

Captain Chaos

Well-Known Member
No, all three were on the table. Disney cut 20% of the budget and with it went the coaster. They and Cameron fell out over it, Cameron and co offered personal money, threatened to pull the plug, then strangely it seems did a complete U turn and agreed. I still can't get to the bottom of why he suddenly and completely changed his mind.
Ego? Everyone seems to talk about Cameron as if he has a huge ego. The potential to bring Avatar to life (not just in the movies) had to be a huge part of his agreeing. Maybe there was the promise of a expansion once avatar 2 and 3 are in the theaters. Who knows what the reason for hm agreeing is.... But, I'm glad he did cause the land has the potential to be pretty freaking cool, much better than piles of dirt.
 

dreamscometrue

Well-Known Member
No, all three were on the table. Disney cut 20% of the budget and with it went the coaster. They and Cameron fell out over it, Cameron and co offered personal money, threatened to pull the plug, then strangely it seems did a complete U turn and agreed. I still can't get to the bottom of why he suddenly and completely changed his mind.

Martin, do you think there might have been a promise (written agreement) to add the coaster and perhaps more in a 'Phase 2', which might have appeased Cameron et al.?
 

Tom

Beta Return
Why would they customize it to have such a lower capacity? Or to put it a different way, what is the purpose of fewer seats per gondola and fewer gondolas per row? I guess the idea might be that you need them more centered to have the full effect and potentially that fewer ride vehicles allow for more space for increased movement.

There's a fine line between having fewer theaters with more seats, more theaters with fewer seats, and also cycle times.

They probably only have so much land they can allocate to the facility (especially if they do want to allow for a phase 2), so the footprint of the building is fixed. By putting the 4 theaters into this building, that limited them on how wide each ride apparatus could be.

With 4 theaters, the guests will feel as if the line never stops, because they'll be able to alternate loading between the 4 theaters almost continuously, based on the show length. Think of Haunted Mansion - while it's an omnimover, the queue isn't actually loading onto the omnimover. This would be similar to Stitch and HM - except with twice as many show rooms.
 

doctornick

Well-Known Member
Capacity, and possibly the potential to offer parallel ride experiences with more/less intensity.

It is an interesting point about different intensity. We know that two of the bays will have handicap access and two will not. We also know that the individual ride vehicles could operate independently, allowing for more or less intensity within the same room. So, they have different ways to handle it if they want to go green/orange like M:S.

My guess is that to start they might go with 2 rooms being lower intensity and 2 rooms being higher ones (with one of each of the handicap rooms being in each group). And they they can tailor it up or down based on demand (long term, I'd expect 3 of the bays to be intense and 1 to be less intense, but I'm not sure).
 

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

Back
Top Bottom