News Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[FLDisneyFan]

View attachment 809574

Maybe they should remove Iger. It's possible. Ask Chapek.

 

[peter11435]

Small creeks (as insiders have suggested) and ponds don't make up for the vast river. If the river is narrower than I am tall, it's a problem.

As I already said. You might not feel the new water features are worthy replacements. However, it’s still incorrect to say there won’t be water

 

[dmc493]

Give me a babbling brook or give me death

 

[ToTBellHop]

Tomorrowland became a lake during Debby last week. I slipped and fell headed down the Space Mtn. queue ramp due to that water feature. To hell with water features. Water features kill.

 

[ednamodedarling]

If this is the proposed Cars Attraction ride system ... sign me up.

 

[Architectural Guinea Pig]

Here is what I consider a compromise. That entire plot there, is 9 acres, compared to the Radiator Springs Racer's acreage of 6. It's a massive plot of land that only takes the back half of the area, the side of RoA we don't see. The plot connects to the HM part of Liberty Square (which doesn't need to be by water, if you look online there are no photos of it beside the water). By utilizing this massive plot without removing what fans care most about (the front half of the river, and the appearance of an island at the front), I would seriously be ok with it. And it doesn't need to breach the railroad and there's still a path for the massive waterway from the Seven Seas Lagoon. Oh, and there's two bridges beside Big Thunder and the Liberty Riverboat docked at Liberty Square.

With VIllians above Fantasyland and next to the this Cars area, the loop problem is also solved. Villians could also be made to include the railroad within its layout, which would be legendary. Also gives plenty of extra expansion space.

 

[Disstevefan1]

It's called "ripping off the band-aid."

In this case, ripping off the band-aid will take at least 6 years probably longer.

Look how long it took to destroy and replace EPCOT Future World.

 

[CoasterCowboy67]

The comment was about it being something that needs to be done. You can’t find something in work that has yet to be performed.

How do we know it was't done? And led to a delay or pause in the announcement? We don't know either way.

Know what’s even bigger than the Rivers of America? The Seven Seas Lagoon which doesn’t have a concrete bottom.

It is not the same as a swimming pool. A structural failure in a swimming pool means it is no longer safe for use for a variety of reasons from objects in the pool to water quality. A chunk of the Rivers of America concrete being removed doesn’t make it unsafe to use, it’s connected to a bunch of waterways that don’t have a concrete bed.

The water that fills the Rivers of America is essentially free because it comes from the Seven Seas Lagoon, Bay Lake and all of the other connected waterways. The method of getting that water in and out is the locks and pumps that have existed for over 50 years. This connection can be maintained with a pipe, or severed and be like other waterways.

Most of the perimeter of the River is area development. There are very few structures adjacent to it. The river has also been drained as recently as 2020. If there was any important relationship between nearby structures and the riverbed then there would have been a need for temporary structural support. It was also be a reason against removing the river.

Ok. Respectfully, I think your understanding of physics is compromised if you didn't realize the riverbed is supporting millions of tons of water weight and the weight of the Riverboat above it. I see your response has quietly moved on to the logistics of refilling the water from leaks, but again, it does not consider that moving water from volume A to volume B requires money -- it is not free. The same way perpetual motion devices are not real.

I'll stop there and advise we temper rushed judgments and be open to experts who are perhaps trying to educate us about challenges none of us might have known about and perhaps explain what might feel like an odd decision.

 

[Disstevefan1]

I wonder how much its going to cost to fill in the ROA?

I wonder if they can just drain it and cap it with reinforced cement?

I have no idea about this stuff.

 

[phillip9698]

“Disneyland will be the essence of America as we know it: the nostalgia of the past with exciting glimpses into the future.” - Walt Disney

I don’t think Walt wanted attractions that mostly cater to children - the only ones that fit that description in the original park would be located in Fantasyland.

But as you say, it gets tricky knowing what Walt would or would not like.

We do know that the Riverboat, Steam Train, and Monorail were the things he personally owned - so it’s pretty clear to me that he would be against removing the riverboat for sure.

Good thing they aren’t removing any of that at DisneyLAND.

 

[CoasterCowboy67]

They’re not apples to apples, and I have no idea what the theoretical capacity of TSI and RoA was. But you had a steamboat, rafts, and various structures that you could conceivably occupy indefinitely. Now, you’ll have two queues, a gift shop, and a pair of attractions of predetermined length. I’m sure someone could do the calculus, but the point is that this expansion is more about popularity, merchandising, LL revenue, and ease of access to other expansion pads than it is about efficiency.

By replacing a river you can't swim in with attractions and paths, you have replaced a lot of physical space you could not occupy with a lot of physical space you can now occupy. You don't need someone to do the calculus. And that's before you consider what appears to be a mountain that allows you to occupy more vertical space than you could before

Those reasons are all speculative so nothing to debate. I could say the point of the expansion is spatial efficiency, operational efficiency, and environmental stewardship and neither of us would have data for our claims

 

[Wall-e]

Give me a babbling brook or give me death.

I know it's not a river but the creek at Wilderness Lodge that leads from the lobby to the pool is one of my favorite spots in all of WDW. If they are able to capture that anywhere in this new area (and at best do it in multiple places throughout) than I think we all would find something new to enjoy.

 

[lazyboy97o]

How do we know it was't done? And led to a delay or pause in the announcement? We don't know either way.

I was responding to a post saying it was something to be done, making it sounds like some unique hurdle.

My assumption would be that one was at least done for fire mountain and would have been consulted before moving forward with concept design.

Ok. Respectfully, I think your understanding of physics is compromised if you didn't realize the riverbed is supporting millions of tons of water weight and the weight of the Riverboat above it. I see your response has quietly moved on to the logistics of refilling the water from leaks, but again, it does not consider that moving water from volume A to volume B requires money -- it is not free. The same way perpetual motion devices are not real.

I'll stop there and advise we temper rushed judgments and be open to experts who are perhaps trying to educate us about challenges none of us might have known about and perhaps explain what might feel like an odd decision.

Yes, the riverbed has millions of gallons of water it is supporting. But what are the consequences of its failure? It’s there to hold the river in its place (to make rain the desired look of the river). It is not holding something up. There is no danger from not having the riverbed. That the riverbed can hold so much heavy water also contradicts the claim that construction cannot be done on the island.

You brought up refilling the lake from leaks.

Someone who works in marketing is not exactly what I consider an expert. It does in fact fit in a long tradition of vaguely technical sounding reasons that are ultimately bogus, my perennial favorite being “because of the building code”.

 

[Wall-e]

I wonder how much its going to cost to fill in the ROA?

I wonder if they can just drain it and cap it with reinforced cement?

I have no idea about this stuff.

I am not an engineer either but based on the concept art it appears to me that the land will sit even lower then the existing concrete. Either that or they plan to build up the outer boundary.

 

[James Alucobond]

By replacing a river you can't swim in with attractions and paths, you have replaced a lot of physical space you could not occupy with a lot of physical space you can now occupy. You don't need someone to do the calculus. And that's before you consider what appears to be a mountain that allows you to occupy more vertical space than you could before

Those reasons are all speculative so nothing to debate. I could say the point of the expansion is spatial efficiency, operational efficiency, and environmental stewardship and neither of us would have data for our claims

A huge amount of the updated space cannot be occupied. A large portion of what was previously the river is dedicated to trees, water features, and rockwork. There are no discernible wending walking paths in the artwork; there's a new connection from Big Thunder to the Haunted Mansion and then a single path into the Cars area that branches either toward the main Piston Peak attraction or the nearby junior attraction. Presumably, an exit path routes you through a gift shop. I'm not sure why the ride path rising or falling in the vertical translates into "efficiency" for you. The ride capacity is what it is regardless of where the ride path goes or how long it is, and bystanders in the area cannot wander along the ride path.

 

[October82]

How do we know it was't done? And led to a delay or pause in the announcement? We don't know either way.


Ok. Respectfully, I think your understanding of physics is compromised if you didn't realize the riverbed is supporting millions of tons of water weight and the weight of the Riverboat above it. I see your response has quietly moved on to the logistics of refilling the water from leaks, but again, it does not consider that moving water from volume A to volume B requires money -- it is not free. The same way perpetual motion devices are not real.

I'll stop there and advise we temper rushed judgments and be open to experts who are perhaps trying to educate us about challenges none of us might have known about and perhaps explain what might feel like an odd decision.

The riverbed absolutely is not supporting millions of gallons above it. The riverbed only supports the water directly above it - For ~3 meters of average depth, that's something like 5 PSI.

The riverboat passing overhead actually reduces the load on any patch of the concrete bed since it's displacing water with a less dense material. @lazyboy97o is absolutely correct that the concrete pad is there for water quality and erosion related reasons. That might mean that it needs to be maintained, but there's no immediate danger associated with age-related deterioration of the surface.

AFAIK, the water level is not actively controlled. If the rivers are linked to the seven seas lagoon, they're all kept at the same water level by gravity. Small leaks in the river system are not going to drain the seven seas lagoon, which means the water level is not going to change significantly, but they may impact erosion of the surface and water-quality. Evaporation of the river surface (offset by Florida rain) is almost certainly a bigger source of water loss from the RoA than the state of the concrete lining.

I can't imagine any significant engineering reason why Disney would be motivated to replace the RoA. I can imagine them not wanting to pay the continued costs of basic maintenance but there's no safety issues here.

 

[Charlie The Chatbox Ghost]

The riverbed absolutely is not supporting millions of gallons above it. The riverbed only supports the water directly above it - For ~3 meters of average depth, that's something like 5 PSI.

The riverboat passing overhead actually reduces the load on any patch of the concrete bed since it's displacing water with a less dense material. @lazyboy97o is absolutely correct that the concrete pad is there for water quality and erosion related reasons. That might mean that it needs to be maintained, but there's no immediate danger associated with age-related deterioration of the surface.

AFAIK, the water level is not actively controlled. If the rivers are linked to the seven seas lagoon, they're all kept at the same water level by gravity. Small leaks in the river system are not going to drain the seven seas lagoon, but they may impact erosion of the surface and water-quality.

I can't imagine any significant engineering reason why Disney would be motivated to replace the RoA. I can imagine them not wanting to pay the continued costs of basic maintenance but there's no safety issues here.

100%. To Disney, this is maximizing capacity and profits on "wasted" space. It's not about the rivers themselves being broken, it's the fact the rivers don't have Lightning Lane and merchandise.

Instead of ROA, they want ROI!

 

[lazyboy97o]

AFAIK, the water level is not actively controlled. If the rivers are linked to the seven seas lagoon, they're all kept at the same water level by gravity.

There are locks backstage. The water level does need to be in a certain range for the riverboat to be properly engaged with the track. I believe there have been a couple of times where the water got too high and the riverboat was no longer engaged with the track.

 

[Charlie The Chatbox Ghost]

I’d imagine that we’ll have to wait until at least when the buzz dies down. Maybe in Autumn? They don’t want to ruin all the positive PR they’re getting by announcing what’s closing for the new stuff.

Wow this didn't age well at all

 

[doctornick]

But the near universal thing I hear from those who don’t enjoy it is that they just simply feel strange about some of these men (a lot of these men really) being represented in a family theme park in a very celebratory context when they’re not really a figure worth celebrating.

I don't think that's an accurate way to describe the attraction though. I would say it celebrates the US government institutions and concept, sure, but the actual presidents are really more acknowledged rather than celebrated.