Disney Develops New "Floating Omnimover"

[aladdin2007]

Oh they are. Look at Mystic Manor or Rattatouie.

Yeah for everywhere but here at WDW.

 

[RunnerEd]

That would work nicely for a Rhine River cruise ride at the Germany Pavilion....wait, sorry. That's in Florida; we couldn't have anything like that.

 

[danlb_2000]

This matches the supposed Avatar leaked plans photo...

I don't see this as a match. The Avatar plans show individual boats just like Pirates or Small world.

 

[Tom]

I don't see this as a match. The Avatar plans show individual boats just like Pirates or Small world.

Agreed.

Every time a new patent is found, people instantly assume it's for a ride that's on the drawing boards. And every timr I remind people that when you see a patent hit the web (i.e. it's been filed with the US Patent office), there are 5-10 years of work hidden behind that document.

Disney has a pile of mad scientists who spend their lives "inventing stuff.". They just keep spewing out patents. Some get used. Some don't. Some just are sold to other companies - even competitors.

Nothing that we see as a patent today was intended for any specific ride or attraction. Sure, if WDI knows the mad scientists have been working on something they could use, they might speed up the process, but otherwise the patents and blue sky attractions are unrelated.

 

[tracyandalex]

Tons of potential here!! Keeping my fingers crossed for WDW . . . eventually.

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Agreed.

Every time a new patent is found, people instantly assume it's for a ride that's on the drawing boards. And every timr I remind people that when you see a patent hit the web (i.e. it's been filed with the US Patent office), there are 5-10 years of work hidden behind that document.

Disney has a pile of mad scientists who spend their lives "inventing stuff.". They just keep spewing out patents. Some get used. Some don't. Some just are sold to other companies - even competitors.

Nothing that we see as a patent today was intended for any specific ride or attraction. Sure, if WDI knows the mad scientists have been working on something they could use, they might speed up the process, but otherwise the patents and blue sky attractions are unrelated.

Not in every case...
Just look at Soarin'. They specifically designed the ride system for that attraction. The idea for the attraction was well in the works prior to the ride system being developed.

 

[J03Y]

i love it! makes getting people in and out a lot easier!

 

[dweezil78]

I wonder... Would a system of this kind still allow for drops? Otherwise it would be fairly limited as far as water-based attractions go, no?

 

[aristo_cat]

Think about how fast Nemo loads. Or Spaceship Earth. That's the advantage of omnimover.

I completely read your response in a Tupac style voice/persona.

 

[RandomPrincess]

I wonder... Would a system of this kind still allow for drops? Otherwise it would be fairly limited as far as water-based attractions go, no?

You couldn't have a fast drop - all the cars would have to move the same speed at all times. You could possibly have a slow descent.

 

[Eeyore13]

I wonder... Would a system of this kind still allow for drops? Otherwise it would be fairly limited as far as water-based attractions go, no?

in the article the ride path that is shown says it has 3 drops but like RandomPrincess said it would be a drop of constant speed

 

[dweezil78]

That was what I had assumed. So not so much a drop then, but just a descent not unlike the attic to the graveyard in HM or the end of SSE? (based on whatever speculation) Would be cool to see an omnimover system that allowed for a momentary break in the chain for a traditional gravity-based drops where the vehicles then reconnect immediately after. Otherwise, for all the benefits of the omnimover, you end up sacrificing any kind of thrill elements you'd have with another type of ride vehicle.

 

[doctornick]

I wonder... Would a system of this kind still allow for drops? Otherwise it would be fairly limited as far as water-based attractions go, no?

Why would that be a limit? A water based attraction could be one level depending on the space used for the show building.

 

[Eeyore13]

That was what I had assumed. So not so much a drop then, but just a descent not unlike the attic to the graveyard in HM or the end of SSE? (based on whatever speculation) Would be cool to see an omnimover system that allowed for a momentary break in the chain for a traditional gravity-based drops where the vehicles then reconnect immediately after. Otherwise, for all the benefits of the omnimover, you end up sacrificing any kind of thrill elements you'd have with another type of ride vehicle.

Yes, almost exactly like the decents in HM. The ride experiences will be very similar to HM with the inclusion of water. So it will basically be a merge between PotC and HM or so.

 

[dupac]

I completely read your response in a Tupac style voice/persona.

Represent.

 

[dweezil78]

Why would that be a limit? A water based attraction could be one level depending on the space used for the show building.

I mean limited as far as any thrills are concerned. Could you imagine a Pirates of the Caribbean without a drop of some kind? For the tamer Small World type rides it would be totally fine, but for anything with a little extra edge it seems like it wouldn't really work.

 

[LVgoN2WDW]

Make it a nice little POTC cruise ride then *BAM* right at the end, you fall over this giant hill at Worlds End

 

[djlaosc]

Would be cool to see an omnimover system that allowed for a momentary break in the chain for a traditional gravity-based drops where the vehicles then reconnect immediately after.

Something similar (but not exact) to Tomorrowland Transit Authority Peoplemover, Journey Into Imagination?

TTAP seperates on the ride but bunches up together in the entrance/exit, JII works like TTAP but don't know if it bunches up...

But you would be talking about individual carriages, not rows of carriages joined together, unless they had a track drop like the one rumoured to be in Gringotts...

 

[doctornick]

I mean limited as far as any thrills are concerned. Could you imagine a Pirates of the Caribbean without a drop of some kind?

Absolutely. I think the "drop" in PotC adding thrill to the ride is a silly point, though I see people make it. The drop there is completely incidental to the ride experience and I'm not sure why it was done in Florida except as a homage to the California ride (the drops are needed in Cali in order to get to the show building by going under the railroad berm). PotC without the drop would IMHO be just as great a ride as it currently it. It certainly doesn't make the ride into a "thrill" ride in even the most tortuous application of the term.

For the tamer Small World type rides it would be totally fine

Which is what this would be used for. And what Disney is largely know for -- immersive rides that are for all ages. Thrill rides are fine as well, of course, but should not be the only thing they are focusing on.

 

[WDW1974]

I haven't been to WDW since Feb last year (don't think i'll be returning in the very near future either considering), didn't see it in person. I saw a video of it though and I'm honestly not at all excited if that's how many new rides are going to go now.

It is an interesting tech and if used in moderation (admitedly a word that Disney knows not) definitely is worth seeing in park attractions. When Jack Sparrow first enters the room in the O-Town attraction, you'd swear he indeed is there. The problem is how that will play out if an entire attraction is built around that type of effect.

I'm a massive fan of animatronic figures in rides. For theme parks, that's my gold standard, having set pieces with not only a ton of detail but populated by moving animatronic figures. I admit to being spoiled by classic EPCOT rides in that respect, but video screens for me just can't match a well designed set populated by tons of animatronic figures (no matter how big or creatively implemented they may be, or whether they're in 3D or whatever tech they want to put in). If it's something to enhance an element that was already just a painted prop in the background them it can work (like digital mapping to add moving texture and such to a wall), but not when it's used in place of something that could have been a physical set or robotic figure.

The fact that Disney seems to be moving away from this style of ride saddens me immensely. I hope someday the main ideas will shift back to physical robotic figures.

The Disney/WDI of today believes that AAs are passe ... yesterday's tech and they don't want to use them much. Or they call what you see in Little Mermaid AA's ... sorry, but a spinning starfish that does nothing is not an AA. It's a piece of plastic on a spinner and I could make the same thing in my garage.

I agree with you. I loved those classic EPCOT attractions that took you through real sets and told a story in 15-20 minutes. Those days are gone for good. SSE would be a thrill ride now if Disney was able to get one into the structure, thankfully they can't.