-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney to announce overhaul of DL Tomorrowland at D23?
- Thread starter Disgruntled Walt
- Start date
Stevek
Well-Known Member
Nostalgia is a wonderful thing. Even though it's one of 5 attraction posters I had professionally framed, it was terribly unpopular when it closed. I dare say that any popularity upon reopening would quickly wane
el_super
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's always the right choice. If they decided to spend more money on Rocket Rods, it wouldn't have been a better attraction.
Rocket Rods was a good example of how WDI cannot effectively work within a budget. Looking back now we can see that money on that project was absolutely wasted (I forgot that the tunnel from Circlevision had to be built underground for that ride). Throwing more money at the problem isn't always the right answer.
Homemade Imagineering
Well-Known Member
I can’t imagine what else they’d be planning aside from aesthetic changes and the return of the PM, as there really isn’t much to work with in the land given the info we currently have. Again, it’s been hinted whatever this is will be an announcement geared towards fans, due to the lack of other news coming to parks panel, so there must be something aside from those aesthetic changes. Now, if we’d get the original 1964 CoP back in the Carousel Theater instead of PM, I might even prefer that scenario
el_super
Well-Known Member
There has been a kind of thinking with Disney/WDI where they "restore" something when taking away something else. Case in point: restoring the Paul Frees cave narration in Pirates when they took away the auction scene. It would make sense if they are planning to bring back *some* form of PeopleMover if they were planning to ditch the Monorail or Subs (or both) finally.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
I think the point is if they used all that money for one attraction it wouldnt have been Rocket Rods at all. They would have left the PeopleMover alone and develop an actual E ticket for elsewhere.
el_super
Well-Known Member
But they needed to replace the PeopleMover. And Captain EO. And what was left of Mission to Mars. Tomorrowland as a whole was failing, that's why they came up witht he idea of redoing the whole land (all the way back in the 1980s).
They could have focused the money on one thing, which I guess to a degree is what current WDI does (like Rise). If they had built that one thing, be it a more elaborate Rocket Rods or some other attraction in the Carousel Theater, most of the other venues in Tomorrowland would have stayed shuddered.
Of course, with all the questionable decisions being made on Rocket Rods, I don't know if it would have made sense to put so much faith on a more expensive attraction, even if it wasn't the replacement for the PeopleMover.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Resolved how? If there truly was structural issues they would have to reinforce pylons with more rebar more than likely having to tear down and repour concrete as well as shore up the foundations in the same way, and that's just the outside track. We have no idea the extent of any damage in the indoor portions or how much it would effect the buildings to fix them. To my knowledge this hasn't been addressed and it is a LOT of money just to bring back one nostalgic attraction.
Overblown? If anyone would put their heart into bringing the PM back it would be Tony. He's the first to admit that RR was an underbudgeted mistake and would love to rectify it by bringing the PM back. I have no doubt he did the full gambit of research and discussions with experts. What reason would he have to lie or at the least overblow his explanations?
The only way the PM is coming back is if they tear down the track, replace it with a new one that had evac stairs/elevators every so many yards, place an elevator at the turn table, completely retrofit the indoor portions to either widen them or do enclosed vehicles (yuck). It's a pipe dream. After 25 years this isn't finally "the one" no matter how many "insiders" hint at it.
As I said before, I'd humbly eat crow if this got announced next weekend.
I feel like I've written this exact same post 5 times over the last 10 years
We don't know where these rumored "structural issues" are located, ie which section of track. It could be in a section over Autopia. So its very possible the rumors of a shortened track is to completely bypass/remove the section that had "structural issues". As such they don't have to replace/reinforce that section and thus its effectively "resolved". And looking at it from that perspective, if its only a certain section of the track that had "structural issues" and not the entire track which was intimated, that is what makes it overblown.
As for the rest, not questioning Tony obviously but its possible he was looking at it at the time from a full redo not the rumored shortened version that might be coming.
Anyways less than 5 days now and we'll see if they announce it.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
An accountant didn’t remove the funds for banking. General Motors was going to sponsor the attraction and pulled out in response to the issues with Test Track. Disney still wanted the fast PeopleMover replacement but was unwilling to make up the lost funding.
It’s not so much that they didn’t consider lateral loads, it’s that the lateral loads as they occurred did not align with the assumptions made during design. The Rocket Rods were in a way remote controlled cars and the slowing down was achieved by braking. The vehicles ate through tires and gave you that nice jerky jerky ride. The assumptions were likely built around getting a smoother ride with more uniform deceleration, not the pulsing that actually occurred.
Building and structural failure is also typically a process, not a singular event. An action can cause damage without causing failure, but repeated damage will eventually lead to failure. The Rocket Rods causing damage that would lead to failure aligns with both structural concerns regarding operating the attraction and more recent assessments of structural viability.
The tunnel already existed. There are limits to how much can be done with any budget, there is a point where funding is simply insufficient. Tomorrowland 98 was hit by loss of sponsorship, decreases in Disney’s own funding commitment and an insufficient reduction in scope.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
This is especially true for Disney submarine rides.
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was given an extensive refurbishment in 1993 that included adding props to the queue and changing its music loop.
It closed permanently the following year.
chadwpalm
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I've entertained this idea myself since if the track stays primarily inside buildings there would be less concern about evac procedures. It would be a pretty short ride though.
chadwpalm
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
You're Bay Area, right? Wanna have a watch party? I'll bring the popcorn!
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I'll bring the Guinness and Jameson.You're Bay Area, right? Wanna have a watch party? I'll bring the popcorn!
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
You guys can take a drink everytime Bob says Synergy or some other meaningless corporate word.I'll bring the Guinness and Jameson.
EPCOTCenterLover
Well-Known Member
Or take a drink every time he misstates a piece of Company history and/or can't remember an attraction's name. You'll be drunk in no time.
chadwpalm
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
1. Synergy
2. Magical (or any form of Magic)
3. Immersive
4. Reimagined
5. Enchanted
These could have us passed out pretty quickly.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
Well since it'll be Josh giving the presentation and not Bob, not sure it'll have the same effect.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
That guy will put you to sleep without an alcohol.
Phroobar
Well-Known Member
How are they suppose to remember an attraction's name when they've never been in the parks before.