News Expedition Everest refurbishment in 2022

cranbiz

cranbiz

Well-Known Member
wedenterprises said:
and the best part wasn't how "real" it looked, but that you felt it was about to grab your head.
Click to expand...
Yes. It scared the crap out of me the first time I rode it. Then in the rides after, it was impressive to see.

Of course, the entire ride as designed was a well put together package and one of the last examples of vintage imagineering. After the mist went away and Yeti in B mode, it was just OK.
 
J

James Alucobond

Well-Known Member
cranbiz said:
Of course, the entire ride as designed was a well put together package and one of the last examples of vintage imagineering. After the mist went away and Yeti in B mode, it was just OK.
Click to expand...
Is it really even comparable to great feats of Imagineering if it was so ill-conceived that it’s horrendously difficult to repair? If the mist effects negatively impact the ride system? The state it’s been left in isn’t desirable, but this seems like a classic example of what folks criticize current Imagineers for in terms of overbuilding something or making it needlessly complex with a lack of care for what the result will be in a few years’ time.
 
cranbiz

cranbiz

Well-Known Member
James Alucobond said:
Is it really even comparable to great feats of Imagineering if it was so ill-conceived that it’s horrendously difficult to repair? If the mist effects negatively impact the ride system? The state it’s been left in isn’t desirable, but this seems like a classic example of what folks criticize current Imagineers for in terms of overbuilding something or making it needlessly complex with a lack of care for what the result will be in a few years’ time.
Click to expand...
Is it imagineering's fault that park operations skimped on the required maintenance? No. Could the Yeti been engineered better? Sure. Does that take away from the over theme when designed? No. You can't blame it's current state on Imagineering. That's 100% on the park and on Burbank.

At the time of design, the Yeti was one of the largest Audio Anamatronic ever built. Some mis-calculations on forces happened. The fix was more maintenance, which park operations didn't want to do. Same with all the other special effects. They are turned off to save money because they can cause maintenance issues that would need to be addressed to keep the ride and it's effects 100% functional. A conscious decision, BTW.

Now that the masses have accepted Disco Yeti, the chances of Lord Chapek opening his purse to fix the Yeti is very, very unlikely. Sorry, spending money to provide a quality guest experience won't satisfy Wall St. although this shareholder wouldn't be upset if the Yeti was fixed.
 
TikibirdLand

TikibirdLand

Well-Known Member
cranbiz said:
Is it imagineering's fault that park operations skimped on the required maintenance? No. Could the Yeti been engineered better? Sure. Does that take away from the over theme when designed? No. You can't blame it's current state on Imagineering. That's 100% on the park and on Burbank.

At the time of design, the Yeti was one of the largest Audio Anamatronic ever built. Some mis-calculations on forces happened. The fix was more maintenance, which park operations didn't want to do. Same with all the other special effects. They are turned off to save money because they can cause maintenance issues that would need to be addressed to keep the ride and it's effects 100% functional. A conscious decision, BTW.

Now that the masses have accepted Disco Yeti, the chances of Lord Chapek opening his purse to fix the Yeti is very, very unlikely. Sorry, spending money to provide a quality guest experience won't satisfy Wall St. although this shareholder wouldn't be upset if the Yeti was fixed.
Click to expand...
Maybe for Disney, it was their largest. Everest opened in 2006. Konfronation opened in Uni Hollywood in 1990. Had Disney kept Bob Gurr on -- or even hired him to consult -- maybe the Yeti would still be running today. But, it would still need maintenance. So, your point is still valid.
 
R

RollerCoaster

Well-Known Member
Tom Morrow said:
Basically, Expedition Everest was designed to run 4 trains at once, but has been modified to run 5 since 2007-ish for higher capacity. It can do this entirely safely as it has more than enough block zones for it. However, with 5 trains, this only allows for mere seconds of delay at load or unload before the ride goes into what's known as a "cascade stop", where the ride initiates an auto ride stop from trains being unable to advance to the next block zone. Part of this is because, to avoid the trains constantly slamming to a stop right before the yeti animatronic scene, the ride system is told to hold the train at the shadow projection until the vehicle at unload advances to load. Holding the trains longer at the shadow projection is better since they are already stopped at that point anyway. This programming results in the control room operator constantly resetting these auto ride stops, as the ride control system is not capable of auto-resuming ride motion after one has been triggered. So, it's possible that this is being addressed.
Click to expand...
Everest was always designed to run 5 trains. It was not a modification. It was running 5 trains when I rode it in May 2006 with the Yeti working.
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
RollerCoaster said:
Everest was always designed to run 5 trains. It was not a modification. It was running 5 trains when I rode it in May 2006 with the Yeti working.
Click to expand...
No. The attraction was definitely designed to operate with 4. They modified it a bit after the attraction opened to accommodate a 5th train. This was when the variable speed lift was implemented. They originally built 5 trains to have 4 in operation and one spare. Some time after they modified the attraction to operate with 5 trains they eventually built a sixth train to once again have a spare.
 
Last edited:
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
cranbiz said:
Is it imagineering's fault that park operations skimped on the required maintenance? No. Could the Yeti been engineered better? Sure. Does that take away from the over theme when designed? No. You can't blame it's current state on Imagineering. That's 100% on the park and on Burbank.
Click to expand...
Imagineering isn’t supposed to do whatever they want and the park has to deal with it. The design of an attraction includes staffing and maintenance plans agreed upon with the park.
 
Cesar R M

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
James Alucobond said:
Is it really even comparable to great feats of Imagineering if it was so ill-conceived that it’s horrendously difficult to repair? If the mist effects negatively impact the ride system? The state it’s been left in isn’t desirable, but this seems like a classic example of what folks criticize current Imagineers for in terms of overbuilding something or making it needlessly complex with a lack of care for what the result will be in a few years’ time.
Click to expand...
Which makes me wonder.. if the YETI is damaged beyond repair for movement purposes. Why turn off the mist?
Also why do not use a series of lights to make the yeti look like its moving based on intelligent light positioning?
 
Cesar R M

Cesar R M

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
No. The attraction was definitely designed to operate with 4. They modified it a bit after the attraction opened to accommodate a 5th train. This was when the variable speed lift was implemented. They originally built 5 trains to have 4 in operation and one spare. Some time after they modified the attraction to operate with 5 trains they eventually built a sixth train to once again have a spare.
Click to expand...
Makes you wonder. Could this have added additional wear and tear on the Yeti? I mean it has to move one more time per full trains-cycle.
 
Master Yoda

Master Yoda

Pro Star Wars geek.
Premium Member
Cesar R M said:
Which makes me wonder.. if the YETI is damaged beyond repair for movement purposes. Why turn off the mist?
Also why do not use a series of lights to make the yeti look like its moving based on intelligent light positioning?
Click to expand...
The mist was on another part of the track and was damaging sensors used to track the ride vehicles.
 
Master Yoda

Master Yoda

Pro Star Wars geek.
Premium Member
Cesar R M said:
Makes you wonder. Could this have added additional wear and tear on the Yeti? I mean it has to move one more time per full trains-cycle.
Click to expand...
It would, but that was not really the problem. The yeti was going to break regardless. All additional cycles would have done is hastened the demise.
 
TikibirdLand

TikibirdLand

Well-Known Member
999th Happy Haunt said:
The effect at load is the steam effect, not mist. Mist is at the top of the mountain if I’m not mistaken.
Click to expand...
Both could easily accommodated using a haze machine. We have just one and it's surprising what you can build up holding the smoke in a box and using a fan to disperse huge clouds as needed. Won't damage sensors. Or, in our cased, sound equipment.
 
R

RollerCoaster

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
No. The attraction was definitely designed to operate with 4. They modified it a bit after the attraction opened to accommodate a 5th train. This was when the variable speed lift was implemented. They originally built 5 trains to have 4 in operation and one spare. Some time after they modified the attraction to operate with 5 trains they eventually built a sixth train to once again have a spare.
Click to expand...
No, I was actually there in May 2006? What is your source? Please explain how you know this to be fact? The layout was designed from the get-go for 5 train operations. The variable speed lift is a different story, but the speed of the lift is not what enables additional trains. There were plenty of blocks to accommodate 5 trains from the start.
 
Master Yoda

Master Yoda

Pro Star Wars geek.
Premium Member
TikibirdLand said:
Both could easily accommodated using a haze machine. We have just one and it's surprising what you can build up holding the smoke in a box and using a fan to disperse huge clouds as needed. Won't damage sensors. Or, in our cased, sound equipment.
Click to expand...
Are you referring to mineral oil or glycol-based fogs?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom