Horizons/ Mission Space Composite?

[yensidtlaw1969]

Hey all.

I was just wondering if anyone would have the resources to make some kind of composite photo of Mission Space and Horizons. Something that would show where something was in Horizons so next time I'm at Mission Space I can say "this scene once stood here" or something like that? Lol, I know this sounds dorky, but I have a real reason behind it, and it is much more than "this scene was here". I need to figure out spacing and sizing etc, and anything anyone could do would certainly be of help.

Yensid "I remember Marni had something like this a while back, i think . . . " tlaw1969

 

[ToTBellHop]

I know it's been done before...I've seen it. M:S is significantly smaller than Horizons was...so back when Disney said something like "Mission: SPACE will be too large for the current building, so we will have to demolish it," they were lying...

 

[marni1971]

Yensid "I remember Marni had something like this a while back, i think . . . " tlaw1969

Not quite - I did a 20k site composite showing just how much space is left. However, I did find this once upon a time

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

Not quite - I did a 20k site composite showing just how much space is left. However, I did find this once upon a time

That's the exact one I remember . Thanks a bunch Marni, that helps A LOT!

Yensid "The sun is setting . . ." tlaw1969

 

[ICP06]

*points* How tall was Horizons/is Mission:Space?

Could it be that when they said that the old pavilion wasn't big enough for M:S, they meant it wasn't tall enough to house the ride mechanism?

Bear in mind that (and I don't know, I'm just speculating), either ride mechanism might have been "sunk" into the ground (i.e. built partially below ground level) to accomodate the ride?

Any chance that's it?

ICP06

 

[Captain Hank]

*points* How tall was Horizons/is Mission:Space?

Could it be that when they said that the old pavilion wasn't big enough for M:S, they meant it wasn't tall enough to house the ride mechanism?

Bear in mind that (and I don't know, I'm just speculating), either ride mechanism might have been "sunk" into the ground (i.e. built partially below ground level) to accomodate the ride?

Any chance that's it?

ICP06

Well, there have been rumors that the Horizons building was starting to become structurally unsound. I can't verify this, but I don't exactly doubt it. Also, I'm sure that the ride portions of the M:S show building had to be purpose built to stand the forces caused by the centrifuge.

Eh, who knows.

 

[Pongo]

Eh, who knows.

WDI...:lookaroun

 

[Connor002]

WDI...:lookaroun

And Al Weiss... :lookaroun

 

[LSUxStitch]

Well, there have been rumors that the Horizons building was starting to become structurally unsound. I can't verify this, but I don't exactly doubt it. Also, I'm sure that the ride portions of the M:S show building had to be purpose built to stand the forces caused by the centrifuge.

Eh, who knows.

I heard that also.

 

[Captain Hank]

:lol: True!

 

[Epcot82Guy]

There also is the issue of when that statement came out. If I remember correctly (and that is questionable, so feel free to chime in anyone), the statement about Horizons size was back when M:S was still in its entirety. Originally, the attraction was to simulate an actual flight and have a spaceport at the rear of the attraction with interactive elements (Still not sure how you were to get back to earth). Therefore, there is a legitimate chance that Horizons' building was too small for the entirety of the M:S concept when they were making decisions since, I believe, the budget cuts came later on to make this the "training" storyline. There also is the issue of structural integrity. While that has been questioned, it is unclear if Horizons could have survived the demolition and reconstruction, especially in light of all the difficulties from WoM (which, from consistency standpoint, carried the statement "We will never retrofit buildings again" with it).

Just some things I had heard to flesh the story out.

 

[MrNonacho]

Could it be that when they said that the old pavilion wasn't big enough for M:S, they meant it wasn't tall enough to house the ride mechanism?

Bear in mind that (and I don't know, I'm just speculating), either ride mechanism might have been "sunk" into the ground (i.e. built partially below ground level) to accomodate the ride?

That could very well be it. M:S's centrifuges take up a LOT of vertical space. It's hard to tell when you're in the flight bay without the work lights on, but the ceiling is way up there. The floors beneath the capsules drop a good four feet, and the planetary drive motors are directly underneath all of that in the "basement."

 

[Coaster3001]

Plus it is just easier to start from scratch. Building in the confines of an exsisting building is tough.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Well, then, is there a lot of empty space in Mission: SPACE? I was under the impression that there isn't...they made that announcement when they announced Mission: SPACE back in 2000...right before they demolished Horizons and started building Mission: SPACE within about 6 months, so I would imagine plans were finalized at that point. I think it was more or less a blatant lie after all the problems they had with retrofitting World of Motion for Test Track. I just miss Horizon's shape...Future World buildings are supposed to have really interesting architecture...Mission: SPACE is a black box. I love Planetary Plaza, but the shape of the building is just boring...I'm sure it was easier and cheaper to just build a special building for SPACE (and a smaller one...), but that would still mean Disney lied. Oh, well...I didn't like Horizons much, anyway

 

[MrNonacho]

I just miss Horizon's shape...Future World buildings are supposed to have really interesting architecture...Mission: SPACE is a black box. I love Planetary Plaza, but the shape of the building is just boring...

But how many guests ever see anything other than the plaza? If we hadn't seen the building being built from the ground up and in aerial photos, how many of us would know the terrible secret of Space?

 

[ToTBellHop]

But how many guests ever see anything other than the plaza? If we hadn't seen the building being built from the ground up and in aerial photos, how many of us would know the terrible secret of Space?

anyone who rides Test Track knows it's a black box...so...all of us? I agree that how buildings look doesn't matter if they are backstage (and guests never see them unless they are sneaking around), but since this one isn't really, it should look better...how much extra paint would it have taken to paint stars into the black paint around the building (and maybe a few sunbursts)...about $100 more (paint and labor...) would have gone a long way.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I like the artistic flair of Mission: SPACE's exterior. While I like how the current Pavilions look currently, I think they could all stand to be redone to look more futuristic (puts on bullet proof vest). Ofcourse, Spaceship Earth is an exception. Something that makes each pavilion taller, and still represents the feeling and theme of the pavilions but with an atristic flair that oozes futurism. I don't want them to looks exactly like Mission Space, but Mission Space stands out in my mind as a physically beautiful and artistic building. Besides, Mission Space is shiny, and who doesn't want that :king: :slurp: !?!?!

I'll be right back .

Yensid "If you can dream it . . ." tlaw1969

 

[ToTBellHop]

right...I said I like Planetary Plaza...it's the rest of the building that is cruddy to me...it's basically a black box with a nice facade. I would say the other Future World buildings approximate futuristic architecture more than Mission: SPACE does...at least from what I've seen of "modern" architecture, anyway...

 

[marni1971]

Unless vertical support columns were an issue, M:S would have fitted into Horizons with ease; the latter had a twin Omnimax theatre - far taller than M:S' centrifuge chambers.

What is known is what is Mission: Space was originally considered to be purely the preshow of a variation of Journeys in Space - the original EPCOT Center space pavilion. As far back as 1990 WDI were considering adding to the Horizons pavilion by extending backwards and putting a centrifuge simulation in as an `actual` ride (in the existing building) to a space station (housed in the new building). Things scaled down and the Space pavilion was just to be housed purely in the Horizons building; part of the ride track would be used for a Zero-G spacewalk attraction, at least one of the Omnimax theatres would be retained for a view out of the stations window, another area would feature motion simulators. Costs rose, and M:S was the result.

Horizons went a little lower than ground level; the load/unload area was slightly below grade, with servcie pits for the Omnimover below this level (although the entrance and exit were raised a little at the top of a gentle ramp it may have appeared the Futureport was well below ground level as you queued) - it`s not as if M:S has really gone any deeper.

 

[MrNonacho]

how much extra paint would it have taken to paint stars into the black paint around the building (and maybe a few sunbursts)...about $100 more (paint and labor...) would have gone a long way.

Ha, nothing gets done for $100 at Disney. A stanchion hole in the ground costs $250. :lol:

It would be nice to have something there (like the design on the Mexico building, maybe), but it's definitely not the first building to look "blah" from a guest-accessible vantage point. Certainly not worse than the view of Fantasyland from the Skyway.