Quietmouse
Well-Known Member
Why doesn’t NASA hook up with Disney and create a space/astronomy pavilion in the old mission space location? That seems like a no brainer? Or does nasa not have funds/desire to partner with Disney?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Mission:Space - Status and Future
- Thread starter ChrisFL
- Start date
DreamfinderGuy
Well-Known Member
Disney did work with NASA for Mission: Space in the first place. They’re not gonna sponsor an EPCOT pavilion, especially considering that would be direct competition to Kennedy Space Center.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Wouldn’t actually be that crazy. Kennedy Space Center and Space 220 are both operated by Delaware North.
V_L_Raptor
Well-Known Member
Does DN pay rent for the space in the pavilion, or does Disney just contract them to run the restaurant operation?
Seems that with Disney's track record of third-party restaurants in Epcot (Marrakech, say), that might put some finitude on Space 220's arrangement.
Fantasmicguy2
Member
I like Mission Space a lot. It used to be my favorite Epcot ride as a kid. But now I don't really think it needs to stay. I feel like Millennium Falcon does its entire gimmick better because the buttons actually do something. Also Cosmic Rewind opened in the same park and while its more fantasy space travel it's still a ride with space travel. I don't think it should be next to go but when it does go it won't be the end of the world. Most people never loved it as much as I did anyway. I think it's mostly because the ride it replaced. If it was a pure addition I think it would have helped it a lot. Also it probably should have launched with Green Team
Brer Oswald
Well-Known Member
Replace it with a New Horizons. Retcon Space 220 to take place on Brava Centauri.
Mickeynerd17
Well-Known Member
IMHO, while M:S is still a pretty popular attraction, I really do not expect it to last past 2035. Its already 21 years old and has seen relatively minimal changes over the years.
What I would like to see is a return to the original replacement concept for Horizons, except design the building to lean even more into the spaceship look with gantry towers on either side. Space220 would still be there but theme the exterior as a launch/landing pad support building.
Either way, I'd like to see a larger structure that dominates the skyline on that side of Future World. The M:S facade is beautiful, but simply too small.
What I would like to see is a return to the original replacement concept for Horizons, except design the building to lean even more into the spaceship look with gantry towers on either side. Space220 would still be there but theme the exterior as a launch/landing pad support building.
Either way, I'd like to see a larger structure that dominates the skyline on that side of Future World. The M:S facade is beautiful, but simply too small.
MakeYourFancyFly
Member
I definitely agree. The ride is set in 2036 (33 yrs after the ride opened so it seemed a lot further out then than now), but something I find interesting about Mission: SPACE is that it is still futuristic. We have not reached Mars yet, and who knows if we will come 2036 the ride officially becomes "outdated". I definitely think the Green/Earth mission added some life to the ride that it wasn't getting before. It was a joy for me (CM) to see kids get off the green mission and say they think space is cool now, or that they want to be an astronaut. There is value there, even if its no Horizons.
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
The commercial always felt like a mystery on what you were doing since you saw shoulder restraints it looked like a coaster oh and let's not forget who said sponser was proudly being shown in the capsule..
Jayspency
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
They should've shown the actual centrifuge spinning at mach-1 but idk if that would be an attractor or turn off for most
osian
Well-Known Member
Well, there are a huge number of people who've liked this sort of thing for around 75 years and still flock to them. Here are some examples.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_(ride)
Enterprise (ride) - Wikipedia
Round Up (ride) - Wikipedia
These rides go at mach-1 too! In fact, some are faster.
The truth is that a lot of Disney fans specifically are over-dramatic about this ride. You know, like footballers who roll over in agony whenever someone brushes past them.
Cmdr_Crimson
Well-Known Member
They at least showed it in the original safety spiel as an animated segment showing what it does if guests decided to change their minds..
Jayspency
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Its funny because even though its a spinning ride it really doesn't feel like it. I think the ride experience does a good job at immersing you to the point where the my mind doesn't register the fact that I'm spinning. Rides like CR, RnRC, and ToT make me a bit nauseous, especially ToT, but not Mission Space.Well, there are a huge number of people who've liked this sort of thing for around 75 years and still flock to them. Here are some examples.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_(ride)
Enterprise (ride) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Round Up (ride) - Wikipedia
These rides go at mach-1 too! In fact, some are faster.
The truth is that a lot of Disney fans specifically are over-dramatic about this ride. You know, like footballers who roll over in agony whenever someone brushes past them.
Well, there are a huge number of people who've liked this sort of thing for around 75 years and still flock to them. Here are some examples.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotor_(ride)
Enterprise (ride) - Wikipedia
Round Up (ride) - Wikipedia
These rides go at mach-1 too! In fact, some are faster.
The truth is that a lot of Disney fans specifically are over-dramatic about this ride. You know, like footballers who roll over in agony whenever someone brushes past them.
The difference is that on Mission:Space, you're spinning but the screen tells you that you aren't...which is fine for most people and good if you keep looking straight ahead. It becomes more of a problem if you turn your head and there's a disconnect between what's on the screen and your movement.
Regular flight simulators had that problem when they were first introduced...if the motion wasn't synced correctly, people would easily feel sick.
osian
Well-Known Member
I don't buy the looking straight ahead thing though for that reason. For example, on an Enterprise you face the direction of travel, not into the centre. So it's not the direction you're looking that's the problem. And it's not the screen that gives you a grounding, because the screen doesn't show you that you're spinning. There should actually be a disconnect while watching the screen.
I believe the reason for "feeling funny" when you look to the side is simply because of the change of direction and the sensors in the ear canals getting confused during the change. I think if you close your eyes while looking straight ahead you'll feel fine as though you were watching the screen but even with eyes closed and you turn your head it will feel funny. I'll have to try it next time on an Enterprise!
I think this is borne out by the fact that I can sometimes feel a bit funny when the ride first starts up, during the launch. But as soon as its up to speed, its fine. It's consistency I think that's the issue here. After a few seconds, you get used to it. But change the position your head is in and you have to readjust.
I think this is also the problem that some people have with Cosmic Rewind. It's the change of direction that you're facing as it rotates that its the problem.
Last edited:
osian
Well-Known Member
I think it's absolutely brilliant. And the way the capsule tilts forwards and backward while spinning in order to change the direction the forces are applying to your body is very clever (upright or on youir back - you're pressed backwards into the back of the seat. Forwards during the approach to Mars - you're pressed downwards into your seat). And fowards without any spinning - weightlessness. Genius! It's been designed and programmed very well. This is all about generating G, not spinning.
There's a parallel here with Cosmic Rewind. It also has a "slingshot around the moon", where the G gets higher and higher the closer you approach and a final "kick" as you whip past the moon. That's done with spinning too! A coaster helix that gets steeper and tighter as you approach. Same with Mission Space, it ramps up just that little bit more, a further turn of the screw, just as you pass the moon.
Last edited:
Both versions of Soarin' have small sections in which the camera turns, but the seats don't reflect that change of direction. I get a very mild vertigo from it and just close my eyes and it goes away.
Snow Queen 83
Well-Known Member
I hated Mission Space the one time I rode it. I kept feeling like I was going to puke up my lunch. Hopefully they'll get rid of it.
Bring back Horizons
Bring back Horizons