Pandora Spoiler Thread

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Full ride video showed the ride as 5:50. Not loading, not waiting. Boat is moving 5:50.

The first full ride video that was posted (and quickly taken down) was about a minute shorter than this, so clearly the ride time is variable.

EDIT: That first video, from Attractions Magazine, seems to be back up and does show a roughly 5 minute ride time.

EDIT AGAIN: I just watched the Blog Mickey video - the difference is largely a PoC-style boat logjam at the end of the video. Besides that, both videos show a ride time right around 5 minutes.
 
Last edited:

MisterPenguin

🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧Fully Pfizered!🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧🐧
Premium Member
From the full ride videos I've seen, the times have been:

4:50
5:00
5:10
5:45
5:50

Average is 5:19
 

Grotto123

Active Member
I didn't see this when I first walked in today but as I was leaving I was greatly surprised to find it, if you look in the center your see it
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2020.JPG
    IMG_2020.JPG
    82.1 KB · Views: 172

180º

Well-Known Member
If only it was based on characters that were actually interesting and memorable...
I see why that would be necessary for marketability (which is what I think this land will struggle with), but not for its effectiveness as a permanent Walt Disney World/Animal Kingdom attraction. But we've been over this approximately 1,000,000 times.
 

djdan888

Active Member
From what I hear, shorter apple shaped people are having the most difficulty. This could be a issue for many many people. This could just be from opening issues or part of the ride design that may leave many people out. Wish we could confirm. Nothing is mentioned on Disney site about weight or shape issues for the ride. Just that you have to be 44"
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
From the full ride videos I've seen, the times have been:

4:50
5:00
5:10
5:45
5:50

Average is 5:19

Sounds like they are testing out water flow speed. It would be interesting if they are trying to find a sweet spot, or if they intentionally speed it up/slow it down depending on demand. A minute difference would be huge in terms of increasing capacity during peak times.
 

Vipraa

Well-Known Member
Having talked with one the Imagineers the Navi River journey ways aimed at a 5 min ride. I have ridden it 4 times so far and it is very impressive with the blending of screens and sets. The first Navi you see is a screen figure with a Projected Navi on it and there are other translucent screens with sets behind them and another screen behind that making very cool 3d effects. The most impressive thing is how tiny the ride is footprint wise. The actual ride is the length of the load platform plus about 15 feet but since it has lots of tight turns it 5 minutes long. Thats also why the boats are only 2 rows is so they can make the tight turns and fit more track into a smaller space.
 

twebber55

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
yeah i never bought into the 3:58 second ride time
not form what i heard
its a good D/C ticket ride for what it is great themeing and some neat technology
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Having talked with one the Imagineers the Navi River journey ways aimed at a 5 min ride. I have ridden it 4 times so far and it is very impressive with the blending of screens and sets. The first Navi you see is a screen figure with a Projected Navi on it and there are other translucent screens with sets behind them and another screen behind that making very cool 3d effects. The most impressive thing is how tiny the ride is footprint wise. The actual ride is the length of the load platform plus about 15 feet but since it has lots of tight turns it 5 minutes long. Thats also why the boats are only 2 rows is so they can make the tight turns and fit more track into a smaller space.

The question, of course, is why they decided to make the footprint so small. This is, after all, one of two rides in a very major expansion. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the small footprint was purely a design choice and not dictated by the space available.
 

Jones14

Well-Known Member
The question, of course, is why they decided to make the footprint so small. This is, after all, one of two rides in a very major expansion. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the small footprint was purely a design choice and not dictated by the space available.
Maybe they wanted to leave plenty of room for future attractions in the event of an expansion. If they had a good sense of the scale/scope they were going for, why waste space if they could squeeze it into a smaller footprint?

Edited to add: this seems to show that WDI hasn't entirely forgotten the lessons learned by the previous generation, namely, that small scale attractions don't need a lot of space to be effective if they're creative with how they use it.
 
Last edited:

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

Top Bottom