Real Reason Why Imagination Changed!?

[lazyboy97o]

It doesn't make sense to kill an attraction for no reason, especially with that big of attendence. I think the person writing that was kinda going for a stretch of Imagination himself.

It makes sense when you factor in that even after all those years the attraction was still a maintenance nightmare.

 

[aladdin2007]

It makes sense when you factor in that even after all those years the attraction was still a maintenance nightmare.

They didnt have to kill it and gut it like they did just cause of maintenance problems. Now its just an experience nightmare. A refurbishment update would have been nice and if the turn table was that bad replace that scene I suppose. But I guess it wasnt that easy.
The 90s sure turned out to be the gutting of futureworld.

 

[mcjaco]

It was easier. You walked the exit corridor, after Dreamfinder had just asked you to go upstairs, and followed the signs to reach the escalator, stairs or elevator not 20ft away. Couldn`t have been easier. Then your exit naturally took you to the Magic Eye, with a small exit option available too.

Well, if you consider following signs and finding your way to an escalator easier than being dumped right into the Imageworks......ok. :shrug:

 

[marni1971]

Well, if you consider following signs and finding your way to an escalator easier than being dumped right into the Imageworks......ok. :shrug:

I think of it as being dumped into a giftshop. The Imageworks just gets in the way

I thought you meant ride to Magic Eye, not ride to IW :wave:

 

[glee]

That sounds pathetic to me. If it was that popular people would still go on it and wouldn't be fooled by a diversion. :hammer:

 

[Master Yoda]

They didnt have to kill it and gut it like they did just cause of maintenance problems. Now its just an experience nightmare. A refurbishment update would have been nice and if the turn table was that bad replace that scene I suppose. But I guess it wasnt that easy.
The 90s sure turned out to be the gutting of futureworld.

I am going off heresy but from what I was told was that the design was flawed and the cost to completely redesign and replace it was just too high.

 

[Figment632]

They wanted a Winnie the Pooh attraction, and Mr. Toad's Wild Ride was the most logical fit?

Or TDO was to cheap to build Pooh in its own building elsewhere!

 

[Alektronic]

I am going off heresy but from what I was told was that the design was flawed and the cost to completely redesign and replace it was just too high.

The biggest problem with the ride was the ride operators. They kept slowing down and stopping then speeding up the ride at the unload and load areas.

The turntable was all about timing and having variable speed motors to compensate, but when too many people were pushing buttons at the same time, it confused the ride and then it would stop.

 

[mcjaco]

I think of it as being dumped into a giftshop. The Imageworks just gets in the way

I thought you meant ride to Magic Eye, not ride to IW :wave:

True! :lol:

Oh, no. Getting to the Magic Eye (which still sounds kind of perverse to me), was easy from the ride exit.

 

[Rob562]

I am going off heresy but from what I was told was that the design was flawed and the cost to completely redesign and replace it was just too high.

I don't comment on grammar/spelling mistakes all that often, but I think you may have meant "hearsay", Yoda.

(Although I guess "heresy" might apply, too... It means "an opinion, doctrine, or practice contrary to the truth or to generally accepted beliefs or standards", though it normally is used in regards to religious beliefs. EPCOT and JII sometimes come across as a religious experience to some on these boards )

-Rob

 

[marni1971]

The biggest problem with the ride was the ride operators. They kept slowing down and stopping then speeding up the ride at the unload and load areas.

The turntable was all about timing and having variable speed motors to compensate, but when too many people were pushing buttons at the same time, it confused the ride and then it would stop.

No, the biggest problem was with the SCS. The ride kept stopping because it had a Test Track. Plus the rotating scene 2 issues and the fact the ride system was installed wrong in 1982 didn`t help either.

 

[WDWFigment]

On a somewhat related note (Imageworks...JII), does anyone have a (fairly) high resolution image of the Rainbow Corridor (during its heyday...I don't want an image of the current corridor with the one-two blinking lights)? I have been looking for one for the longest time without any luck.

 

[Bob Connor]

It just seems that an update could have been performed without destroying the ride and it would not be unreasonable. Perhaps trackless vehicles did not exist in 1998 but they would solve a lot of the problems if they did improvements today. I read that the turntable crashed vehicles. Was it necesssary for there to be a mechanical connection between the turntable and the cars? If there wasn't and it went "off" people might see the next scene early and lose some of the "magic" but it would be a lot better than a wreck and would be much safer.

Would it be possible to have a preshow in the queue area to introduce the characters so that the turntable would not be necessary? Meanwhile, I would think with these improvements there might be enough money to update the Science scene, make Performing arts better. Would this not be enough to be the required update?

By the way, how was it "intalled wrong" in 1982? Couldn't that be corrected?

 

[aladdin2007]

It just seems that an update could have been performed without destroying the ride and it would not be unreasonable. Perhaps trackless vehicles did not exist in 1998 but they would solve a lot of the problems if they did improvements today. I read that the turntable crashed vehicles. Was it necesssary for there to be a mechanical connection between the turntable and the cars? If there wasn't and it went "off" people might see the next scene early and lose some of the "magic" but it would be a lot better than a wreck and would be much safer.

Would it be possible to have a preshow in the queue area to introduce the characters so that the turntable would not be necessary? Meanwhile, I would think with these improvements there might be enough money to update the Science scene, make Performing arts better. Would this not be enough to be the required update?

By the way, how was it "intalled wrong" in 1982? Couldn't that be corrected?

That kind of update sure would have been just right to a lot of us. Thats all it needed really; Some redone scenes, fresh paint, and leave the rest of the thing alone. But nooo lets take out the imagination and replace it with dead space, and nothingness. Now the second redo, I guess the imagineers have to be givin credit for trying hard for what they were givin to work with, but still the whole thing needs to go. I dont think we will ever see a 15min long journey like the original ever built again. I would be fine with a 5min long journey as long as it was worthwhile.

 

[Bob Connor]

What I was kind of getting at is some way to eliminate the turntable scene that caused so much trouble. I have to wonder how it was approved in the first place. It would seem before it was built that to have 5 identical scenes on a turntable would be expensive and trouble prone. Since it was used to introduce the characters couldn't that be somehow done in the queue area as a pre show?

Do you think we will ever find out who was responsible for the Journey into your (not mine!) imagination? I don't think that person would ever admit it, even if they have not been fired.

Along with what you suggest I might have given Dreamfinder a makeover, his beard was just too much.

 

[marni1971]

Bob;

The `turntable` really was an engineering feat, typical of EPCOT Center and a great example of not taking short cuts. Sure, a preshow could have done the job, even a simple screen and video, but that is Disney of today. Not the Disney of yesterday where the turntable was a stunning piece of showmanship, it was the hard thing to do and not the easy route, not to mention it lasted 2 and a half minutes. The issues wern't found until testing began - much like Test Track - but there wasn`t time to fully fix them since the ride was already late.

So far as I know, there was only one derailment during T&A with no-one riding, and adjustments were made for the SCS to err on the side of caution. The entire ride system was cutting edge, again much like TT with its block zones, cars bunching up, splitting and running at different speeds, and the software back then was an unknown quantity, not to mention the hardware a one-off. It was being invented as they went, like much of EPCOT Center. Think of it like the Hat Box Ghost for example, but on a much larger scale. Most of the time it worked very well, and was one of the main features and crowning achievements of the attraction. It was just so very complicated.

Without going into detail, the main reason the ride was delayed was the ride system motors were not installed correctly, and all of them had to be removed after the whole attraction was inplace, new holes dug for them, have them all reinstalled, and the ride re-snagged from scratch once again.

 

[Bob Connor]

Well then it sounds like the problems were all with the ride vehicles and not the "stationary" parts of the ride - or were there troubles with the scenes and the animatronics? Really what was so expensive after the initial investment? Also wonder if they use the same ride vehicles now how is that any more reliable? Perhaps they needed vehicles from another manufacturer - dare I name them - ETF ride systems?

One question I do have is the "cast members" who operate the ride. Is it not a good assignment? While they are always professional and cheerful, the morale to work an unpopular ride has to get anyone down. Do CMs have any say over what ride they are assigned to?

What was the main expense that was so out of control that caused this ride to be replaced? You would not have "wear items" like tires on test tract or water-related issues like POTC, really nothing beyond routine dusting and cleaning and replacing lights everything else at Disney or any amusement park has.

 

[mickey2008.1]

Are there any videos of the old JII compared to the new? I have been on both, but cant remember the old. I get it confused with horizons. Its because of another thread that showed and old horizons car, which i thought was JII, all i remeber was figment. please set me straight.

 

[Astronaut Jones]

I'm definitely on the outside of this discussion -- I really don't know the details of what's being talked about here, but why did Disney apparently want to kill off Figment and Dreamfinder if the the ride was so successful?

 

[Rob562]

Well then it sounds like the problems were all with the ride vehicles and not the "stationary" parts of the ride - or were there troubles with the scenes and the animatronics? Really what was so expensive after the initial investment? Also wonder if they use the same ride vehicles now how is that any more reliable? Perhaps they needed vehicles from another manufacturer - dare I name them - ETF ride systems?

The ride vehicles used today are the same vehicles from 1982, just with a different paintjob. (I think the little "accordion protector flaps" between each car are an addition, though)

One of the big problems with the turntable was the fact that it had walls separating each showscene, not only on the "stage" where the blimps were, but also separating one train from the next. So this required a hanging wall "sweeping" along the track in front of and behind each train.
If it were simply a matter of a train running at the same speed as the blimp, it'd be far less of an issue. But when you add in rotating walls that are within the spatial "envelope" of where the ride vehicles operate, you can see why safety was a big concern. If the train sped up too soon or slowed down too late when entering/leaving the turntable, you'd have the train ramming the moving wall.

This is one of those concepts/designs where it can be difficult to grab just how complex it was without a moving diagram or model to illustrate...


A thought/armchair Imagineering moment: I wonder if a better/safer/easier design would've had the track-area wall separate from the turntable... Have it be a stand-alone piece that was supported by a track of some kind located between the turntable and the ride track. It would have no motorization at all, except perhaps between the exit and entrance of the turntable. Each wall segment would sit at the entrance to the turntable scene waiting for a train to come along. As the train entered the turntable, the rear car would somehow automatically "grab" the wall segment and pull it along with it. This would then act as the trailing "blinder" for that train, and also the leading "blinder" for the train behind it. Then, as the train left the turntable, the wall would disconnect from the back of the train, and be pushed around the curve to await pickup by another train.
Since the walls themselves would rely on the ride track motors for movement, there wouldn't be any danger of a train crashing into the wall if the turntable and trains became out-of-sync, but as long as train speed was synched properly, the moving wall would match up with the turntable's wall and all would be fine.

EDIT: Oh, and for Mickey2008, if you're looking for a history and ride-through of the original JII attraction, Martin's video can't be beat:
http://www.vimeo.com/3015806

-Rob