Spaceship Earth being turned into a roller coaster?

[marni1971]

Maybe they shoulda put on the warning sign: "Rocket Rods: What happens when our good Imagineers take a vacation to Disney World" or "Rocket Rods: Designed by the best students in Mrs. Crawley's 9th grade algebra class"

How about "Rocket Rods: we have a great idea but need another $50 million to bank the turns. This will save on wear and tear on the cars and the structure. Thats only loose change in Disneys pocket right? WRONG: the powers that be (were) say "no more money". So Rods opens with flat turns and guess what? Hey - ho...

 

[DarkMeasures]

And I can't see why they wont just rebuild the track. I mean 100 million tops? They could tear it down and rebuild if they have to but the people mover really needs to reopen. Not that I ever rode the Disneyland one, but I have ridden the WDW one more than any other ride at Disney and I love the TTA.

Where is all this money going? How were they able to rack up the cost for WDW? Can't they do the same for current attractions?

 

[BalooChicago]

Rocket Rods and the DL SM were not HUGE engineering projects. We do not know the extent to which the audio changes at SM affected the track, it very likely was primarily affected by its age. There are those of us who wouldn't mind seeing WDW's track replaced either...

The thing that I was trying to get across is that to say fitting a roller-coaster into SE is impossible is a fallacy. It is possible. SE is essentially a steel structure. One of the advantages of steel structures is that they can be substantially upgraded through the addition of more steel. (Either additional members, or by adding more steel to existing). I have worked on many projects that have done just that. On one project in my office we added 13 floors to a 4 story building. Given time, money, and proper engineering it is definitely possible. Likely? No. Practical? No. Would I want it to happen? No. But it could happen.

 

[cloudboy]

When does a rehab become a new building? The sphere itself is just the outside shell - to do any major work would involve removing that. And the actual structure itself is a pretty simple central ahft with the helix floor suspended around it. Sure, you could always tear out those floors, but then is that really the same building? Essentailly you would end up just rebuilding the whole thing.

Mind you, I would not put that past them right now, especially if they had another ride to clone to fit there.

OK, so the Rocket Rods had problems, but was teh structural damage so severe that they could not just put on new vehicles that didn't go that fast and didn't do the wheelies onto the track?

 

[BalooChicago]

When does a rehab become a new building?

That's essentially what was done to the White House some 56 years ago. (The Building was rebuilt within the existing walls.)

 

[ToTBellHop]

Rocket Rods is completely unstable now and cannot support the weight of even the old PeopleMover cars without collapsing. That is why there has been absolutely no maintenance of its track, allowing trees to overgrow it and the magnetic propulsion system to rust badly. Disney will not spend $100,000,000 to bring the PeopleMover back. It is not worth that much money (the PeopleMover and even Rocket Rods are no E-Rides). They would spend that much money on an E-Ride, but in order to build Rocket Rods the correct way (as Time Racers, the original plan), the entire existing track would need to be removed, completely rebuilt, and then themed and given banked turns, which would probably cost more than $100,000,000. I don't see it happening. I just wish they would remove the old structure already, as it looks absolutely horrible due to the lack of upkeep. Finally, the act of demoliting and rebuilding this attraction would likely take several years and cause for either an entire closure of an already ailing Tomorrowland or the setup of a maze of construction walls for guests to navigate. In the mean time, it is being "reclaimed" by the wild...

 

[DarkMeasures]

Rocket Rods is completely unstable now and cannot support the weight of even the old PeopleMover cars without collapsing. That is why there has been absolutely no maintenance of its track, allowing trees to overgrow it and the magnetic propulsion system to rust badly. Disney will not spend $100,000,000 to bring the PeopleMover back. It is not worth that much money (the PeopleMover and even Rocket Rods are no E-Rides). They would spend that much money on an E-Ride, but in order to build Rocket Rods the correct way (as Time Racers, the original plan), the entire existing track would need to be removed, completely rebuilt, and then themed and given banked turns, which would probably cost more than $100,000,000. I don't see it happening. I just wish they would remove the old structure already, as it looks absolutely horrible due to the lack of upkeep. Finally, the act of demoliting and rebuilding this attraction would likely take several years and cause for either an entire closure of an already ailing Tomorrowland or the setup of a maze of construction walls for guests to navigate. In the mean time, it is being "reclaimed" by the wild...

It wouldn't cost nowhere near that much. The peoplemover would probably cost as much as it did to originally build with inflation. And that was not a 100
million dollar project. And construction walls? I think only for the footers. After that, the track could be placed in overnight. The only roadblock would be inside the buildings but that wont require construction walls.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Removing the current track and building a new one would cost a lot. That is basically a track with LIMs all the way along it--not cheap at all, and for the crowds the PeopleMover brings in, it would cost too much. A new Rocket Rods, done right, would EASILY cost $100,000,000. That is how much they should have spent on it in the first place. As for construction walls, the track goes above all of Tomorrowland, and even if they only did work at night, which I doubt would happen (Disney has given us little reason to believe it would be given the more recent attraction constructions), they would never allow guests to be walking under a track that they were in the process of building. This would result in a construction wall below every piece of track, because those areas would be effectively hard-hat only areas from the date they started removing the existing track until the new magnetic system was installed, which would be a long time.

 

[Figment1986]

However... While building buzzlightyear at DL... they were told to not touch the People mover/Rocker Rod track. It is still their. And the could rebuild the track in phases.... perhaps work over a month on the track. build and manufacture before instalation.

It could work.... In therory...

 

[Mag1575]

I hope that it isn't true! Spaceship Earth is my favorite ride at Epcot

 

[KaliSplash]

I didn't have time to rant the other night after Grizz roared. But I do have a few minutes now.
There is nothing wrong with roller coasters at Walt Disney World. They have several, most well-themed and most family-friendly. There are people who won't go upside down on a ride (my darling wife, for one), so you don't see a Hulk or Kraken (sp?) type coaster here.) But there are coasters.
But what separates Walt Disney World from Six Flags and your local amusement park is the attention to detail and the variety of attractions. Specifically, the audio-animatronics. Whether going by in a boat or an ominmover or whatever, it is this attention to detail that makes Disney stand out.
This is, in large measure, why Walt Disney World has been orders of magnitude more successful than other theme parks. (Along with the overall quality of other experiences.)
This is what we seem to be losing, especially at Epcot. World of Motion and Horizons being the most blatant examples. I like Test Track and I love Mission:Space, but I wanted them IN ADDITION to, NOT INSTEAD OF.
Even the Kitchen Kaberet/Food Rocks/original Journey Into Imagination are losses. And I look forward to Soarin (having never been to Disneyland)
This is what we must not lose at Spaceship Earth.
I do think the Ellen story made Universe of Energy a better attraction. (though I miss the music from the original version).
but what we need, especially at Epcot and elsewhere, are MORE audio-animatronic based attractions, regardless of the means of locomotion involved, (including the whirling carousel around the scenes.)
If you want to go upside down a dozen times in 45 seconds, by all means, head to Six Flags, or the Paramont parks or whereever and have fun. I enjoy those parks, too. But what I really want is WALT DISNEY WORLD!!

 

[WDWTestDummy]

^ I agree with everything KaliSplash just said

 

[Michael72688]

Ok, I'm just gonna say this so dont get mad! Disney is looking out for their parks and what draws people into them. Someone is not going to fly down to Orlando just to ride SSE, that is why a new ride would be built and would more then likely be more thrilling. I think you all are just gonna have to except the fact the most new rides are going to be big thrills.

 

[DVC_Couple_PA]

I have a read these threads about replacing SSE and there has been one thing keeps comming up that always sort of nagged at me. Some folks seem to believe that gutting SSE would be structurally impossible; that the internal ride system helps hold up the building. This raised an eyebrow because I seem to remember reading in early EPCOT materials that Disney touted the fact that SSE didn't require internal support.

I did some homework on the subject. I read about Buckminster Fuller (the pioneer of geodesic design) and Peter Floyd (a student of Fuller's and the man who designed SSE), and found that, not only is there no internal support required for that type of building, but it is actually the point to building one. Since nothing is required to support it internally, it creates more usable space.

So, yes, SSE can be gutted entirely. Given that it is a complete sphere, it may be tedious and expensive to do it, but it can be done.

 

[cloudboy]

Let me try explaining it again - maybe this wil make a little more sense.

Really, you could almost think of it like 2 separate buildings. If you were to remove the sphere, you would find a helix-shaped building (think circular parking garage). The base is where the loading takes place. At the level where the support pylons are is a wider platform. This extends outwards farther than the rest of the core building.

While Spheres are great when they are built, it is very difficult to build one. They pulled off a great trick at Disney - what they did was to build the core building first. Then they build a 3/4 dome on the platform that was a ways up to make the top 3/4 of the sphere. This is in fact a shell - it doesn't have anything to do with the actual building structure at all. From the bottom of the platform they constructed a 1/4 dome - upside down (obviously making a cut out for the base of the building). So in effect there is a sphere surrounding the core building.

If you were to tear down the core building, you would have to take down the domes, because they are in essence sitting on top of it. you could take it down, build a new building, and put it up again, but that would be the same as rebuilding it.

 

[jrashadb]

Let me try explaining it again - maybe this wil make a little more sense.

Really, you could almost think of it like 2 separate buildings. If you were to remove the sphere, you would find a helix-shaped building (think circular parking garage). The base is where the loading takes place. At the level where the support pylons are is a wider platform. This extends outwards farther than the rest of the core building.

While Spheres are great when they are built, it is very difficult to build one. They pulled off a great trick at Disney - what they did was to build the core building first. Then they build a 3/4 dome on the platform that was a ways up to make the top 3/4 of the sphere. This is in fact a shell - it doesn't have anything to do with the actual building structure at all. From the bottom of the platform they constructed a 1/4 dome - upside down (obviously making a cut out for the base of the building). So in effect there is a sphere surrounding the core building.

If you were to tear down the core building, you would have to take down the domes, because they are in essence sitting on top of it. you could take it down, build a new building, and put it up again, but that would be the same as rebuilding it.

Which will never happen. If Disney is too cheap to keep their AAs, they're way too cheap to undergo that large of a project.

Let. This. Rumor. Die.

 

[Lynx04]

I honestly don't can't see Disney doing this. First, every coaster I've seen constructed requires a crane and it happens to be large and takes up space. I can't think how else the could get the coaster pieces together. Using the a crane would require the whole front area of the park to be shout down during the construction (potential falling pieces). Which means they would have to build a whole new entrance area for the park, and the back entrance is out of the question. Also, the globe would have to be taken apart to left the pieces into place which would become a visual nightmare for some.

 

[ead79]

Count me in as another person who loves Walt Disney World based largely on the fact that it is NOT merely a thrill ride park. You won't find me at Six Flags (even though I live about a half hour away from one), but you will find me at WDW multiple times a year. I have nothing against Disney adding additional thrilling attractions, just as they have been doing. As long as they continue to theme them (e.g. Tower of Terror, Rockin' Roller Coaster), then I think it is in keeping with Disney's legacy. However, I completely oppose the idea of turning Epcot (or any other Disney park, for that matter) into a park with an over abundance of thrill rides. Spaceship Earth is a classic attraction and an example of what Disney does best--tell a wonderful story (in this case about human communications history) in the midst of an entertaining and insightful attraction. To get rid of Spaceship Earth would truly be a shame. It is honestly my favorite attraction at WDW (for a variety of reasons), and I would hate to see it go. It really helps "make" Epcot's theme of discovery and entertaining education.

 

[Tim G]

If Disney is too cheap to keep their AAs, they're way too cheap to undergo that large of a project.

EXCUSE ME ???

There have been much bigger projects than this...

SSE will stay... only the inside will be updated...
If they would take down the sphere... they might as well could close down the park as the demolition would block almost all the walkways.
And alternative entrance wouldn't be the solution either...

So don't say things, you don't know anything about... please...:kiss:

 

[EpcoTim]

Ok, I'm just gonna say this so dont get mad! Disney is looking out for their parks and what draws people into them. Someone is not going to fly down to Orlando just to ride SSE, that is why a new ride would be built and would more then likely be more thrilling. I think you all are just gonna have to except the fact the most new rides are going to be big thrills.

I would fly down for SSE. Rides like SSE, Horizons (for shame), Pirates---all the old school rides. Thrill rides are great, but theres a lot to be said for the informative, AA based rides. World of Motion, Horizons.......thats the way Epcot should be. Save the thrill rides for another park.