Either that, or TDO needs to pay up to redesign their pyro shows to avoid the major new attractions now operating underneath the fallout zone.
I have a glassy house on a hill in Villa Park, California where most rooms have windows that face Disneyland a few miles due west. For the last two decades I have seen the fireworks every night I'm at home, and Disneyland cancels fireworks either beforehand, or mid-show, about 10 to 20 nights per year due to wind. When was the last time we heard that Magic Kingdom cancelled their fireworks show due to "unfavorable wind conditions at higher elevations" (that's the in-park spiel that plays at Disneyland on windy nights)?
As for flying overseas, I'm actually more comfortable flying in a jet overseas than I am over land. If it's a Boeing, the plane has a dramatically better chance of making a surviveable crash landing on water than it does on land. I only fly Boeing planes, mainly 777's or 747's, when it's time to go overseas for that exact reason. William Boeing made a point of over-engineering his aircraft to survive water landings. Other plane manufacturers, notably Airbus, never put as much effort into designing their aircraft to survive a water landing.
That said, even a lowly Airbus can survive a water landing nicely when the pilot knows what he is doing.
And if you are going to Tokyo Disneyland, you absolutely must fly JAL or Singapore! If you fly a US airline to Japan, you are doing it wrong.
I'm far more comfortable shooting through the stratosphere at 600 miles per hour when the plane is over water. So much so that I have the stewardess stop bringing me drinks after my second, so that I can coherently put the life vest on and jump overboard and swim to the raft without drunk drowning.
But when the flight is over land? We're all gonna die, so I'll have another Scotch, please!
