News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
Approvals can be specific to a particular task and moving dirt is a task that does not require much in the way of information. Again, go look at some of the South Florida Water Management District filings. There are cases where the approval is for a certain area of impervious surface in a general area but the drawings do not indicate what will compose those impervious surfaces. It could be a building, it could be a parking lot, it does not matter to get approval and there are no requirements to even have any clue as to what will be built. You can get approval to move dirt and prepare a site just so it is available for future building. You also don't have to take anyone's word for it and can do your own research on things like early site work permits and the fast-track process.


You are contradicting yourself because you do not know what you are talking about. I provide a Disney-created document that tells you exactly where in the design process they make a decision. And again, you can do your own research to see the typical correlation between each phase of design and percentage of work completed. A "general" design is a Concept Design, one step past Blue Sky, it is what is approved and it represents less than 20% of the required design work.


Plan stamping is illegal. A clone only removes the bulk of the Blue Sky and Concept Design phases along with some of the Schematic Design Phase. That still leaves the vast majority of the design work to be done.


Nobody said years, but about a year is not unreasonable. How long does it take you to read 1,000 pages? And that would just be the drawings and not the specifications that are just as long if not longer.


I did not say that wind loads will require toilets to be moved. They are two of many issues that must be reviewed. The bathrooms must be redesigned because the ones designed for Shanghai do not comply with the ADA Standards for Accessible Design, the Florida Building Code - Accessibility or the EPCOT Accessibility Code.

But since you mentioned it, it is possible for wind loads to cause a toilet to have to be moved. A change in the structural design could create a conflict with the location of plumbing fixtures.


Again, plan stamping is illegal. Even if the structural design for Shanghai is 100% suitable for its new location (which includes more issues than just hurricanes), the structural engineer must still do independent calculations demonstrating that the design is compliant with all local regulations.
Click to expand...
OK, you are absolutely right...they will start the new Tron coaster as if it has never been built before, throw away all plans and start from scratch. The buildings, systems and structure designs will be completely disposed of and they will start designing it from the ground up....and it is perfectly normal for any attraction to take more time to build than it took to build the entore EPCOT theme park.
 
Missing20K

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
OK, you are absolutely right...they will start the new Tron coaster as if it has never been built before, throw away all plans and start from scratch. The buildings, systems and structure designs will be completely disposed of and they will start designing it from the ground up....and it is perfectly normal for any attraction to take more time to build than it took to build the entore EPCOT theme park.
Click to expand...

Cognitive dissonance is strong with this one. I design buildings, not bridges, so I don't deal with trolls.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
Missing20K said:
Cognitive dissonance is strong with this one. I design buildings, not bridges, so I don't deal with trolls.
Click to expand...
OK...lets not start with the name calling.
Cognitive Disonance has absolutely nothing to do with thinking they should be able to bring a previously designed attraction over to the US in a shorter time frame... nothing whatsoever... look it up
As an architect, If your opinion is that it should take 3 years, then that is your professional opinion...
Also, having an opinion does not make one a "troll"...but calling people names does.
Carry on.
 
Missing20K

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
OK...lets not start with the name calling.
Cognitive Disonance has absolutely nothing to do with thinking they should be able to bring a previously designed attraction over to the US in a shorter time frame... nothing whatsoever... look it up
As an architect, If your opinion is that it should take 3 years, then that is your professional opinion...
Also, having an opinion does not make one a "troll"...but calling people names does.
Carry on.
Click to expand...

I never called anyone a name.

cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance
noun
Psychology
-the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.

Professional opinions have been offered to help clarify what actually happens in real-world design and construction and not in Disney fanbois dream world. You have refused to use those professional opinions to change your attitude. Carry on.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
Missing20K said:
I never called anyone a name.

cog·ni·tive dis·so·nance
noun
Psychology
-the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.

Professional opinions have been offered to help clarify what actually happens in real-world design and construction and not in Disney fanbois dream world. You have refused to use those professional opinions to change your attitude. Carry on.
Click to expand...
I know what it means....
my thoughts are not inconsistent... I still believe that it is a long time to bring the project in.
are you currently working on this project?
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
more time to build than it took to build the entore EPCOT theme park.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure why people think this is a valid argument. It’s not as if there was only one person working on either project.

Epcot was a massive construction project with numerous construction companies and thousands of workers and designers working simultaneously. They weren’t building one building at a time and then moving on to the next. The fact that it took three years to build the entire park does not mean that any one part of the park could have been built in significantly less time.
 
Last edited:
Missing20K

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
I’m not sure why people think this is a valid argument. It’s not as if there was only one person working on either project.

Epcot was a massive construction project with numerous constructions companies and thousands of workers and designers working simultaneously. They weren’t building one building at at time and then moving on to the next. The fact that it took three years to build the entire park does not mean that any one part of the park could have been built in significantly less time.
Click to expand...

Get outta here with that logic stuff. No place for it in this discussion apparently.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
OK...lets not start with the name calling.
Cognitive Disonance has absolutely nothing to do with thinking they should be able to bring a previously designed attraction over to the US in a shorter time frame... nothing whatsoever... look it up
As an architect, If your opinion is that it should take 3 years, then that is your professional opinion...
Also, having an opinion does not make one a "troll"...but calling people names does.
Carry on.
Click to expand...
You’re not just expressing an opinion. You are denying a process that is a matter of law.
 
GlacierGlacier

GlacierGlacier

Well-Known Member
peter11435 said:
I’m not sure why people think this is a valid argument. It’s not as if there was only one person working on either project.

Epcot was a massive construction project with numerous construction companies and thousands of workers and designers working simultaneously. They weren’t building one building at a time and then moving on to the next. The fact that it took three years to build the entire park does not mean that any one part of the park could have been built in significantly less time.
Click to expand...

Yup.

It's parallel construction vs. a single project.
 
Bocabear

Bocabear

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
You’re not just expressing an opinion. You are denying a process that is a matter of law.
Click to expand...
I am not denying the process... I am wondering why the process is so much longer for Disney than other parks... I am doubting that it is just this process that holds up the construction....
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Bocabear said:
I am not denying the process... I am wondering why the process is so much longer for Disney than other parks... I am doubting that it is just this process that holds up the construction....
Click to expand...
You laughed at and sarcastically dismissed the the process as nonsense. You’re claim that this particular process is excessively long is predicated entirely on that dismissal. Because of that dismissal you can’t discern different overlapping tasks and their respective timeframes.
 
nickys

nickys

Premium Member
Missing20K said:
Couldn't have said it better myself. Agree on all points. We have a saying around here, you can have it done right, you can have it done quickly, but you can't have it done right and quickly.
Click to expand...

You missed out the cost from the equation.

You can have any two of:

On budget
On time
On specification

But not all three.

At least, I assume construction is like IT projects in that regard.
 
Missing20K

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
nickys said:
You missed out the cost from the equation.

You can have any two of:

On budget
On time
On specification

But not all three.

At least, I assume construction is like IT projects in that regard.
Click to expand...

Construction moreso than design. Architecture fees are generally a set % of the total construction cost. Invoicing usually happens according to a set schedule when documents are completed, permits acquired, punch lists completed, etc. Miss a deadline and don’t expect a fully paid invoice. If you get a client or contractor drawings early it’s usually a “good job” and pat on the back. To increase the speed of construction document completion after predesign has set all of the milestone dates, it usually requires firms to hire contract workers to help finish which is generally very inefficient and expensive.

Your point remains the same and I wholeheartedly agree however. Throw more money at an architect and they will most assuredly pull longer days and nights and 1099 old colleagues and interns.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom