Yeti is indeed being fixed! Update 8/4/2014

[rle4lunch]

EE did not triple the attendance at AK. And there are large parts of the Disney demographic that can't even ride EE. So while it's a major hit.. would they lose 75% attendance? No way.



You do realize PW is different than the ride in DCA right? They are both wild mouse style tracks... but PW 'whirls' while MM/GSS is a fixed classic wild mouse design.

[/quote]

That was of course an estimate on my part, but what I was getting at is that there's no reason for a family of 4 to spend more than 2-3 hours in that park without EE running, hence the probability of them keeping it running while Yeti is down. EE actually gives the adults something to do besides take pictures of monkey's and have some decent bbq for lunch.

And yes, I know the difference on the rides, that's why I called them 'cousins'. Nevertheless, that ride feels as out of place at AK as MM/GSS does at DCA. I think that's why we're seeing the sweeping changes to DCA to incorporate some of the 'magic' into it. I get the same feeling in that land at AK, there's no 'magic', it just feels rushed and cheap.

 

[tdpolo26]

No attraction runs forever... so the idea they can't close everest is something they knew they would have to face eventually. They must have some idea of how to do it and not see the park go crippled.

Of course they have a idea just like test track they will have some group come out and do a song and dance at the blocked entrance to the ride.....maybe a band of yeti performing beatles songs or u2 songs.

 

[marni1971]

That was of course an estimate on my part, but what I was getting at is that there's no reason for a family of 4 to spend more than 2-3 hours in that park without EE running, hence the probability of them keeping it running while Yeti is down. EE actually gives the adults something to do

Seriously? DAK has more to do than a 20-120 minute wait for a good but not amazing 3 minute coaster.

One thing this whole sorry story does reveal,if it is a capacity issue, is how woefully under capacity the whole park actually is.

 

[Pixiedustmaker]

Are you an engineer or are you just assuming? Here's a clip from an episode of Modern Marvels where they talk about how all 3 systems of the ride were constructed at the same time because of the scale, none could be added before/after the others.

Youtube Link (it's time stamped to start you right where they begin talking about it) - lasts about 3 minutes or so before they change topics. This episode aired before they even showed the yeti to the public and the ride was still under construction so it's not some retro-fitted BS excuse

I do have real world construction experience.

The fact that the Yeti has a separate support base which goes all the way to the footings actually makes it easier to repair. Here's why: if the Yeti was "built-into" the structural support for the mountain, then theoretically you might have to shutdown the ride as the mountain is built around the coaster. The Yeti would never be structurally attached to the coaster as the coaster moves independently. IF the Yeti and its base were to magically disappear today the ride would go on functioning as normal. Period.

If the Yeti can be accessed by a guy/gal with a wrench, he could be slowly taken apart. Plain and simply as that. Given how close the Yeti is to the ground . . . doing this wouldn't be particularly onerous. His base could be used to install another (much smaller) figure with maybe some fake rocks to make it look like the Yeti climbed up high.

The have been recently doing some construction work on the Yeti, adding wires attached to the limbs. I know somebody who works at WDW and I think I'll bug him about what the deal with the Yeti is (if he even knows.)

But here's something else to think about, the falling rocks were removed because of concern about overhead effects falling on guests. Didn't they fire up the Yeti for a special event years ago? I find a hard time believing they would do this at all if he wasn't 100% working (and safe to operate) . . . what if the lawyers shut the Yeti down as there was a real, but small, risk he could crash down on the track given a combination of structural failures? Or in other words, maybe the Yeti does work fine and his base is OK, but legal is concerned about a catastrophic failure?

 

[rle4lunch]

Seriously? DAK has more to do than a 20-120 minute wait for a good but not amazing 3 minute coaster.

Early morning safari, picture taking with some of the animals, meet and greet and lunch. So, yes, there are a couple more things to do. But nowhere near a full day of fun in that park. Think if EE wasn't there.. Would you even consider it a 'must see' park? It's a rough call.

The park has a GREAT atmosphere, but severly under utilitzed space.[/quote]

 

[tsaintc]

I do have real world construction experience.

The fact that the Yeti has a separate support base which goes all the way to the footings actually makes it easier to repair. Here's why: if the Yeti was "built-into" the structural support for the mountain, then theoretically you might have to shutdown the ride as the mountain is built around the coaster. The Yeti would never be structurally attached to the coaster as the coaster moves independently. IF the Yeti and its base were to magically disappear today the ride would go on functioning as normal. Period.

If the Yeti can be accessed by a guy/gal with a wrench, he could be slowly taken apart. Plain and simply as that. Given how close the Yeti is to the ground . . . doing this wouldn't be particularly onerous. His base could be used to install another (much smaller) figure with maybe some fake rocks to make it look like the Yeti climbed up high.

The have been recently doing some construction work on the Yeti, adding wires attached to the limbs. I know somebody who works at WDW and I think I'll bug him about what the deal with the Yeti is (if he even knows.)

But here's something else to think about, the falling rocks were removed because of concern about overhead effects falling on guests. Didn't they fire up the Yeti for a special event years ago? I find a hard time believing they would do this at all if he wasn't 100% working (and safe to operate) . . . what if the lawyers shut the Yeti down as there was a real, but small, risk he could crash down on the track given a combination of structural failures? Or in other words, maybe the Yeti does work fine and his base is OK, but legal is concerned about a catastrophic failure?

Based on what we have seen in the post-refurb BTMRR, I suspect your theory about the overhead effects is closer to the truth than Disney ignoring a marquee show element.

 

[flynnibus]

That was of course an estimate on my part, but what I was getting at is that there's no reason for a family of 4 to spend more than 2-3 hours in that park without EE running, hence the probability of them keeping it running while Yeti is down. EE actually gives the adults something to do besides take pictures of monkey's and have some decent bbq for lunch.

Your opinion - but the park has a lot more than that, and actually did attract guests for EIGHT YEARS before EE was added to the park. EE has become a 'must do' for the park, no doubt. But EE is not for everyone, EE is not the only reason people come to the park, and people don't ride EE for 5 hours a day and then leave the park.

Stop skewing your view as a 'rides rides rides' person and realize there is much more to the park than maybe what you as an individual may value.

Everest and Finding Nemo the Musical resulted in 1 million more guests going to DAK

Yes, 1 million isn't anywhere close to 75% jump as quoted by rle4lunch. from 2005 to 2007 (your period) attendance jumped ~15%

DAK could survive without EE. Would it hurt? Certainly.. but it's not going to roll over and die.

 

[rle4lunch]

Your opinion - but the park has a lot more than that, and actually did attract guests for EIGHT YEARS before EE was added to the park. EE has become a 'must do' for the park, no doubt. But EE is not for everyone, EE is not the only reason people come to the park, and people don't ride EE for 5 hours a day and then leave the park.

Stop skewing your view as a 'rides rides rides' person and realize there is much more to the park than maybe what you as an individual may value.



Yes, 1 million isn't anywhere close to 75% jump as quoted by rle4lunch. from 2005 to 2007 (your period) attendance jumped ~15%

DAK could survive without EE. Would it hurt? Certainly.. but it's not going to roll over and die.

I'm not trying to be hostile like you, but I'm just pointing out the obivous. The park attractions are great if you've never seen them before, but if you're trying to convince me that the park would be a must see venue everytime I visit, if it didn't have rides, that's a pretty hard pill to swallow. If I have a 5 day park hopper ticket, even with rides, I'm not spending more than 5 hours TOTAL in that park for the entire week, and that's even with showing up early for the safari.

And I'm all for having the interactive things. I love that about all Disney parks. That's what I was referring to as 'magic'. The little things that surround a land and the major ride for that part of the park are great, most of the time. There's just not enough of that magic in AK. It's a beautiful park, but it's lacking the punch and excitement that is Disney 'magic'.

Obviously it sounds like you work in AK, which is awesome, I would defend my workplace too if I loved it. If I'm wrong, then sorry. I'm not dissing the park, it just needs more.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Early morning safari, picture taking with some of the animals, meet and greet and lunch. So, yes, there are a couple more things to do. But nowhere near a full day of fun in that park. Think if EE wasn't there.. Would you even consider it a 'must see' park? It's a rough call.

The park has a GREAT atmosphere, but severly under utilitzed space.

I'm coming from the bias that Animal Kingdom is my favorite park. Having said that, I understand why people don't like it but I really think the perspective that many have is short sighted. There are 3 classifications of activites in the Animal Kingdom: Rides, Shows, and Animal Walk Throughs.

Rides: Kilimanjaro Safaris and Expedition Everest are two of the best rides on Disney property. Dinosaur and Kali are underwhelming largely because it seemed that both could have been much more. Primeval Whirl and Triceratops Spin are placeholders. The park needs more quality rides, it's the obvious weakness to the park. So many people visit Disney World and only want to experience rides. As such, a park like the Animal Kingdom is largely forgettable.

Shows: Festival of the Lion King is a top 10 attraction in WDW. It's far and away the best show on property that doesn't involve Pyro, and that's really only to eliminate Illuminations from the discussion. Finding Nemo the Musical is solid and Flights of Wonder is very underrated. Having said that, the number of people that skip these offerings (especially Festival of the Lion King) is mind blowing. I don't see Nemo or Flights of Wonder every visit to that park, but I always see Festival of the Lion King.

Animal Exhibits: There's quite a bit to see here if you like animals, but if you're indifferent (like many guests), it comes back to "where are the rides?" I think we're nearing the point where Maharajah Jungle Trek needs to be redone to allow access to the Northern plot, and if the temporary coverings don't get removed from the Discovery Island/Tree of Life trails the park looks that much worse.

The problem here is that not everyone wants to experience Rides, Shows and Animal Exhibits. There isn't enough in each category to satiate the needs of people that only want 1 of the 3 things. Comparitively, Epcot's 3 categories are Attractions, Shopping, and Dining. If you only care about the Attractions you still have 11 rides to choose from.

Your opinion - but the park has a lot more than that, and actually did attract guests for EIGHT YEARS before EE was added to the park. EE has become a 'must do' for the park, no doubt. But EE is not for everyone, EE is not the only reason people come to the park, and people don't ride EE for 5 hours a day and then leave the park.

Stop skewing your view as a 'rides rides rides' person and realize there is much more to the park than maybe what you as an individual may value.

Yes, 1 million isn't anywhere close to 75% jump as quoted by rle4lunch. from 2005 to 2007 (your period) attendance jumped ~15%

DAK could survive without EE. Would it hurt? Certainly.. but it's not going to roll over and die.

The park opened in 1998 with the following "rides": Countdown to Extinction, Kilimanjaro Safaris, Discovery River Boats, and the Wildlife Express Train. Kali River Rapids was added in 1999, and Dinorama was added a few years later. The park was underbuilt from the start, and every addition was seemingly rushed to add capacity save Expedition Everest. Despite all that, I view the Animal Kingdom as the best "themed" park I have ever visited. This is part of the problem with adding to it - to cohesively add new things to the park is difficult without disrupting the existing theme.

I posed the question about how would they go about replacing "It's Tough to be a Bug"? Is there really anything that could go into that area? My only suggestion was indoor animal exhibits.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm not trying to be hostile like you, but I'm just pointing out the obivous. The park attractions are great if you've never seen them before, but if you're trying to convince me that the park would be a must see venue everytime I visit, if it didn't have rides, that's a pretty hard pill to swallow. If I have a 5 day park hopper ticket, even with rides, I'm not spending more than 5 hours TOTAL in that park for the entire week, and that's even with showing up early for the safari.

Again - realize YOUR likes and desires are not everyone's. There are more details entrenched in DAK than most of the other parks - but they aren't your style. That's fine.. but don't project your style as the ONLY style.

Obviously it sounds like you work in AK, which is awesome, I would defend my workplace too if I loved it. If I'm wrong, then sorry. I'm not dissing the park, it just needs more.

No I don't work in the parks - but you gotta be able to extract your own personal likes from something and be objective if you want to generalize what the masses will do.

 

[rle4lunch]

Again - realize YOUR likes and desires are not everyone's. There are more details entrenched in DAK than most of the other parks - but they aren't your style. That's fine.. but don't project your style as the ONLY style.



No I don't work in the parks - but you gotta be able to extract your own personal likes from something and be objective if you want to generalize what the masses will do.

I'm not projecting just my views, but I could see how it would come across that way. I've read many, many forum threads with the same complaints. I still like the park, I think you're overlooking that. I'm just saying that it needs more, and needs to get rid of the cheesy placeholders that do not fit in the overall classy feeling of the rest of the land. It's like they put a legoland in the middle of the Grand Canyon, and it's just plain ugly. The rest of the park is fine, (here comes my opinion, watch out! lol) but it seems like Disney is grasping at straws by offering a 'nature walk' or digging up fake bones to appease the kiddos. These are more of placeholder crap than the lackluster rides. Don't get me wrong, I loved Innovations when I was a kid in the 80's at Epcot, but DAK's interactive stuff doesn't compare.

Nevertheless, I will visit the park with many family members that have never seen it before this December, and like me, they'll be in awe of the great things that Disney has done with the natural landscape and the details put into EE and the Safari and their respective lands, just as I was/am, and then around 2 o'clock will be taking the bus back to another park to finish out the day...

 

[flynnibus]

I'm not projecting just my views, but I could see how it would come across that way. I've read many, many forum threads with the same complaints. I still like the park, I think you're overlooking that. I'm just saying that it needs more, and needs to get rid of the cheesy placeholders that do not fit in the overall classy feeling of the rest of the land.

I don't really disagree with any of that.. and I think everyone wants the park to be even more than it is today. But when we go back to your post I responded to...

Fact is, EE is the major, albeit only ticket draw for AK. Without it running, the park would have a quarter of its attendance than it does now. Other rides in the park are okay, and the safari is fun, but there truly isn't anything in the park that'll keep people in the park longer than 3-4 hours.

I think we can agree that is a gross exaggeration. And in the context of the discussion... can DAK survive without EE for a period of time? I would say yes.. without the extremes you mention.

EE alone wasn't enough to satisfy the 'ride' crowd to make the park 'must do' in their mind and stick around.. so if the park doesn't have EE for a period of time.. it really isn't going to change the view of the park much to that audience. To those that appreciate the other portions of the park.. and don't ride EE.. it's absence is minor. To those that appreciate both rides and the other aspects of the park.. there are still other things to carry their day.

In all my trips to DAK... Everest really only accounts for maybe an hour of our day. So if I do goto the park, its not going to alter things radically. Would it's absence make us skip DAK all together? Possibly... but that's really a group to group decision that will swing heavily on what you like about DAK... and DAK's past performance before EE shows it can draw significant crowds even without EE.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Driving around the area south of Orlando this past weekend, I saw a billboard promoting the ride and there was no suggestion of the yeti. Sad.

The billboards for Expedition Everest are the exact same design they were using 2006 for Everest's opening. Nothing is changed.

 

[Castle Cake Apologist]

I'm not trying to be hostile like you, but I'm just pointing out the obivous. The park attractions are great if you've never seen them before, but if you're trying to convince me that the park would be a must see venue everytime I visit, if it didn't have rides, that's a pretty hard pill to swallow. If I have a 5 day park hopper ticket, even with rides, I'm not spending more than 5 hours TOTAL in that park for the entire week, and that's even with showing up early for the safari.

Perhaps you're missing the point of the park. While I'm not denying that more rides are definitely needed, I go to DAK quite frequently (when in Orlando full-time, twice or more a week) for hours on end without riding a single thing. To this day, even after nearly five years of near-constant visits... I still find new things to see and do and explore every time that I go.

DAK could (and for eight years did) survive if Everest went down for a bit. Even if not to fix the Yeti, the ride has never had a true refurb and could certainly use one.

 

[Amused to Death]

I'm coming from the bias that Animal Kingdom is my favorite park.

Mine too.

Festival of the Lion King is a top 10 attraction in WDW. It's far and away the best show on property that doesn't involve Pyro

Second best. As much as I enjoy Festival of the Lion King, it doesn't hold a candle to La Nouba.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Second best. As much as I enjoy Festival of the Lion King, it doesn't hold a candle to La Nouba.

I haven't seen La Nouba, but I can say that I still enjoy Festival of the Lion King more than the showing of Cirque de Soleil I did see when it was in Massachusetts.

 

[raugust]

I do have real world construction experience.

But here's something else to think about, the falling rocks were removed because of concern about overhead effects falling on guests. Didn't they fire up the Yeti for a special event years ago? I find a hard time believing they would do this at all if he wasn't 100% working (and safe to operate) . . . what if the lawyers shut the Yeti down as there was a real, but small, risk he could crash down on the track given a combination of structural failures? Or in other words, maybe the Yeti does work fine and his base is OK, but legal is concerned about a catastrophic failure?

Me thinks thee has hit the proverbial nail on the head. Give this person a cigar!!

 

[rle4lunch]

I don't really disagree with any of that.. and I think everyone wants the park to be even more than it is today. But when we go back to your post I responded to...


I think we can agree that is a gross exaggeration. And in the context of the discussion... can DAK survive without EE for a period of time? I would say yes.. without the extremes you mention.

EE alone wasn't enough to satisfy the 'ride' crowd to make the park 'must do' in their mind and stick around.. so if the park doesn't have EE for a period of time.. it really isn't going to change the view of the park much to that audience. To those that appreciate the other portions of the park.. and don't ride EE.. it's absence is minor. To those that appreciate both rides and the other aspects of the park.. there are still other things to carry their day.

In all my trips to DAK... Everest really only accounts for maybe an hour of our day. So if I do goto the park, its not going to alter things radically. Would it's absence make us skip DAK all together? Possibly... but that's really a group to group decision that will swing heavily on what you like about DAK... and DAK's past performance before EE shows it can draw significant crowds even without EE.

It would all depend on the group. I'll be interested to see the reaction of the extended family and friends that I'll be with in December when we visit it. I think I know the answer, but I could be surprised. All I know is that if I want to go to the zoo, then I'll go to the zoo. And for the money that people have to plop down to visit WDW, it's highly doubtful that the families that visit have lived meager lives and they've never taken themselves or their kids to a zoo before, but that's a whole other topic...

With that being said, I like the relaxed atmosphere of essentially what DAK is, a preserved wetland habitat.. It eerily feels like I'm in the San Diego zoo down the road from me when I visit though...

Like I said, I just wish there was more. I hate to leave a park and feel unfulfilled. Anyway, I'm done.

 

[C.FERNIE]

My thoughts on the yeti are ......wait for it lol..... it will never get fixed! I think disney built this awesome AA and forgot how expensive it would be to maintain it! i think it will get replaced with a totally new effect or a less expensive AA! With rides and expansion being mentioned, disney now has a track record of building up parks slowly, just take a look at the other international theme parks its a slow but sure pace, many of them opened with out that many rides in their MK, but people still visited! Think they realised after AK that this was a money saving thing to go slow but sure! Were not in the eisner years of expansion anymore! Universal is just in an "eisner" time and will slow down again and disney will go back to expansion! Hence Avator land in like 5 years time! AK will grow and at some point they will do "something" with the yeti, but im doubtful it will get fixed, think a replacement is more on the cards! Just my opinion!

 

[marni1971]

Early morning safari, picture taking with some of the animals, meet and greet and lunch. So, yes, there are a couple more things to do. But nowhere near a full day of fun in that park. Think if EE wasn't there.. Would you even consider it a 'must see' park? It's a rough call.

The park has a GREAT atmosphere, but severly under utilitzed space.

Err... The pathways? The walks? The petting areas? A bit of Kali and a few Dinosaurs? Two live shows?

Despite Everest, which IMHO is good but nowhere near great, we go to DAK. Everest could close tomorrow and it wouldn't be a problem. BTM has more story and design. Not that I'm defending it as a woefully underdeveloped park. Which it is.