| # | Author | Message |
31
| gmaletic
Sun 12/9/2007 11:39a | Bill can shed more light, but I'm reading one of the articles he pointed to--http://www.mouseplanet.com/mark/mg050706gm.htm--and it shows that at one point they had considered a five-sided building. Also, the first design was more cube-like in structure, and Bill was asked to make it more mountain-shaped. So it seems that the aesthetic ideal played a very important part in the design. |
32
| lauwmw
Sun 12/9/2007 1:21p | Let me clarify. We were originally talking about putting the ride in DL and I more or less took it upon myself to design something that would fit in Tommorrowland. The requirement that we use the Matterhorn vehicle made it necessary to have two tracks and the location of utilities in the parking lot behind Tomorrowland dictated the shape. Art direction was not involved until later. Prior to all this was a stillborn effort by an outside contractor to design a ride with 4 tracks, running in and out of the building, which was, by necessity, not a pure gravity ride. It was concluded that there just wasn't room for all the booster and retarder drive units and still have reasonable clearance between track and peoples heads, etc. So, without really asking anyone, I began my studies and design. When I finally showed it to management, no one could figure out what kind of a reasonable facade could be put on it. The thing that saved the design, (most of it, anyway) was the move to WDW.
If you think that this is a casual approach to developing an attraction; well now you know what it was like to work at Disney in the 60's. |
33
| FerretAfros
Sun 12/9/2007 1:41p | So, basically, the track we have in WDW was originally designed for DL, with a couple minor changes added in? I would have never guessed that it would fit in that area, but I guess I just automatically think of Space Mountain inside a circular building. That's really interesting how they just decided that they should do it in WDW first too, since I always assumed it was their answer to not putting in a Matterhorn, and then DL got a cloned version. It's also nice to see that they didn't really get caught up in the politics that seem to be everywhere in the attractions being designed today. |
34
| lauwmw
Sun 12/9/2007 2:21p | I wouldn't say that DL was a cloned version; maybe a sibling. There are no clones of the WDW-SM, but the DL-SM is in 3 parks. The new track at DL is a duplicate of the original. |
35
| gmaletic
Sun 12/9/2007 2:25p | >The new track at DL is a duplicate of the original.
Is the track at DL actually "new"? I had thought it was very same track as before, but refurbed. |
36
| lauwmw
Sun 12/9/2007 3:23p | New. Since I was not involved I only know what I heard. I heard that they totally removed the old worn out track and replaced it with a new one which was built to the same design. The original track was built at MAPO (A Disney Co. named after Mary Poppins) in Glendale. But that old Grand Central Airport hanger no longer exists. I'm sure they went outside for the new track and apparently they built two of them concurrently, as the Hong Kong SM opened shortly thereafter. I rode the new track on the day they reopened and it felt just like the original one did when I first rode it during testing. |
37
| MPierce
Sun 12/9/2007 3:28p | lauwmw do you think the added sound track compliments the ride or detracts from it? |
38
| lauwmw
Sun 12/9/2007 4:05p | I can't remember being aware of the sound, I was just thinking about where I was on the track. I noticed that the visual effects were much enhanced. I heard somewhere that the added weight of the audio equipment was being blamed for some for the deterioration of the old track. |
39
| a1stav
Mon 12/10/2007 9:33p | As far as the ride vehicle goes, there should be a way to recline the seating without loosing the ability of using a locking restraint (lap bar). The B&M Flying coaster pulls it off. Now I am not suggesting the mammoth train design of that thing, but it seems conceivable that a system could be devised. A more reclined seating system could have a twofold benefit. Leaning back offers a better view of the dome for show effects while it directs viewing away from the track, preserving the thrill of not knowing which way you will go next. |
