Motion Sickness Bags Are Now Being Handed out To Mission Space Riders

[Another Voice]

"Not true. They took THE space ride used at NASA training centers and tooled it for capacity."

Where did this come from.

The ride system for 'Mission: Space' was developed by a private company, ETC the specializies in military simulators. A while back they created a division to sell this technology to amusement parks.

You can check them out at http://www.etcusa.com or http://www.theerideworks.com. The same ride system and other just like it are coming to amusement parks all over the country.

Or, to quote from their press release:

According to William F. Mitchell, ETC's President, "We can no longer remain silent. ETC is the creator of the Mission:Space ride concept and we manufactured the ride; we provided the technology. Under our contract, ETC licensed its technology for a one-time use at EPCOT Center. Also, ETC's contract requires that future Mission:Space type rides be purchased from ETC."

The story of Mission:Space is not ETC's creation. ETC, however determined how the story could be turned into a physical ride. ETC provided the concept, then built a prototype and demonstrated how the story could be told on an ETC Centrifuge motion platform.

Recent news releases indicate that NASA engineers had substantial involvement in the creation of the Mission:Space ride; strongly implying the ride technology was NASA's. ETC states that NASA had nothing to do with the ride technology. "Two NASA astronauts visited ETC for one day during the ride development." The ride concept was entirely ETC's and the core technology was all based on ETC's existing motion base technology. The technologies in the Mission:Space ride are used in ETC's GYROLAB, GYRO-IPT, GLAB, GFET, GFET2 and Tactical Flight Trainers products. The ride concept is also the subject of ETC patents. All USAF and US Navy pilots are trained on ETC centrifuges. Over 30,000 pilots have been trained on ETC centrifuges. All the high performance pilot training in the world is done on ETC centrifuges. ETC is suing over a number of issues including the demand to finalize the safety analysis and safety testing of the Mission:Space ride. The ownership of intellectual property is also at issue.

ETC designs, develops, installs and maintains aircrew training systems, public entertainment systems, process simulation systems (sterilization and environmental), clinical hyperbaric systems, environmental testing and simulation systems, and related products for domestic and international customers.

Believe me, if you ever rode on a real military or NASA simulator you'd be curled up and wimpering in the corner.

 

[WEDWAY100]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
As for what you label "waste", like it or not it is a cost of doing business..................and some of those initiatives surely helped to "save" costs in other areas.

On this point, we'll have to agree to disagree. There's no way to prove this either way, but my experience has been that the types of quality initiatives I mentioned do not save costs. In fact, they increase costs, and are sometimes cast aside after considerable expense.

Back to our topic, PoC did not use any completely new technology that I'm aware of. Disney already had experience with the transportation system (boats) that were used in the 1964 world's fair. They also had experience with human AA figures (Lincoln - again '64 WF). I don't doubt that there were technological advancements made with the ride, but that was not the primary focus. The focus was storytelling, and placing you completely in an exotic environment (almost a 1967 version of VR). I would guess that a smaller percentage of the money for PoC was spent on technology, while the larger was spent on the construction of a fabulous environment that was able to wow visitors for a very long time.

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
It may even be a moot point as the lion's share of the $150 mil was probably subbed out anyway for the ride mech.

If true, this may have been the biggest mistake/waste of all.

 

[WEDWAY100]

Originally posted by Another Voice
The same ride system and other just like it are coming to amusement parks all over the country.

If true, this could very easily become a very expensive "Body Wars" scenario for Epcot.

 

[DisneyKidds]

Wedway...............

So you seem to be saying you'd have preferred what I call alternate approach number two...................the see what they see not feel what they feel approach? Yes, that would have wowed people as well. Perhaps a different set of people...............more or less people I don't know. As I said, that approach would likely have had it's downsides as well.

As for that waste subbing the cost out, I have to assume you mean that having the ride mech (if it were the majority of the cost) is the waste? Surely you aren't suggesting Disney was capable of manufacturing their own NASA grade flight simulator.

 

[DisneyKidds]

AV............I'll give you that the M:S ride mech is a commercialized version of what NASA uses, but it is hardly your typical amusement park ride mech and, while ETC may have plans, can't be found in other entertainment venues just yet. And even when or if it is more widely used it doesn't change the fact that the sims are authentic (although throttled down).......................or did Disney pay real astronauts enough that they would destroy their credibilty by going on record as to how realistic the (albeit throttled back) simulation is when it is no more than your typical spyder?

 

[hopemax]

I've seen two numbers for the New Orleans Square project (not just PotC, but the shops and restaurants and the Pirates Arcade Museum). $15 and $18 million, which translates roughly to $85-$105 million. However, construction costs have increased faster than inflation. Marty Sklar said in an interview about a year or so ago that Pirates itself would be about $175 million.

 

[crusader]

Comeon AV:

We all know NASA contracts this stuff out and ETC builds it. You're trying to distinguish the fact that they applied proprietary applications to accomodate the general public as window dressing when the truth is these specs were vital.

If you need a refresher course - here's a little synopsis on this wonderous government enterprise:

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/facts/HTML/FS-002-HQ.html

Who else has this tech coming to a theme park? Last I heard ETC was in a litigation battle trying to gain ownership rights away from Disney.

Believe me, if you ever rode on a real military or NASA simulator you'd be curled up and wimpering in the corner.

Which part of the phrase: "retooled for capacity" didn't register?

 

[DisneyKidds]

Originally posted by hopemax
I've seen two numbers for the New Orleans Square project (not just PotC, but the shops and restaurants and the Pirates Arcade Museum). $15 and $18 million, which translates roughly to $85-$105 million. However, construction costs have increased faster than inflation. Marty Sklar said in an interview about a year or so ago that Pirates itself would be about $175 million.

I knew I could count on you for some numbers Hope .

 

[hopemax]

Speaking of numbers, on another message board someone was claiming that M:S cost only $60 million, not the $100 million that's been reported and not the $150 million that AV mentioned. And if the $60 million were true, that would put a whole new twist on this discussion.

 

[raidermatt]

And if the $60 million were true, that would put a whole new twist on this discussion.

Yes it would, considering the $150 line in the sand already drawn as the "right" amount for an E-ticket.

Regardless, Disney didn't spend it anyway. Compaq/HP did.



Ride Mech, Smide Rech.

The ride mech itself is going to matter for all of the proverbial 15 minutes. If it proves useful and responsible for theme/amusement parks, it will be copied. If it doesn't, it won't. Either way, the ride mech itself is not going to buy Disney years of success.

Just like it isn't the flume that makes Splash the megahit it is, and it isn't the 28mph coaster that has made Space Mountain as popular as it has been for about 30 years now.

Yes, MANY of us dreamed of being astronauts, or just day-dreamed about space travel, or watched Star Wars and said "WOW!"

But there is no way anyone is going to convince me that the g's is anywhere near the most important aspect of those dreams to us. Is it cool to be able to experience a fraction of the physical feeling that the real guys experience? Sure. Certainly I want to do it.

But its the other wonders, the unknowns, the scope, the visions of supernovas and space clouds, black holes and worm holes, the questions about what is out there....its all of those things that truly capture our imagination. And, to throw a little good 'ole fashioned greed into it, its those things that have the greatest potential to bring in the bucks.

Perhaps space was just too ambitious topic to even have been challenged?

Not for the Disney that brought us all together in the first place, and certainly not for the Disney that could be... But for the Disney that is, sadly, I guess it was too ambitious. So, they'll get what they paid for, not just in terms of the $'s paid, but also in terms of all of the other components of creativity.

 

[crusader]

Matt -

That $150 mil budget is my personal line in the sand based on what I've come to learn about the past offerings of the company and its' resources.

If they can give us the same quality and innovation for less - I'm in.

When I read your descriptions of M:S I decided to post this as a reminder of what we were given and why:

Here's the link.
http://www.nasa.gov/news/special/mission_space.html

and here's the story.....................




NASA lends reality to Disney thrill ride
10.07.03

Image left: Visitors will enter Disney's "Mission: SPACE" ride through a Planetary Plaza featuring inspirational quotes on exploration from President John F. Kennedy, Columbia astronaut Kalpana Chawla and others. Photo courtesy Disney

For decades, the creative minds at Disney have been the experts on fantastic voyages, taking children of all ages to magical kingdoms and enchanted seas.

But when they wanted to send people rocketing towards Mars, they called NASA.

"Mission: SPACE" officially opens at Walt Disney World's Epcot on Oct. 9. Disney touts the ride as their most technologically advanced attraction ever, relying on visual imaging, motion control, and centrifuge technology to send would-be astronauts on a futuristic voyage to the red planet.

But it also relies on input from NASA advisors to create what the ride's co-producer, Susan Bryan, calls "a mix of real science and thrill."

"This ride brings it home and makes it real."
--Michelle Viotti, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Over the past few years, NASA provided Disney's Imagineering team with tours, briefings and discussions on current human and robotic missions, as well as the challenges that future missions, like a trip to Mars, might present.

Phil West of NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas, was an advisor on the project and says Disney "wanted as much realism as they could get."

"Part of our mission at NASA is to inspire the next generation of explorers. The U.S. needs them to be our inventors of tomorrow, and NASA needs them to explore new worlds and improve life here on Earth," says West.

"So when Disney approached us, it was a natural fit."

The team at JSC laid out a potential timeline: a six-month journey to Mars, followed by an 18-month stay on the surface and another six-month return ride. The advisors also told Disney any future Mars mission would likely set up surface support ahead of time and verify things are up and running before sending the human crew.


Image right: Inside the X-2 trainer, each rider is assigned a role -- commander, pilot, navigator, or engineer. Photo courtesy Disney

West says Disney also loosely modeled a post-ride game, "Mission: SPACE Race," after procedures at Mission Control, where data is passed from flight controllers to the Flight Director to the Capcom, who then relays the information to the crew in space.

It's also the Capcom (for "Capsule Communicator," a name that dates to the earliest days of human spaceflight) who meets riders in a ready room and briefs them before their mission. Next they head to a "pre-flight corridor," inspired by the "White Room" at Kennedy Space Center. Finally, the four-member teams are strapped into the fictional X-2 Deep-Space Shuttle for a Mars mission set in the year 2036.

When they arrive at Mars, the would-be astronauts will see a landscape based on NASA imagery taken by several spacecraft over the past two decades, provided to Disney by the agency's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California.

NASA's Michelle Viotti, who worked on the project at JPL, says the result is a "cross between the realistic and artistic. They took the planetary geologists' knowledge and abstracted from that."

"We're really trying to make Mars a real place, as familiar as your backyard," Viotti says. "This ride brings it home and makes it real."

"When Disney approached us, it was a natural fit"

--Phil West, Johnson Space Center
Talks with JPL engineers also led to Disney computer models of Mars rovers, another sign, as Viotti says, that the Imagineers were "really great about wanting to have a sense of reality behind their ride."

Viotti says it's great "to partner with somebody who reaches people," especially those in Florida, where launches every 26 months make the state a "Gateway to Mars."

Humans may someday follow their robotic predecessors through that Gateway, and it's possible that a child alive today will command the first mission. Who knows, the future astronaut may even be driven toward that goal by the NASA-inspired feasible fiction of "Mission: SPACE

___________________________________________________

Five years and 350,000 man hours in the making is commitment and dedication worth a heck of alot more than a lighthanded philosophical dismissal.

If you research the HP alliance you'll find a great connection resurfacing from Disney's past which explains why this partner clearly understands exactly what it is the Disney company does.

here's one brief little story:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/business/wdw_hp_031009.html

 

[Peter Pirate]

Five years and 350,000 man hours in the making is commitment and dedication worth a heck of a lot more than a lighthanded philisophical dismissal.

I totally agree.

What's more we should remember that all attractions are never going to be for everyone and attitudes and opinions will change over time. I NEVER appreciated any of Fantasayland until I had kids. In the 80's, I vividly remember kids laughing AT attractions like POC and Horizons...They weren't cool. But over time the appeal changes. The ride settles into what its legacy is really going to be.

M:S is a dream and from what crusader just should us, it wasn't as easy as pointing to a picture in a magazine and saying "that one"... I don't dispute that more could have been done to appease some portion of the Disney going audience, but then again whatever was done would probably not impress another group, so...

M:S will not burn out like Body Wars, which truly was just a "souless" attraction, but M:S is an experience for dreamers, IMO. The building itself is beautiful (especially at night), the set-up harkens of reality in a way that works here and doesn't work at Soarin Over California, IMO. The fact that we get to participate is cool (who cares that it's not functional). M:S will continue to draw crowds for years to come and yes some people will continue to lose their lunch for years to come (as happens on lots of thrill rides)...

crusader, thanks for the reads. I enjoyed them.

 

[WEDWAY100]

Originally posted by DisneyKidds
As for that waste subbing the cost out, I have to assume you mean that having the ride mech (if it were the majority of the cost) is the waste? Surely you aren't suggesting Disney was capable of manufacturing their own NASA grade flight simulator.

DK,

It would be so much easier if I could convey my thoughts more clearly.

I meant 2 things. The first is that outsourcing the majority of a project that is your core product (a theme park attraction) is a mistake. AV has already given evidence that this ride mechanism will most likely be cloned to other theme parks. The only way I can see this mechanism not being used in a Six Flags in five years is if it proves un-useable by making people sick. Otherwise, the vendor will be able to reduce costs, and sell the system to Disney's competitors. Then the only competitive edge that Disney has with M:S is the story line and onboard video, and these are the things they apparently spent less on.

The second point I was making is that percentage wise, I really don't think that spending the majority of cost on a ride mechanism is wise, given Disney's niche in the market. The only example I can think of for this in the past would be the omnimover. It may well have had the lion's share of the expense for Adventures thru Inner Space (it's first application), but it was proven technology by the time it was used in the HM. And Adventures is long gone, but the HM survives and is popular today. In the end, I guess it's OK to develop a unique ride system and patent it, but only if it can be used in several applications. I don't think they'll be using the ride mech from M:S in any other application. Maybe I'll be proven wrong.

After all of this, I still like M:S. I just think that it could have been a lot more, even with the same budget.

 

[raidermatt]

A press release quality "story" hardly qualifies as evidence of what we were given.

M:S is a dream and from what crusader just should us, it wasn't as easy as pointing to a picture in a magazine and saying "that one"...

Why continue to belabor this? Nobody said it was that simple. In fact, the point has been that the ride mech is not the point at all. Yes, a lot of effort went into the ride mech. Great. Wonderful.

The problem is that many feel not enough went into the other aspects that should have been pursued. That's not to say the investment in the ride mech was worthless, only that it should not have been at the expense of other aspects of the show.

If the ride mech is actually causing problems to the extent described by the news reports and by some posters, that just compounds the impact of the problem.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Why continue to belabor this?

Well, it seems paramount. There are obviously a large number of folks who think M:S is a first class addition but we get to have our opinions belittled by people continually calling it an "unimaginative spin and puke'.

Besides, it's just discussion. Got anything else to do?

 

[DISJAZZ]

I rode Mission Space for the first time last week. I think that all of the warnings are necessary, but the warnings themself are causing some people to over-stress. It's a great ride with some fine attention-to-detail. The big game at the end could use some work. The CMs have to do too much explaining. Keep your eyes on the viewscreen, don't look around when it's in motion, and enjoy the ride!

 

[TheRustyScupper]

Will MISSION:SPACE Barf Bags now become a collector's item?
. . . can you will them to your heirs?
. . . will they appreciate in value?
. . . will they sell well on eBay?
. . . does it make a difference if they are used or unused?

 

[WDWHound]

Originally posted by Peter Pirate
Well, it seems paramount. There are obviously a large number of folks who think M:S is a first class addition but we get to have our opinions belittled by people continually calling it an "unimaginative spin and puke'.

Actually, I expect Mission Space probably is a first rate attraction (I wont have a firm opinion till I ride it next December). MS is the first new attraction since ToT at Disney World that has seen significant bucks spent on something new and different. My concern, as I stated before, is that becuase they have not solved the motion sickness problem enough for it not to be a factor, they may not reap the rewards of their efforts and Ei$ner could then use that failure as an excuse to revert back to dressing up carnival rides and calling them attractions.

 

[ThreeCircles]

I'm not too sure that Mission: SPACE even has a "motion sickness" problem. I've been on the attraction twice already and have never seen an individual get sick. Of course this is only anecdotal evidence, but then again, so is anything that Jim Hill may type up for his web site.

 

[WDWHound]

Originally posted by ThreeCircles
I'm not too sure that Mission: SPACE even has a "motion sickness" problem. I've been on the attraction twice already and have never seen an individual get sick. Of course this is only anecdotal evidence, but then again, so is anything that Jim Hill may type up for his web site.

While I am certain the percentage of riders experiencing nausia is quite small, I doubt they would of installed the bags *and thus generate some very bad PR) if there wasn't enough of a problem to justify it.