News on the 5th park

[Tikiman]

I figured the 5th park was not that big a secret. I did not realize that it would start such a discussion. I agree that it does not seem reasonable that the 5th park would go back behind the AKL but we don’t know how far those roads go with out an airplane. I realize many CMs start rumors and most of the rumors I ignore but this was not information that was given up easily and this Disney Employee was not just a ride operator or popcorn vendor. This guy was a Disney Engineer. It may or may not be true. I am still on the fence as to weather I believe it or not but I thought the rumor board was a good place to post it. I don’t think it is a far fetched idea of Disney building a thrill ride park. Look at California Adventure. It is not your typical Disney park.

Yes I am a share holder but I don’t think the info I have would get me in to trouble. Just some interesting things that are in development for the 100 celebration and the future. Mostly ideas but still things they may not want everyone to know.


Steve

 

[YoHo]

To the best of my knowledge, Disney has never Done major land development on a park before it was announced. More importantly from a Thrills park perspective, Look at DCA. DCA is tanking worse then AK (AK is a good idea perhaps underexecuted, DCA is a weak Idea done as well as could be expected (MHO). DCA is in manyt respects a Thrill park. The major complaint...... NOT ENOUGH FOR CHILDREN TO DO!!!

Somehow, While I don't question gcurling's overheard exit interviews, I suspect that Thrill park is not #1 on Disney's agenda any more.


Not to mention that adding a 5th gate right now doesn't fit in with the oft mentioned (although rumours themselves) Timelines.

 

[larworth]

Tikiman

How about we all certify that this rumor it totally false. That way you would not have any qualms about sharing some of the details to this cleary ridiculous rumor. Of course, any mention of the source would still be redacted. I think you said it was from a monorail captain, right (hey what happened to the winking guy?)

Awhile back didn't someone post an aerial view of the property. Seems this would show if there was enough room back there and where the recent excavations are or are not.


Yoho

I would have never thought to classify DCA as a thrill park. I guess we need a whole thread to define what a thrill ride is. From what I can gather there are only two rides that I would consider thrill rides (Screamin and Maliboomer). Maybe, you can throw in the mouse coaster on a technicality. If the intention was to be a thrill park than no wonder it has failed miserably, because it is a very poor version of one.

Oh, I forgot to include the tortilla experience. There is the danger of getting burned from too hot a tortilla. I know it was a cheap shot, but it is just so hard to resist.

It seems to make more sense to put new rides in existing parks than open a 5th footprint. The only thing that would be good about a 5th park, the half we would get when it opened would probably still be more attractions than we are going to get from the IV they have the existing parks attached to now.

 

[All Aboard]

Defining a thrill park...

Hmmm, how would I do it? Let's start by defining a thrill attraction. I would say that any attraction on which the primary entertainment value (or at least a major portion of it) is derived from the motion of the attraction vehicle AND that vehicle motion involves significant acceleration, falls, inversions or some combination of similar motions, is a thrill attraction. At WDW I would classify Spa M, Spl M, BTMR, TT, BW, RnR, ToT, ST, Kali & Dinosaur as definite thrill attractions (some with higher thrill factors than others, of course.) While the motion is the primary entertainment factor on Dumbo, Aladdin, Astro Orbiter, Mad Tea Party, Speedway... they do not qualify under the second half of the formula. The Barnstormer and Maelstrom are low level thrill attractions that could go either way based on the definition.

Now, if within a theme park, 40% or more of its major attractions fit this description, then I'd call it a thrill park.

 

[johare]

gcurling,

What about Alien Encounter? I would rate that as a 'thrill attraction'.

 

[wdwguide]

Originally posted by larworth


The sound issue seems logical, but when I think about being at a SF or CP I don’t recall really noticing the roar/screams of a particular coaster until I get fairly close.

Two words to illustrate that the "sound issue" is in my opinion very overreated: Tarzan Rocks! You can hear it across half the park, without any apparent ill effects in the animals. Of course there is also the background noise of 8 million visitors each year, safari trucks, trains rolling past enclosures, etc. The AK is definitely no dream land for the average wild animal, but some thrill rides in the vicinity should not bother them. After all, there was supposed to be a big wooden roller coaster right where they are building DinoRama right now. And woddies are infamous for being noisy!

 

[larworth]

gcurling

At first pass it did seem like a good definition and list, but there are some gray areas for me.

The first thing I started to question were the motion simulators. The motion simulators don't actually have significant speed, drops...but they do fool the mind on that score, so maybe they qualify. And I guess this is their primary show effect?

Could we say the same thing for Splash. I would still ride it even if it didn't have the final drop. That thrill is only a secondary, not a primary show element. But since this thrill does inhibit someone from riding it would get classified as one by many.

Now, where do we put Alien Encounter? There is no motion, but it does intend to produce most of its' attraction value based on the thrill of fear.

Kali rely on motion, but really the fear of getting wet is the real element here. If riders didn't get wet would people really find the motion thrilling or fearful?

Maybe, a medical person would say a thirll ride is anything where most of its amusement comes from the amount of adrenaline produced, or elevated heartbeat. Hmmmm have to think about this some more.

I've never stopped to think about what percentage to apply. I guess we could take your average SF park and see what their percent is as a starter. If some of the Disney spinning rides don't enter into the count, than neither would many of their flat rides, so they would have to be well below 70%.

We can sure get off on tangents can't we.

 

[beattyfamily]

Thanks for sharing this rumor with us! That's what this board is for!

I, too, heard this rumor back in 1998 from a bus driver; that there would be a 5th park and it was to compete with IOA and other "thrill ride parks"

I'm all for it. I would love it to be something like IOA or Six Flags with stuff for the family but also about 4 or 5 "thrill" rides for the older child/adult.

Thanks again!

 

[Captain Crook]

You know, the more I mull it over, the more I can see Disney doing a seperate Thrill Park. They already have 4 gates, the thrill Park could concievably be smaller (like DCA) because the demographic being pursued would be smaller. The price would be the same as the other parks, merchandise sales, restaurant sales, etc. would all be size relevent. My only concern is the upkeep. Would Disney be willing to compete in the rollercoaster wars which seem to require new rides on a yearly basis? I also believe AK must be finished (in some manner) before this Park could be built, as the cannabilization effect could turn the current AK into a downright loser.

 

[disneyboy21]

that disney should open a 5th park! They have so much land, as of now they are only using 1/3 of their land. They could put up a few more huge resorts and another park or 2 or even 3 depending on size. It would make Disney the hugest resort in the world.


inkbounc

 

[Safari Steve]

1. Most of the staff at WDI FL, as well as the WDW art director were let go recently. There will be no fifth park for quite some time, and it will not be behind DAK.
2. Lightbulbs are replaced quickly when the department in charge is notified. Burnt out lightbulbs have no connection to reduced budgets or lax maintenance. There are a lot of bulbs, and it's very hard to keep track of them all. Every time I have called central engineering about a lighting problem, it has been fixed within mere minutes. Correlating burnt out lightbulbs with the company being incapable of anything meaningful or of high quality is the work of a small mind that A)doesn't know how things work at WDW and B) is prone to cynicism, the closest thing to cancer of the psyche and of the soul...
Wha? Huh? Oh, gee, it's time to take my medicine again...

Kungaloosh!

 

[larworth]

Steve good to see you back in the fray.

Enlighten me on the role of WDI FL. I thought major WDW projects were not run out of WDI FL. I agree that downsizing of WDI in general is not consistent with any near term plans for a new park or a major WDW renaissance.

I don't know what medicine your taking, but it might be having some side-effects. I had to search really hard to find the original crack about the lightbults.

 

[Tikiman]

This person we met spoke with us for quite awhile about the layoff and he said it was sort of a "cleaning the house" or getting rid of the dead wood sort of layoff. It sounds like that would save Disney some money and do nothing to productivity. When we had a similar layoff in our engineering group it saved us enough money to start new projects.

Thanks for the input Steve. We looked for you at the Jungle Cruise last week.

Steve

 

[Safari Steve]

For WDI FL to go from half-a-dozen show writers to two (one of whom spends most of his time in CA), most clerical support gone, and virtually the entire documentation department (who were in the middle of two projects) to be trimmed seems like a bit more than "cleaning house", imho. Also, it should be noted that there is a distinct difference between an engineer and an imagineer. Engineers handle audio, technical, and mechanical problems on property, and are not a part of WDI, but cast members at WDW. They play a very important role, don't get me wrong. (I wouldn't be able to do my job were it not for the support of central shops, central engineering, central audio, and DACS, but they are no more "Imagineers" than I am.) I also don't consider the WDI art director for WDW "dead wood".

 

[anim8or98]

The only "major" project WDI Florida has done by themselves is Alddin's Magic Carpet Ride. Other than that, WDI Florida's main job is enhancements, atmosphere, rehabs, and such. They do a great job, too! And I back Safari Steve with his comment. If a cast member knows about a lightbulb being burnt out, it is called in and replaced when there are no guests around that night or the next morning before the park opens. With the amount of lightbulbs WDW uses in a day, some are bound to go out.

Does anyone else think Reign of Fire (Disney's big budget movie for next summer) will have anything to do with Beastly Kingdom (I do)?

Anim8or98

 

[Tikiman]

I think I have said enough on this topic. Sorry I brought it up.

Steve

 

[Testtrack321]

Maby the CM's were confused between BK and a 5th park because BK was suposed to have at least 2 thrill rides...

 

[wdwguide]

Originally posted by Tikiman
I think I have said enough on this topic. Sorry I brought it up.

Steve

Don't feel sorry. Rumors are always welcome, and just because they turn out to be highly unlikely doesn't mean you did something wrong by mentioning it.

 

[JeffJewell]

Sorry I brought it up.

...please, don't be. Your post was fun and on topic, and I'm glad you posted it.

Jeff

 

[Tikiman]

Thanks Jeff. I am not upset. Sorry if it seemed that way. I just felt I had said enough on this subject. I have never been much for rumors but I think there is a lot of good information on the rumors board along with some off the wall stuff, but that is what makes it a good posting board.

Steve