News Round Up 2017

[Roxyfire]

Agreed! I can only stare at my phone for so long

I still have my maps from 2011. I plan to get some in September and hopefully get a few extras for mementos (hopefully ones without creases and such lol). I love reading maps in general so I get them whenever I can on vacations along with guide/tour pamphlets. They then go in a storage box for memories sake once vacation is over

As in favor of digital methods as I am, I love the paper maps. I do like the progress they've made with MDE with the directions and the filtering but there's just something about looking at a paper map.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

As in favor of digital methods as I am, I love the paper maps. I do like the progress they've made with MDE with the directions and the filtering but there's just something about looking at a paper map.

 

[MommaBerd]

As in favor of digital methods as I am, I love the paper maps. I do like the progress they've made with MDE with the directions and the filtering but there's just something about looking at a paper map.

That's how I feel about books!

 

[Tiffany_m15]

I have a picture of someone in the seat in the official Pandora thread.

That's just it. Large short people have been fine in some cases and not in others. Tall people have been fine in some cases and then not in others. There is no specific person that can't ride.

If possible can you link to this photo? I searched through the last 10 pages and can't seem to find it on the Pandora thread. Sorry if I missed it, Thank you!

 

[rteetz]

If possible can you link to this photo? I searched through the last 10 pages and can't seem to find it on the Pandora thread. Sorry if I missed it, Thank you!

It's on the first page with all of the Pandora info actually. A woman is seated on the ride vehicle.

 

[Tiffany_m15]

It's on the first page with all of the Pandora info actually. A woman is seated on the ride vehicle.

Oh ok, I see it but unfortunately the safety restraints are not in place yet in the photo. I was hoping for a better idea where the restraint sits. Thank you!

 

[rteetz]

Oh ok, I see it but unfortunately the safety restraints are not in place yet in the photo. I was hoping for a better idea where the restraint sits. Thank you!

The only other thing we have is the instructional pre show video that shows the restraints going in place. I don't think you'll get a photo of someone in the seat with restraints on.

 

[allthenamesaretaken]

Anywho I wrote down the park hours and brought a pen with us so I could mark off the rides I had done.

I do this too except I tick off all the shops as well
The food would be too much of a mission to try!

 

[mikepizzo]

http://www.wdwinfo.com/walt-disney-...passage-for-guests-who-are-of-a-certain-size/

Can we agree now that this is a problem? 22% of that group couldn't ride. I doubt it's a .01% problem

Also, overlooking the obvious problem of it sucking for those people not able to ride, the longer it takes Cast Members to try and get the seats to click, the longer the load time, the longer the wait.

 

[beer dave]

Oh ok, I see it but unfortunately the safety restraints are not in place yet in the photo. I was hoping for a better idea where the restraint sits. Thank you!

The rectangular pad at the bottom rear of the vehicle is on a T bar that will rise through the slot between the two "halves" of the ride vehicle and rest on the small of the users back, keeping them secured against the front pad.....

 

[jlundeen]

Also, overlooking the obvious problem of it sucking for those people not able to ride, the longer it takes Cast Members to try and get the seats to click, the longer the load time, the longer the wait.

I was thinking this also. Seems several things about this needs some re-thinking. Too bad they didn't figure this out sooner.

It reminds me of car shopping years ago, when they never put "female" type amenities, like visor mirrors, on the driver's side, because mostly it was men doing the driving and women were passengers (or so the designers thought). Standards were used considering only certain average body types for many products (chairs built for average men's bodies, for example).

Quite different now, of course. Seems to me it has to be more expensive (dollars, criticism, and time-wise) to fix after the fact than to figure this out during design phase.

 

[Madonna3]

I think that's blown up/coincidence, several other have reported they have seen nobody getting asked to leave. It's still previews, we won't know actual numbers until it opens.

Again there have been several larger people who've been able to ride.

Ok, it's not the point that some have ridden and others haven't. The point is out of one load group, 22% of that group COULD NOT ride. So, are you saying that those 22% just happened to be of one particular body type? No, I don't think you are. Therefore, the ability for riders to ride is so varied that it's creating a problem across the board, not just with the fluffy.

 

[Madonna3]

I agree this is being blown out of proportion before the ride is even officially opened, I am far from a small person and I rode, we will never know any numbers though, Disney is in no way no how going to let anything in this land or attraction be put in a negative light especially anything that actually comes from them.

It's not just the fact that people who are larger can or can't ride. It's that ride is showing to be unaccommodating to all different body types. Short, heavy, tall, skinny and at its current design is very maladaptive. Do you think that the people who couldn't ride in this particular focus group were of all one body type? I sincerely doubt it. So we're talking not just a specific group of people, but really anyone is at risk for not being able to ride who may have any unusual area on their body.

 

[jknezek]

Ok, it's not the point that some have ridden and others haven't. The point is out of one load group, 22% of that group COULD NOT ride. So, are you saying that those 22% just happened to be of one particular body type? No, I don't think you are. Therefore, the ability for riders to ride is so varied that it's creating a problem across the board, not just with the fluffy.

Well that seems to be the problem. If you can't pin it down to one body type, then there is a much bigger problem and somehow the tolerances on the restraints need to be adjusted. Frankly I'm surprised this is such a problem. I'm not sure exactly how the restraints work, but a simple flip over from the front, with a cage like fitting for shoulders down to rear and "legs" about mid chest area down to below the ride vehicle should keep everyone safe. The ride itself isn't a thrill like mover, so I don't see the point of being "restrained" so much as simply needing to be "contained" to the vehicle. The risk is falling off due to startling more than being thrown by the movement. So actually having to be pushed down on to the vehicle, as opposed to just making sure no one can fall off while wiggling a bit, seems like a massive amount of overkill and the root of the problem.

 

[Madonna3]

Well that seems to be the problem. If you can't pin it down to one body type, then there is a much bigger problem and somehow the tolerances on the restraints need to be adjusted. Frankly I'm surprised this is such a problem. I'm not sure exactly how the restraints work, but a simple flip over from the front, with a cage like fitting for shoulders down to rear and "legs" about mid chest area down to below the ride vehicle should keep everyone safe. The ride itself isn't a thrill like mover, so I don't see the point of being "restrained" so much as simply needing to be "contained" to the vehicle. The risk is falling off due to startling more than being thrown by the movement. So actually having to be pushed down on to the vehicle, as opposed to just making sure no one can fall off while wiggling a bit, seems like a massive amount of overkill and the root of the problem.

I think they were trying to give the sensation of free flying as much as possible. So, if you do what you were talking about then you feel more like a cage riding on top of something. The way it appears it is designed, it gives the illusion of being in a saddle and free flying.

 

[jknezek]

I think they were trying to give the sensation of free flying as much as possible. So, if you do what you were talking about then you feel more like a cage riding on top of something. The way it appears it is designed, it gives the illusion of being in a saddle and free flying.

You are probably right, though in my thought the cage would be behind your head so visually it wouldn't be much of a problem. Since it is more containment than restraint, you probably wouldn't feel it much either. I'd really have to spend some time looking at the ride to better articulate it though. Still, the last thing Disney is going to want to do is redesign the restraint system at this point. It will be interesting when it opens to hear if it is a significant problem and how they decide to handle it.

 

[adam.adbe]

Ok, it's not the point that some have ridden and others haven't. The point is out of one load group, 22% of that group COULD NOT ride. So, are you saying that those 22% just happened to be of one particular body type? No, I don't think you are. Therefore, the ability for riders to ride is so varied that it's creating a problem across the board, not just with the fluffy.

Unless 22% of *all* prospective riders are being turned away, clearly that group *is* something of an anomaly.

 

[rteetz]

Ok, it's not the point that some have ridden and others haven't. The point is out of one load group, 22% of that group COULD NOT ride. So, are you saying that those 22% just happened to be of one particular body type? No, I don't think you are. Therefore, the ability for riders to ride is so varied that it's creating a problem across the board, not just with the fluffy.

I understand the frustration but there is no specific one body type not able to ride. Many have been able to ride who are larger and taller. This discussion is on going in the Pandora thread so if you want to continue that I suggest you go there to do so.

 

[adam.adbe]

It reminds me of car shopping years ago, when they never put "female" type amenities, like visor mirrors, on the driver's side, because mostly it was men doing the driving and women were passengers (or so the designers thought). Standards were used considering only certain average body types for many products (chairs built for average men's bodies, for example).

More likely they are designing mechanisms for other markets now. There are twice as many Disney complexes outside the US than inside, and while WDW might still rule the roost on visitors, it's inevitable that over time the US parks will cease to be the single largest driver of the company. In such a world, if Disney opt to cheap out and built one-size-fits-all attractions for all of their park properties, the US is the body-size outlier.

 

[rteetz]

Well that seems to be the problem. If you can't pin it down to one body type, then there is a much bigger problem and somehow the tolerances on the restraints need to be adjusted. Frankly I'm surprised this is such a problem. I'm not sure exactly how the restraints work, but a simple flip over from the front, with a cage like fitting for shoulders down to rear and "legs" about mid chest area down to below the ride vehicle should keep everyone safe. The ride itself isn't a thrill like mover, so I don't see the point of being "restrained" so much as simply needing to be "contained" to the vehicle. The risk is falling off due to startling more than being thrown by the movement. So actually having to be pushed down on to the vehicle, as opposed to just making sure no one can fall off while wiggling a bit, seems like a massive amount of overkill and the root of the problem.

There are numerous photos and such in the Pandora thread. A restraint comes up onto your back and one on each of your legs. For most people it seems to be the legs that are an issue.