Originally Posted By G2-4T Earlier this week I (with the help of some other dedicated Peoplemover fans) started a petition and website to see if we can't get Disneyland to bring back the Peoplemover. There have been persistent rumors for some time that it may be coming back so we're showing our support for the gone but not forgotten ride. Anyways - here are the links to the petition <a href="http://www.petitiononline.com/pplmover/petition.html" target="_blank">http://www.petitiononline.com/ pplmover/petition.html</a> and <a href="http://peopleforthepeoplemover.org/" target="_blank">http://peopleforthepeoplemover .org/</a> Please sign and also help spread the word!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I will happily sign it. One thing I would add to "Why the Peoplemover" is that not only does it add vibrance to Tomorrowland, it also would help ease guest congestion in the park since it is a high capacity attraction.
Originally Posted By seanyoda I won't sign it. I want to see the peoplemover (or preferably a more modern version) return, but not as an attraction; I want it to be a transportation system to replace the trams.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss So you're going to hold out for nothing? Cause that's the likely outcome of wishing for a parking structure PM.
Originally Posted By oc_dean Well, I wouldn't want them to "bring it back" .. but an all NEW Peoplemover would be nice. The 1967-1995 system propelled 4,880 per hour with it's 16 per person trains (all 62 of them) ... So I hope they would create just as many trains with the same capacity. The help to ease crowds, alone, is a saver!
Originally Posted By G2-4T Thanks for the support! I've added the points about guest congestion - I hadn't known how many people it could hold in one hour - that would be really great during the busy seasons to be able to pull close to 5,000 people an hour off the pavement and onto the Peoplemover. The site was updated tonight with some photos from 1994 - I'd certainly like to add more so if any of you have some you would like to share let me know.
Originally Posted By Roger55 <<The help to ease crowds, alone, is a saver!>> Only if people ride it... which no one was doing... thus their removal. Do all of you have that short term a memory? It was a waste to operate them based on the ridership. They could have tried yet another upgrade beyond the speed tunnel, or close them down. They chose to close them. I can't say I would have done differently if I was in charge and responsible for a profitable business. JMO
Originally Posted By oc_dean With all due respect .. you're missing key points. Tomorrowland has been a very troubled land .. long before the fiasco of TL:98. The opening of Captain EO in 1986 and Star Tours in 1987 saw an end. From there on out .. the land suffered a very long and painful death .. starting with the closure of America Sings in Spring of 1988 .... and it got steadily worse from there. With Mission to Mars in 1992 .. the closure of Space Place also in 1992 ... Skyway in 1994, and no Rocket Jets in 1991/1992 because of a Dumbo accident that shuttered both similar attractions for a while. Those years 1988-1995 .... leading right up to Peoplemover's sudden closure in the middle of summer because of a sudden breakdown .... witnessed a VERY sorry looking land. Tomorrowland in those years was right down depressing. Peoplemover was all about "Getting a bird's eye view of TL and it's attractions". Even I avoided the ride at times .. because TL from 1988 to 1995 was so pitiful........ Thus ......... the low ridership in Slowdeathland. That's not the story anymore with Buzz Lightyear, a slightly reinvented Space Mountain, new Submarine Voyage on the way .. new Monorails ... even a new Star Tours in the not too distant future ... the land is on the upswing. Record crowds during this 50th celebration, and just the plain truth that more high capacity attractions are SEVERELY needed ......... the dominos are in place .... all we need now is someone to push the first one!
Originally Posted By oc_dean I'll also add that one very predominate imagineer, who's name I'll leave out, explained to me years ago.... They wanted to some how have both the Peoplemover AND this "new ~Rods~ something or other" idea they had cooking to ride SIDE BY SIDE. Peoplemover got "pushed off" because it had to be one or the other. And with EXTREME thrills becoming the new rage by this time (1995) ... that rods thingie got built. Also remember ..... when it came time to dream up the "TOMORROWLAND:2055" plans throughout the late 80s/early 90s ... Peoplemover was RIGHT THERE along side all their other ideas for the land! TL:2055 got canned in the summer of 1991. The idea of Rocket Rods came up just 5 short years later. How could that short time span between 1991 to 1995 change things so drastically to cause imagineers to phase Peoplemover out completely? And remember ....... the track was not wide enough (especially through the buildings) to support both rides.
Originally Posted By oc_dean It was a sad ending for the "1967" Peoplemover as it was not supposed to close till the end of 1995. When demolition to the carousel theater's interior commenced beginning January 1996. Peoplemover prematurely broke down in the middle of summer instead. One thing is for sure ... if a new Peoplemover is designed and built .. I think we can count on the fact the original "Wedway" design will not be used (motorized rubber tires spaced out throughout the track). I'll be anxious to see what they do. Rocket Rods utilized a single "tubular" track. Which is all still in place ... Be it rusty. Waiting on pins and needles!~!
Originally Posted By Roger55 So if the point is the PM goes as TL itself goes... I can see that. Yes, the PM did not go down the tubes all by itself. All the more reason for it to be closed when it was. If TL was given the proper attention and not let to deteriorate the way it did, maybe the PM too could have survived. Yes, TL is looking up. Yes, DL needs some more high capacity rides to help handle the crowds. I just don't see bringing back an old tired ride as the right move. Justify it how you may, but IMO, if there is money to be spent in TL or anywhere in DL, it should go towards a new and innovative ride. Not just "bring back" something from the past for nostalgic reasons. I am completly in favor of making use of the old track and the loading area if possible. Just not for the same old PM. Any PM type ride should be completely re-vamped. I believe the infrastructure for the PM ride has been severly compromised with all the changes since its close, including the disaster called Rocket Rods. Would a completly different attraction that utilized the PM track satisfy the majority of the "bring it back" crowd? I'm not sure it would. I think DL and especially TL should move forward in it's development, not backwards.
Originally Posted By oc_dean I'm totally on your side for brand new innovative ideas. Like a completely brand new Tomorrowland in the same vien how wildly different it went from the 1955-1966 TL to the "1967". But to do that ... is going to entail an undertaking I'm not quite confident Disney is willing to do. They are capable. (cough-DisneySea-cough) ... But "willing" is another thing. >>I just don't see bringing back an old tired ride as the right move. << Well .... I can see why you are turned off .. especially with this "bring it back" tag line. Roger ... I HARDLY think they would *bring back* that design that dates ALL THE WAY back to drawing boards in 1965! I wouldn't like it. The world is full of imaginative minds .. and HUNDREDS of sci-fi magazines, movies, television shows that have drawn up some pretty cool looking systems. Look at the system used in the 1976 film Logan's Run. TOTALLY COOL! I'm an artist .. I've come up with so many different ideas myself that are leaps and bounds beyond the 1967 Peoplemover design. I'm just a novice artist .... and I know there are minds more creative than mine ... so I have no doubt the many designs that are most likely on desks in Glendale! >> if there is money to be spent in TL or anywhere in DL, it should go towards a new and innovative ride.<< So how long is that track supposed to stay there unattended? It's been that way since Sept 2000. It's been SIX years! It's time to get off their fannys and do something. The time is now. No more procrastinating! Enough. I saw that with the carousel theater with "We're closed to Imagineer a new attraction" for 8 years! EIGHT! 1988-1996 till the Innoventions crews finally came in Jan '96 and finally took that darn sign off once and for all. >>Not just "bring back" something from the past for nostalgic reasons.<< I can tell you I'm not interested in Tomorrowland nostalgia. Just a form of an attraction that can be reinvented to look different .. and possibly do a trick or two. I'm not interested in "the old" ... Just a form of a ride that went WAY before it's time. >>Would a completly different attraction that utilized the PM track satisfy the majority of the "bring it back" crowd? I'm not sure it would.<< The only thing I guess you can possibly be suggesting is a faster type ride. They tried that with Rocket Rods. And it's not going to work with an aging "1967" infrustructure. We're talking a massive rebuilding that would close the entire land. Tomorrowland proper, that is. I see Disney going only as far as reusing the 1967 infrustructure. Layout that can only take a 6mph ride and all. We see that reusing former facilities is their way of creating new rides. (Pooh, Buzz, Nemo Subs). I see a trend. I see them continuing with it. Disneyland is all about attractions the entire family can ride together .. and with the latest serious "incidents" in recent Disney theme park extreme thrill attractions ... I think they are better off staying away from some extreme thrill similar to Rocket Rods. I came up with the idea another 6mph Peoplemover can be "exciting" by doing a "Roger Rabbit/Tea Cup/Buzz" *zip* to it .. and give people the option to spin them. Who knows what they got cook'n. But give the idea the benefit of the doubt. I say that to all Peoplemover naysayers. Okay .. So DCA, TL98, and a whole rash of other things suck ........ but have a little faith that "bringing back" does not mean bringing the exact same old system back on line ..... but something with an all new look to entertain the masses!
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<something with an all new look>> Here's where I disagree. I don't think an all new look would make much a difference. If it looks new but is basically the same ride, nothing is accomplished, IMO. Now, if a new PM did something different... if it had some new technology that would change the experience... then I could see a redesign making more sense.
Originally Posted By Roger55 <<The only thing I guess you can possibly be suggesting is a faster type ride. They tried that with Rocket Rods. >> Not at all. I hope I am not as much of a simpleton as you infer. A new PM concept could be very interesting without speed or thrills. PM cars that give virtual experiences. Maybe internet connectivity. Interactivity. Maybe some futuristic ergonomics. There are plenty of imaginative things that could be incorporated into a ride system using the old track. Yes, like you Dean, I am totally against bringing back the old PM, in design or in concept. It would have to be totally re-vamped. I just get the feeling that most of the people calling for the PM's return just want that same old transportation system of the "future" that they remember, or at least something very similar in concept and complexity. OP or anyone else who signed the petition, your comments would be interesting.
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>Not at all. I hope I am not as much of a simpleton as you infer.<< No ... not at all ... Your next paragraph (thank you btw) explained what's cookin' in your imagination as well. As I don't have the ability to read minds. lol What worries me though is WDI may be aware this age of X-Box version 265.0 era may be asking far more than what they can deliver. That either it's a Peoplemover 2.0 with a new look or nothing. If the demographic or ratio is like 30 percent not in favor (ages 10-30) to the 70 percent (all other ages) ... then perhaps they would say ........ "More are in favor, it's a go." Who knows though. But an empty track for years when the 1967 infrastructure is here to stay AS IS for another 10-15 years .. is simply not the answer.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<If it looks new but is basically the same ride, nothing is accomplished, IMO.>> True, but the Show of the Peoplemover was primarily the views it provided of other attraction and that show has and is dramatically changing, (Nemo, Buzz, Autopia 2000, as well as many new design aspects of TL). Essentially, Peoplemover was an ever-changing attraction. Though, I certainly wouldn’t mind some newer technology implemented, and something for the super-speed tunnel that would knock our socks off.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<True, but the Show of the Peoplemover was primarily the views it provided>> Whick is why I am saying I don't believe that the PM would necessarily need to be reinvented. I am NOT arguing against its return, only that it doesn't need to be re-Imagineered much... unless someone at Disney was feeling like Walt and wants to show the world a new transportation solution. I rather doubt anyone there is interested in doing that.
Originally Posted By monorailblue As far as the accusation that PeopleMover was somehow inefficient to operate, that is complete bunk. PeopleMover had, even if ridership was very low as a % of theoretical maximum capacity, one of the very the lowest number-of-cast-members-to-riders ratio of any Attraction in the park. There was a greeter, a load, a safety position after load, an unload, and a safety position after unload--AND THAT WAS IT! (Of course, breakers, too.) That small cadre of CMs operated a system capable of carrying more guests every day then even walked through the turnstiles. Compare that to a Peter Pan or a Canoes or a Horseless Carriage, or even an Autopia (at least, up through 1999). Through 1999, it took 12 Autopia CMs to get a very good throughput of 1200 Guests per hour (that was very high). Maintenance issues are, of course, separate, but PeopleMover wasn't closed because it was too inefficient.
