Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Thank you so much for joining the debate Bill, it is great to see your insite to the attraction development.
Originally Posted By brotherdave Yes, thank you, Bill. As a lifelong coaster enthusiast, I'm fascinated on how these rides were developed. And thank you for designing both Space Mountains. They're both wonderful ride experiences in their own unique ways!
Originally Posted By mickeyboy43 Yes great job on both of them. Its interesting how one person can have two very different styles of building roller coasters and i find it rather amazing how you rose to both of the challenges. Will you be brought in on the refurb of Space Mountain or will you be kept in the dark on it? No pun intended.
Originally Posted By lauwmw In many ways, both of the Space Mountain designs are the same. The basic principles of curve transition design and velocity control are the same. The differences that you perceive are more subjective than technical. Even the Big Thunder rides, which I also designed, are technically similar. As I told McGinnis when he told me that the design of the WDW-SM might be changed: I considered offering my services, but I got over that in about 10 seconds. After 14 years of retirement, I'm content to sit back and enjoy the memories.
Originally Posted By lauwmw Just noticed that I substituted my initials WMW for WDW in one of yesterdays posts; sorry. Bill
Originally Posted By a1stav Bill, it is quite a pleasant surprise to hear from the designer of these rides. WDW Space Mt. was one of my first ever coasters. The lay down seating offered a very different feeling to the more upright lapbar system that has been in place for the last 15 years. I do enjoy the MK version of the ride, but I always preferred the DL version, even before the massive referb. So if you were to redesign the MK ride (I know you are retired) would you consider a single track layout? With the HUGE MK show building it seems that there could be so may possibilities. I have envisioned an almost lay down ride vehicle so you could have the best view of the dome, like in a planetarium with the steep reclining seats. Also a Barco planetarium projection system could create some amazing show effects.
Originally Posted By lauwmw Decisions of the type you mentioned are made by several people. The WDW-SM building has a lot of unused space because it was sized by drawing a circle around a track layout that was designed for a different shaped building. But there were several modifications to the track to accommodate integration into Tomorrowland and Operations issues. I described George McGinnis as a show designer. He was, but he was much more. He was concerned with getting people in and out of the building. For example, he asked me to widen the space between the lifts so that he could get the entry tunnel between them. Then there was a suggestion that the load and unload be on different levels and that space be made for the Peoplemover to tour through the building. And at Disneyland, George placed the load / unload station with its access ramps and asked that I run the track past the queue line so that people could be forewarned of the nature of the ride. So what I’m trying to say is, the decision wouldn’t be all mine. Given a free hand, I probably would suggest a single, long track with larger vehicles (maybe even with 3-car trains) that would better utilize the building. I would stick to the same standards as were applied to DL-SM, i.e. roll rates and maximum g-force levels. And certainly pure gravity, no boosters or retarders. The vehicles would have lap bars. (Those seatbelts in the original WDW ride were a nightmare). I don’t think that lap bars and a laydown seating arrangement are compatible.
Originally Posted By gmaletic Bill--thanks for reminding me about one other thing I love about the WDW Space Mountain: separate loading and unloading areas. It's remarkable to me how much that changes the ride experience for the better, when you climb into an empty, mysterious vehicle rather than one that's just been vacated by tourists who obviously weathered the ride without any problem. (This is also one of the few things that the WDW Pirates has in its favor, too.)
Originally Posted By FerretAfros "The WDW-SM building has a lot of unused space because it was sized by drawing a circle around a track layout that was designed for a different shaped building." Does that mean that they weren't always planning on having a circular building? I know in early concept art, I've seen a mostly circular building with random protrusions with some spires on them. Would it have been more like that? Or did they just want a track layout that was fun, regardless of how it really used the space, and then stuck a building around it?
Originally Posted By gmaletic 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.
Originally Posted By lauwmw 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.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros 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.
Originally Posted By lauwmw 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.
Originally Posted By gmaletic >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.
Originally Posted By lauwmw 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.
Originally Posted By MPierce lauwmw do you think the added sound track compliments the ride or detracts from it?
Originally Posted By lauwmw 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.
Originally Posted By a1stav 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.
