What does Jurassic Park need?

[Chris]

That is such a tease But I bow down to your expertise then.

I know Potter has a very wide age range of fans. Knowing that, I guess I just assumed Universal would be smart enough to make it accessible to youngsters. I always forget to keep in mind what happens when you assume...

Well, if you look at it, it was much more of an answer than a tease. :look:

In early concepts, the ride would have had three completely seperate queues - a very smart idea, but operationally, a formula for disaster. The basic idea was that there would be a tame, medium and intense version of the ride that would have also allowed the potential for varied height requirements. With an operations background, I can't even *imagine* the nightmare something like that would have caused in day-to-day operation and though it would have solved the varied demo issue, it would have sparked up MUCH worse than just "sorry, too short" will do.

---------- Post added at 08:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:24 PM ----------

Jurassic Park at IOA should have stuck with what the book had. Three main attractions. The Safari, The River Adventure, and The Aviary.

In a sense, the original plans for the island sort of did that with the inclusion of the Jeep Safari and HelecopTours.

The concept art and such for Jeep Safari IS public knowledge, right? If not, that's something that I can definitely post.

 

[YETI PINTRADER]

I have not seen any concept for the Jeep tour.

 

[Chris]

I have not seen any concept for the Jeep tour.

Give me a few mintues to finish up the *actual* work that this board is yet again distracting me from, then I'll dig it out and post it. This one isn't something that I *ahem* obtained so I'm not hessitant to post it online.

---------- Post added at 09:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:38 PM ----------

Give me a few mintues to finish up the *actual* work that this board is yet again distracting me from, then I'll dig it out and post it. This one isn't something that I *ahem* obtained so I'm not hessitant to post it online.

I went ahead and gave the Jeep Safari stuff its own thread. I figure people will probably go searching for it down the road and I didn't want it to get lost in a general JP thread. Feel free to check it out!

 

[TheDecemberists]

but isn't that the point of IOA? it's a park for big kids! I was thrilled about the park when it first opened (and I was 9). I was tired of "it's a small world" and "snow white".

 

[ChiefBrody]

More than anything, JP needs to have the Triceraptops Encounter open at the very least. As it stands there is very little in such a huge amount of space, it's a shame.

 

[Chris]

More than anything, JP needs to have the Triceraptops Encounter open at the very least. As it stands there is very little in such a huge amount of space, it's a shame.

While it hardly takes up a "huge amount of space" - this is the one comment in this tread that is likely to happen at some point.

 

[Mearn]

I'm not sure that JP needs another attraction, but a good refurbishment of River Adventure would help. Clean up the AAs, do something to hide the obvious platform underneath the Ultrasaur(?) towards the beginning, and get some of the MIA effects back online reliably.

Reopening the Triceratops Encounter would be a good boost as well. Disney's Living Character Initiative is proving to be pretty popular, and IOA's got a very similar attraction just sitting there at the moment.

 

[Chris]

I'm not sure that JP needs another attraction, but a good refurbishment of River Adventure would help. Clean up the AAs, do something to hide the obvious platform underneath the Ultrasaur(?) towards the beginning, and get some of the MIA effects back online reliably.

Reopening the Triceratops Encounter would be a good boost as well. Disney's Living Character Initiative is proving to be pretty popular, and IOA's got a very similar attraction just sitting there at the moment.

The problem with the Ultrasaur's platform isn't the platform but the fact that the whole lagoon used to be filled with low-lying fog that covered those eyesores.

The condition of the dinosaurs, and their current programming thouhg is so bad that it's *not even* a joke. They're so tuned down that they might as well turn them off.

Trike is still in the works. It's FAR from a dead project.

 

[SpyderDan]

The problem with the Ultrasaur's platform isn't the platform but the fact that the whole lagoon used to be filled with low-lying fog that covered those eyesores.

The condition of the dinosaurs, and their current programming thouhg is so bad that it's *not even* a joke. They're so tuned down that they might as well turn them off.

But why is that? Why are they programmed like that?

 

[Chris]

But why is that? Why are they programmed like that?

Realistic programming requires a much higher, faster range of motion. More aggressive movement requires more maintenace. More maintenace requires more money spent on an attraction that gets a luke-warm reception at best from park guests. Dialing the animation of the figures way down allows them to last much longer without needing repair / replacement of the parts or especially in the case of those dinos, the skins.

It's not cool, but it's a pretty standard way of handling things in the industry.

 

[ralphoutloud]

While it hardly takes up a "huge amount of space" - this is the one comment in this tread that is likely to happen at some point.

They're going to need it when they shut down Dragons for the time to redo them. Right?

 

[Chris]

They're going to need it when they shut down Dragons for the time to redo them. Right?

There is no connection between the two. Dragon's closure will be very minimal.

 

[ralphoutloud]

There is no connection between the two. Dragon's closure will be very minimal.

Well not just dragons, with everything and all the construction. Another attraction would help out with the crowds and stuff.

 

[ChiefBrody]

Realistic programming requires a much higher, faster range of motion. More aggressive movement requires more maintenace. More maintenace requires more money spent on an attraction that gets a luke-warm reception at best from park guests. Dialing the animation of the figures way down allows them to last much longer without needing repair / replacement of the parts or especially in the case of those dinos, the skins.

It's not cool, but it's a pretty standard way of handling things in the industry.

This is the case with JAWS too if I'm not mistaken. Several Skippers over @ IOACentral mentioned the current movement of the cable shark and that it actually still has the ability to thrash from side to side as it did all those years back. I guess it's something you have to see to believe and to see both JAWS & JP's AA's working at full force would be quite something.

I guess though like you said, there are many downsides to that too though, unfortunately.

 

[Chris]

This is the case with JAWS too if I'm not mistaken. Several Skippers over @ IOACentral mentioned the current movement of the cable shark and that it actually still has the ability to thrash from side to side as it did all those years back. I guess it's something you have to see to believe and to see both JAWS & JP's AA's working at full force would be quite something.

I guess though like you said, there are many downsides to that too though, unfortunately.

I'm guessing you're talking about the "Kill Shark"? I'm surprised to hear people that are supposedly Skippers referring to it with incorrect terms... ?

Case in point- the moral here is that it's always best to ride these big animatronics shows when they are brand new, because a few years down the road, when the public eye is off of them, all bets (and most effects) are off.

 

[ChiefBrody]

I'm guessing you're talking about the "Kill Shark"? I'm surprised to hear people that are supposedly Skippers referring to it with incorrect terms... ?

Case in point- the moral here is that it's always best to ride these big animatronics shows when they are brand new, because a few years down the road, when the public eye is off of them, all bets (and most effects) are off.

I'm sure they called it the 'kill shark', I just have always known it as the 'cable shark'

Mhm, sadly that looks like the case. I was lucky enough to get the chance to ride JP the year it opened but I don't remember much about the AA's (I was like 7) but the last time I was there the whole ride just seemed to have slowed down and lacked in intensity in places and it's a shame.

When working at 100%, I'm almost certain that River Adventure could blow almost any ride of its type of of the water (literally) but I guess unless Universal invests big time in the ride and gives it the extended refurb it so desperately needs, it will be quite some time before we see it anywhere near its best.

 

[Chris]

I'm sure they called it the 'kill shark', I just have always known it as the 'cable shark'

Mhm, sadly that looks like the case. I was lucky enough to get the chance to ride JP the year it opened but I don't remember much about the AA's (I was like 7) but the last time I was there the whole ride just seemed to have slowed down and lacked in intensity in places and it's a shame.

When working at 100%, I'm almost certain that River Adventure could blow almost any ride of its type of of the water (literally) but I guess unless Universal invests big time in the ride and gives it the extended refurb it so desperately needs, it will be quite some time before we see it anywhere near its best.

Yeah - for example in 1999, the T-Rex didn't have a sheet for a neck.

Even at 100%, River Adventure still felt hokey; better than now for sure, but still not jaw-dropping. They're just not very capable robots used, but for some reason, that *tends* to be the case with Universal incorporated animatronics versus Disney ones.

You'll never see it "at its best" again. It's cheaper to run this way.

 

[Disneyhead]

Yeah - for example in 1999, the T-Rex didn't have a sheet for a neck.

Even at 100%, River Adventure still felt hokey; better than now for sure, but still not jaw-dropping. They're just not very capable robots used, but for some reason, that *tends* to be the case with Universal incorporated animatronics versus Disney ones.

You'll never see it "at its best" again. It's cheaper to run this way.

Sort of like the Yeti?

 

[ChiefBrody]

I hate that damn sheet. Any idea what purpose it actually serves? It feels like it's been there for as long as I can remember

For sure. No matter how much it costs, Disney always seems to find a way to get the best animatronics and if existing ones should need updating or restoring, it's done pretty quickly (excluding the Yeti).

I just guess we'll have to get used to seeing River Adventure refurbed a couple of times a year with the whole thing merely drained, repainted and stuff replanted and a spot of cleaning up here and there. Not that it offers any kind of solution but rather covers up what's wrong for a week or so and then it's back to the way it was again

 

[Chris]

Sort of like the Yeti?

Not at all like Yeti. There are serious structural issues prohibiting it from being run in full motion right now.

But I suppose these boards are not a place that we like to believe in "serious structural issues".... right? :look:

---------- Post added at 08:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 PM ----------

I hate that damn sheet. Any idea what purpose it actually serves? It feels like it's been there for as long as I can remember

For sure. No matter how much it costs, Disney always seems to find a way to get the best animatronics and if existing ones should need updating or restoring, it's done pretty quickly (excluding the Yeti).

I just guess we'll have to get used to seeing River Adventure refurbed a couple of times a year with the whole thing merely drained, repainted and stuff replanted and a spot of cleaning up here and there. Not that it offers any kind of solution but rather covers up what's wrong for a week or so and then it's back to the way it was again

It has a sheet for a neck to save on maintenance hassle. That spot is where the figure has the widest range of motion, and thus the most common spot to need to be worked on.

"No matter how much it costs" is *exactly* why Disney has the best figures. They're not cheap when they set out for a new attraction. Do you honestly think Disney would have spent $40 on a Mummy coaster had it been built there?