SS Disney - The Floating Theme Park

[Thrillrulz]

Hey, remember in 1994 when Disney built a traveling theme park inside the hull of a massive supertanker? You don’t? That’s because it’s insaaaaaaaane! This surprising project began with an off-handed joke by a Navy Admiral to Disney executive Jim Cora, suggesting that Cora build a theme park on an unused aircraft carrier. Somehow this wacky notion found purchase in the ranks of management, and soon Imagineers were casting about for the proper type of vessel to contain an actual floating theme park. Hickson was brought on board the project because of his previous experience with shipbuilding. He suggested that Disney use a supertanker; the ship’s vast internal capacity would allow Disney to build a full five decks of attractions and guest areas. It was decided that the ship would be used to tour the Pacific Rim, stopping at many tourist-friendly ports in China, southeast Asia, and Australia. The ship would stay roughly two and a half months in each port, returning to each city only every four or five years. On the top deck there was the Orbitron, Casey Jr. Train, a large Ferris Wheel, Alice in Wonderland’s spinning Tea Cups, Dumbo, and a Fantasyland Carousel under a glass dome! At the stern end of the top deck, there would be It’s a Small World. The center or “Hub” of the ship that receives our guests actually had a big glass canopy over the top of it. It was multiple decks deep, so when you entered the ship you had this beautiful giant caverness entry way. If you went to the right you would find Fantasyland themed attractions and to the left it was Tomorrowland themed attractions. Other attractions included Peter Pan’s Flight, Snow White’s Scary Adventures, Indiana Jones, Star Tours, a 3D movie theatre, and even a Space Mountain roller coaster! The fact is the ship was so big and deep that we could actually put an iron roller coaster inside down below the decks. The only difference is you would not see any mountain. We probably we would have to re-named the ride! THIS IS AMAZING!!! SUCKS THAT IT WAST REALISED !!! STIIL SHOULD GO AHEAD WITH IT!!!

[POP]

I don't think a theme park on a ship would be commercially viable, that's probably why they never did it.

[CruiseSF]

It would be too hard to sail around the world in safely. Imagine the Ferris wheel when the ship hits big seas. Plus all the sudden bumps at seas would destroy the ride so they would need to reassemble at each port. Would of been cool but would never of worked no matter how big the ship is. It would be commercially viable because its Disney and they will travel to places like Australia where many people will have never been to Disneyland and want to see it. Plus the ship stays in a place just long enough to make a decent profit but not long enough so numbers will start to drop, so that when they visit again they will not be bored by it. The only issue would be while its at sea.

[Thrillrulz]

I sure that they could find some way to secure the ferris wheel from moving when the ship is in transport between ports, like just a massive latch that connects to the main wheel, and if they build the rides strong enough they should be able to withstand the forces of the seas.

Edited October 19, 2011 by Thrillrulz

[Gazza]

^That's what I was thinking, plus I don't think a supertanker of this scale is going to have too much roll in high seas. As it is, it's not like you hear stories of the water slide towers on newer cruise ships busting apart in rough weather.

[Reanimated35]

However water slides don't have as many moving parts.

[Gazza]

And a ferris wheel has one.

[strop]

And a ferris wheel has one.

I disagree. I would say that technically each gondola swings/pivots, or moves separately, if they were fixed they would be inverted at the top of the rotation. Having said that, I agree that on a ship of the size required to build the park, all but the most extreme of seas would even bother it, and seeing as how the park was only intended to be operated while docked, and not whilst travelling as it would if it was a cruise ship, I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult to pack down some of the more vulnerable rides into a 'sailing mode' and then reset them up at the next port, considering they were discussing several months at each location. Edited October 19, 2011 by strop

[CruiseSF]

The problem still is the jolting movements of the ship which are still present in almost any size of ship. It all depends on how the waves hit the sides of the ship not its size. It causes everything inside the ship to bounce around a little bit. Over time this could loosen the rides. Which are completely different to water slides. For example the Oasis of the seas, the biggest cruise ship in the world just has jolting movements in smaller seas when the waves are hitting in the right angle.

[Original]

But this is an aircraft carrier here, those things have to be stable enough to allow jets to take off and land.

[CruiseSF]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWpQ_0fqJOM Edited October 20, 2011 by Cruiseshipfan

[Gazza]

The problem still is the jolting movements of the ship which are still present in almost any size of ship. It all depends on how the waves hit the sides of the ship not its size. It causes everything inside the ship to bounce around a little bit. Over time this could loosen the rides. Which are completely different to water slides. For example the Oasis of the seas, the biggest cruise ship in the world just has jolting movements in smaller seas when the waves are hitting in the right angle.

So they can engineer a floating theme park, but making a reinforced ferris wheel is too hard?

[katarax]

Could you also imagine the cost of the materials? There would need to be such a high grade of stainless steel seeing as it would be exposed to sea water. Very expensive. But still would have loved to see this get made.

[CruiseSF]

Not saying its impossible just very very expensive and would need lots of care, more so then any of their parks.

[Gazza]

There would need to be such a high grade of stainless steel seeing as it would be exposed to sea water.

No...Or else the whole ship would need to be made of that. That white paint they do the rest of the ship in would do.

[rappa]

OMG are we next going to discuss the colour of green the beam along the pool will be painted? You'll notice the chopper on the deck of that carrier, it has a lot more moving parts than a damn ferris wheel. As for rust, Sea World has to deal with the salt factor all the time and the rides there do survive, true all of the fasteners must be stainless but that's pretty much the case in all the parks anyway. To address an earlier comment, economically viable doesn't mean it would make money in port, but the transport isn't practical, it means the entire operation must make money. Trust me if it was viable, Disney would have done it!

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

I can't see why it couldn't be part theme park and part cruise ship... most, if not all attractions could operate during calm seas as well... At the end of the day, there are no obstacles that they could not overcome. All you need to do is watch some of the discovery channel engineering programs for a few hours to see just how amazing somethings are that we build these days... whether it's commercially viable or not is another matter - but i think it would be a great way for Disney to reach out to every corner of the globe.. give those that don't have the means to get to a park to experience disney... and understand what all those who HAVE been mean when they refer to the "disney standard"

[Gazza]

Part of me wonders how cheaply you could get some sort of second vessel, pack it with water slides, and have a floating water park you could sail around Australia to various summer hotspots. I mean, if some of our carnival ride operators can justify multiple trucks for a few shows per year then this might be possible.....Just dreaming a bit here.

[Thrillrulz]

Why water rides? Why not the best rollercoasters of the world which have not been experienced by many Australians? As these will have more appeal to the Australian audience. LOL... I am writing this on a very hot and hummid day in Sydney, when I wish Sydney had a Waterpark.

[Gazza]

Because water slides are significantly cheaper, and weight a bit less, which matters if you were putting it on a boat. Also because if you wanted " best rollercoasters of the world which have not been experienced by many Australians", you wouldn't fit that on a boat.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Gazza

[CruiseSF]

Also Roller coasters would be less likely to make money due to the massive increase i upkeep costs. Even more so them average theme parks due to constant painting needed to be done. (Track needs to be clean of old paint and new paint added. As if you have ever been on a ship before you can see the large amounts of paint has built up.)

[Scott.]

Ships are designed to flex and bend, Bulkheads act like shock absorbers and can pretty much expand and contract if needed. as seen in the video below. This would make attaching any ride with a decent footprint ridiculously expensive if possible at all. Also the fact some rides wont even work unless the ship is perfectly level, any listing at all and it will not go. Case in point, the carousel on the Oasis of the Seas, specially designed and super reinforced because a standard carousel wouldnt run at a 5 degree list. http://youtu.be/NE_ri8PkihE Then you get the problem of corrosion, very few metals are corrosive proof. Even stainless will corrode eventually. Moving parts and such on things like planes, and helicopters no problem. Try and find one thing on a helicopter thats exposed and is made of steel. Mostly all aluminum or titanium, steel is just too heavy for aeronautical purposes. Then you start adding all these different materials you get electrolysis problems. HUGE problem on a ship that size, the huge surface area just builds up energy moving through the water. In the case of the large aluminium ships ive built we had to search every inch of it to make sure no dissimilar metals were not protected against electrolysis, even something the size of a 10mm washer left in the bilge would burn a hole in the hull stupidly quick. And the paint, ships hulls arnt painted using normal paints, any part near or under the waterline will be anti fowl and thats some thick shit, then anything above that is expensive stuff but even that wont last, go look at any ship even brand new ones or ones like the qm2 where image is everything, they start to rust almost immediately after leaving the yard. Trying to keep rides from corroding on a ship would be near on impossible no matter if you painted the damn things everyday. Then the biggest problem of all, Even the best ships in the world dont have a huge lifetime. Something of this nature would have a lifetime of 20-30 years if its lucky. Not worth the HUGE amount of money it would cost to build and run. Cool idea, yeah, feasible in any possible way even if money wasnt an issue, no way.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Gazza

[New display name]

http://disneycruise.disney.go.com/ I would say Disney ended scaling down the idea.

Edited October 30, 2011 by skeetafly