Tomorrowland re-do?

[Tbad556]

Well, what's the importance of perserving it? SM is Disney's first indoor coaster and the first computer controlled coaster. I think the layout is different than anything else on property so it offers something unique (wild mouse vs mine cart for example). But I think the layout is good! It's fun and has some surprise drops and is worth saving. If it wasn't good and didn't have any historical context I'd say rip it out.

That's genuinely my question. The preservation of Space Mountain as an existing attraction is important to me. The layout itself, not so much. I have a great time with it in its current state (seriously, I love Space Mountain), but I think it could absolutely be improved upon, so I have no qualms with change there. I'm not overwhelmingly pushing for change either. I just don't mind it personally if it does happen. The history behind it is incredibly cool as a theme park nerd, but I also don't personally need it to be a living museum exhibit for the rest of time.

The preservationists honestly intrigue me and I ask questions like this genuinely. I have a strong sense of nostalgia and do wish for certain attractions to be preserved (still mourn stuff like Jaws). However, even with the rides I adore, I think there's an inevitable time where something eventually gives and I'm at peace with that. The question of where that line is for people fascinates me.

The element of changing the layout but keeping the ride is an equally intriguing wrench into that discussion.

 

[mccgavin]

I'm curious to see how they approach this. It sounds like Tokyo's new Space Mountain is going to take a lot of inspiration from Cosmic Rewind. At WDW, Space Mountain and Cosmic Rewind are very similar concepts, but the fact that one is modern and one is retro is what primarily differentiates them (besides some Guardians theming and music). If WDW's Space Mountain really is getting a revamp, I'm interested to see how they try to differentiate from what Guardians offers...

 

[belloq87]

And hopefully someone on the team realizes what makes the layout special. I don’t see why it can’t be a full redo, and still contain an exciting coaster with drops.

I think there's something to be said for preserving a (for the time) groundbreaking 1970s coaster layout. There are plenty of other options elsewhere -- including right next door -- for modern coaster design theory if you're looking for that.

The element of changing the layout but keeping the ride is an equally intriguing wrench into that discussion.

If you're changing the layout, are you really keeping the ride?

That's an interesting philosophical question. Just because the name on the signage is the same doesn't mean it's the same attraction.

 

[Freak]

I'm curious to see how they approach this. It sounds like Tokyo's new Space Mountain is going to take a lot of inspiration from Cosmic Rewind. At WDW, Space Mountain and Cosmic Rewind are very similar concepts, but the fact that one is modern and one is retro is what primarily differentiates them (besides some Guardians theming and music). If WDW's Space Mountain really is getting a revamp, I'm interested to see how they try to differentiate from what Guardians offers...

Yes, but there seems to be a bit more difference between Cosmic Rewind and Tokyo’s Space. Cosmic Rewind has the faster speed and rotating cars to set it apart. Tokyo’s space will apparently not spin but will focus more on speed, forcefulness, and twistiness.

 

[Evan]

If you're changing the layout, are you really keeping the ride?

That's an interesting philosophical question. Just because the name on the signage is the same doesn't mean it's the same attraction.

I don’t know, some change I don’t go for, and can agree they should leave alone, but a coaster running on 70s bones is due for an upgrade.

I hope they thread the needle: something that honours the original layout’s spirit, while recognizing it’s 2026 and expectations have moved with the times.

 

[Tbad556]

If you're changing the layout, are you really keeping the ride?

That's an interesting philosophical question. Just because the name on the signage is the same doesn't mean it's the same attraction.

I agree that it's an interesting train of thought to go down.

Personally, I think that it depends on where the heart of the attraction is for you. For me, I think it's in the theme rather than the layout itself. I think a similarly high-paced, drop-and-twist-filled layout could still feel like Space Mountain to me. Nothing about the current layout is what makes the attraction iconic in my mind (despite what history there may be).

I'd feel the same way about Big Thunder. I wouldn't mind them tweaking the layout of that either at some point in the future as long as the story & theming remain. I find it to be a fascinating way to keep an iconic attraction alive personally.

 

[DOOMBOT]

I'm interested in the ride layout being preserved in ways, but I'm much more concerned about potential changes to the Mountain itself. That thing is striking and beautiful and iconic. It's so recognizable that it could be added to any generic Sci-Fi setting and instantly everyone, even non-theme park people, would know it's Disney's Tomorrowland. I hope we see minimal changes to it.

The Queue music and general aesthetic should also be preserved as much as possible. I understand some changes, as certain parts of the queue are very 70s and are just not especially appealing to be in, but the Star Tunnel with the different practical effects thru each "window", the falling and rising pathways, the star maps, all has such an awesome vibe to it that'd really be unfortunate to lose. I hope they retain and potentially expand on all of that.

 

[belloq87]

I hope they thread the needle: something that honours the original layout’s spirit, while recognizing it’s 2026 and expectations have moved with the times.

But again, if a guest wants a 2020s sci-fi coaster, TRON is right next door. Cosmic Rewind is a monorail ride away. I think having a wide variety of experiences -- even within the coaster category -- is crucial, and that would include "classic" layouts being able to exist alongside the most modern ones.
By all means, rebuild the track. In fact, please do!

Personally, I think that it depends on where the heart of the attraction is for you. For me, I think it's in the theme rather than the layout itself. I think a similarly high-paced, drop-and-twist-filled layout could still feel like Space Mountain to me. Nothing about the current layout is what makes the attraction iconic in my mind (despite what history there may be).

I'd feel the same way about Big Thunder. I wouldn't mind them tweaking the layout of that either at some point in the future as long as the story & theming remain. I find it to be a fascinating way to keep an iconic attraction alive personally.

I think the '70s sensibilities of the details (including the exterior, the queue, music, and general atmosphere/vibes) is as foundational to the very theming of the ride itself as the layout.

That doesn't mean these things can't be tweaked, but it needs to be done with an understanding of what the original/current appeal is. And I'm not sure I trust Disney (or anyone else) with that task.

 

[Tbad556]

I think the '70s sensibilities of the details (including the exterior, the queue, music, and general atmosphere/vibes) is as foundational to the very theming of the ride itself as the layout.

That doesn't mean these things can't be tweaked, but it needs to be done with an understanding of what the original/current appeal is. And I'm not sure I trust Disney (or anyone else) with that task.

There’s not a lot I disagree with here. I’d genuinely be more crushed about losing the music and overall vibe than the ride layout. However, I do think the loading station area can absolutely be plussed in a classy retro way and same with that final queue area.

As for the trust aspect, it’s truly a 50/50 shot in the dark lol.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Just seems like the entire internet is lit up with hysteria, over something we know zero about, for a ride we all knew was up for a major redo.

I'm hoping for the best and I'm excited to see what they do.

I think there's something to be said for preserving a (for the time) groundbreaking 1970s coaster layout. There are plenty of other options elsewhere -- including right next door -- for modern coaster design theory if you're looking for that.


If you're changing the layout, are you really keeping the ride?

That's an interesting philosophical question. Just because the name on the signage is the same doesn't mean it's the same attraction.

1) that tron is next door is another point that I keep forgetting! having two swooping indoor coasters with turns wouldn't make much sense, keep the wild mouse design and layout of SM even if it gets some touchups (a larger turn here, a different banking angle there).

2) it's a ship of thesisus question for sure. I think you have to take in intent of the original designers, the intent of the new team, and the physical alterations. we really don't have a good answer to this in the amusement and themed design industry.

 

[OrlLover]

This was a long time coming and I’m excited to see what Disney has planned for this classic attraction.

I’m really curious if they are gonna touch up the exterior and do a complete rebuild à la Tokyo style of just gut the interior.

 

[ThemeParks4Life]

I'd be ok with a new layout but do not want Disneyland's layout. Going on both DL and WDW's versions within two weeks of each other last month reminded me why the latter could be truly superior with a proper retrack.

 

[Evan]

1) that tron is next door is another point that I keep forgetting! having two swooping indoor coasters with turns wouldn't make much sense, keep the wild mouse design and layout of SM even if it gets some touchups (a larger turn here, a different banking angle there).

2) it's a ship of thesisus question for sure. I think you have to take in intent of the original designers, the intent of the new team, and the physical alterations. we really don't have a good answer to this in the amusement and themed design industry.

I actually think this is enough proof they aren't going to install a launch coaster right next to Tron.

They already built their thrill coaster, they'll want to keep Space Mountain family friendly.

I do think layout could change, among other factors, but I still think it will be a coaster, with a lift hill, allowing gravity to help it reach the unload station.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I actually think this is enough proof they aren't going to install a launch coaster right next to Tron.

They already built their thrill coaster, they'll want to keep Space Mountain family friendly.

I do think layout could change, among other factors, but I still think it will be a coaster, with a lift hill, allowing gravity to help it reach the unload station.

Tron has a height requirement of 48, Space rn is 44. What if they do a BTMR and end up being able to LOWER the height requirement with new trains and restraints? That would rock for families!

 

[Freak]

Tron has a height requirement of 48, Space rn is 44. What if they do a BTMR and end up being able to LOWER the height requirement with new trains and restraints? That would rock for families!

It’s possible! Big Bear Mt at Dollywood I believe has a 39’ height requirement and that’s a Vekoma!

 

[Evan]

Tron has a height requirement of 48, Space rn is 44. What if they do a BTMR and end up being able to LOWER the height requirement with new trains and restraints? That would rock for families!

Honestly, I bet that’s the move they would want to make.

 

[belloq87]

After thinking about it and sleeping on it, here's basically where I stand.

1. Preserve the exterior.

2. If the queue must change, keep it in a sleek "retro-future" style that still evokes a '70s flavor; keeping the queue music loops is absolutely non-negotiable. Dark, half-eerie/half-calming ambiance is essential.

3. If the exit must change, try to keep the show scenes (or equivalent scenes); it's such a nice little touch that not only further distinguishes Magic Kingdom's Space Mountain, but they also act as a tribute to Walt's ideas of futurism and space travel that are foundational to Tomorrowland (and really, to the company itself).

4. If the layout is to change, the new layout must maintain the sense of dynamic motion (i.e. some strategic plunging drops) that is lacking in Disneyland, while still being family-friendly. Don't overthink it, don't get too cute, and don't feel the need to compete with TRON or Cosmic Rewind. Space Mountain is a different vibe.

5. If you're going to change the layout, presumably that may also involve getting rid of the bobsled-style vehicles in favor of side-by-side seating. While that wouldn't be my preference (I think the single-file seating adds an extra dimension of precariousness that enhances the experience), I'd accept it if there's the trade-off that designers find a way to keep two separate tracks (thereby doubling the ride's current capacity). I'm not sure if there's enough room inside the dome to pull that off, though.