LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksYes, this is the ACTUAL engine (well, at least the nose of the engine) that was in DCA. In what ways are the windows different? There aren't many (if any) window variations in an F-7.Originally Posted by Disneytwins
Yes, this is the ACTUAL engine (well, at least the nose of the engine) that was in DCA. In what ways are the windows different? There aren't many (if any) window variations in an F-7.
Agree completely. While the placement was odd to say the least, I wish they would have found a way to relocate it somewhere. Old trains like this are so cool looking.
Sometimes sacrifices need to be made. Disney seems to want to go full bore on a total revamp of that area, so a 1950's era train will be out of place in 1920's L.A. It's a bummer, but Buena Vista Street looks like it's going to be beautiful, I'm sure when it's over and done with the loss of the trains won't sting as bad.
That train never made any sense. I don't get it. But the construction was flawless. It was well done, yet incoherent in the old DCA.
That train had style and class. It was the best thing in DCA for years!
This has been a Filmways presentation dahling.
Considering Walt's very strong connection to the Santa Fe, it always struck me as odd that a WP train was chosen. It did have a cool name, though, that fit in with the CA theme.
The Santa Fe's F-unit red-and-silver "Warbonnet" scheme is widely considered one of the all-time best diesel paint schemes and would have looked uber-cool.
---------- Post added 08-01-2011 at 10:56 PM ----------
Maybe you're thinking about the headlight Disney added to the front door to make it look more like a WP unit?
I really haven't missed anything that's been changed at DCA so far but I will miss the train. I always thought it was cool. Seems weird that they're getting rid of it because it doesn't fit the theme of the new BVS when there are so many things that don't fit in that park's theme even remotely.
The sarcastic remark would be "there are two Zephyrs in DCA, leave it to Disney to pull out the one that people actually liked."
Writing about all things Disney, a couple of paragraphs at a time
http://disneylandtraveler.blogspot.com/
50,000+ page views and counting.
At least the Golden Zephyr actually matches Paradise Pier, for what that is worth.
I thought that train in DCA was emblematic of all of DCA.
DL RR talks you all the way around the Magic Kingdom with 4 different stops in 4 different lands, not to mention, gives you an over view of much of park, and even takes you for a trip back in time. Whereas . . . .
over in DCA, the Train just sits there, doesn't move anyone anywhere, not even an inch, and doesn't do a darn thing . . . .
That's not true... you can buy stuff in it. Hmm, guess you're right with your comparison.
oops! I was looking at the wrong end!
DisneyTwins
Since May 2003
Yeah, cause it would be a time-travelling train coming through not just a tunnel, but a rip in the dimensional fabric of the universe; a 1955 Streamliner arriving 20 years in the past in 1930's Los Angeles.
I liked the California Zephyr too. It was just about the only classy thing in DCA's original park entry and opening act of the Sunshine Plaza. The rest of that area of DCA was mostly cheap junk, worthy of an outlet mall along a freeway somewhere. But the Zephyr complex was unique and classy and clever. It's just a good thing the replacement for it of Buena Vista Street is 100 times better overall than DCA's original entry and opening act.
Anachronisms don't bother me much. I usually prefer artistic license over historical accuracy when it comes to entertainment purposes. It's not like Mickey Mouse was holding Walt's hand when he arrived in LA in the 30's, but that's not stopping them from making that a statue, either. Nor would there be people walking around talking on cell phones or parades with Pixar characters passing by the Carthay.
In the case of BVS being "set" in the 1930s, I'd be fine with the architecture being primarily from the 30s but with "content" from later decades. Buildings from the 1930s still exist in the modern day... they don't magically turn to dust once the decade changes over to the next. Point being, I would have been fine with BVS consisting of a broader range of years rather than a narrow one, say 1930-1950 instead of just the 30s.
But again, I totally understand their logic and their design choices. I "get" BVS and I love the plan.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks