Business as usual for now in Orlando theme parks amid coronavirus concerns

GoBucks89 said:

The US can't go to war with China; what would we wear?

Mulfinator said:

Remember when the College Board tried to reframe US History and actual address the implications of race in the story of our country? Remember when the conservatives threw a massive fit and eventually got their way?

You mean Tuesday?

Let’s not diminish our effect on WWII. The Russians were only able to successfully do a scortched earth withdrawal with American Trucks constantly arriving in Siberia. Also, without us engaging and fighting the Japanese Japan would have eventually engaged Russia and opened up an Eastern Front there causing Russia to have to fight on two fronts. At the same time, Britain would have been alone in the world, and best case have fought to a stalemate over the channel, which would have allowed Germany to divert forces to the Eastern Front.

Even then, you could argue this would only have delayed the USSR’s eventual victory but the problem with that thinking is the Nazis were dangerously close to inventing the nuclear bomb, any delay and they likely would have cracked it. In the words of Bill Paxton, Game Over man! Game Over!

It took the combined effort of Britain, USSR and the United States to win WWII, take one of them out and a vastly different less free world would have emerged under the victorious Axis powers or a draw with the USSR gaining a communist Europe and a Japanese empire in Asia.

I think the point stands that the American narrative that we saved the day is, at best, nuanced.

I wasn’t arguing against that, it just seemed to me that we were sliding too far in the other direction.

I think that's a bit of a stretch. I do agree with you that without either Britain, America, or Russia the outcome could have been drastically different. I contend that most of us really didn't hear much about Russia's involvement in our formative years. We heard plenty about Britain and the US though.

You could also make the argument that if Italy had been able to successfully invade Greece the Allied forces might have been on the losing end. Since Germany had to divert forces to assist the Italians that delayed Operation Barbarossa by 5 weeks which put them in Moscow at the dead of winter.

The Germans lost because they couldn’t sustain fighting a multiple front war long term. Remove one of the major powers and something different would have happened.

I can’t seem to locate it but I did read a nice article detailing how Japan was going to surrender regardless and that the US atomic bombing wasn’t the reason they did. However we like to use it as the reason they did.

The United States would have been able to invade Japan and conquer it via traditional means. However, the lives that would have cost (on both sides) would have been astronomical. It also would have resulted in the Soviets occupying some of the home islands. The first atomic bomb actually saved more lives then it took. You can debate about the second one, and you can debate about the city the US chose to drop it on, but I really can’t fault Truman for choosing to use it over a traditional invasion.

I don't think it's much of a debate that the second bomb was immoral, knowing what it would do.

Some would argue that Japan refused to surrender and we were forced to carry out our threat to strike again without a ceasefire we demanded.

I don’t know if I agree with that, and that decision was almost certainly made so that the Soviets did t have time to mobilize and thus get a “seat at the table” of surrender terms but from everything Ive read their was a significant portion of the Japanese leadership that thought we were bluffing about having more then one bomb.

From reading Chris Wallace's book Countdown 1945 it sounds like Japan was hesitant to surrender due to the US demand that the Emperor be replaced. Eventually he was allowed to stay on but only after the bombing of Nagasaki. If you get a chance, it's a great read.

The national press is talking about the Disney parks being sold out the next couple of weeks during spring break. Of course, they fail to mention that Disney is still at 35% capacity so it makes it sound much more alarming than the reality.

35% of "capacity", which they are probably basing off of a NYE or 4th of July capacity crowd is still pretty crowded. At least that was my impression during my recent WDW trips this past winter.

Yes, it is not deserted but my experience was that the crowd is manageable. My kids are pretty sensitive to crowds and Covid right now and they've been comfortable. Lines have the requisite spacing markers, masks are enforced, etc. In fact, without Fastpass it feels a little like the "good old days" when you see reasonable wait times for the E ticket type rides but not the 3 hour standby lines we are getting familiar with.

Granted, we haven't been in the Kingdom yet (which always feels congested) but I'm optimistic about my trip this coming week. You make a good point about their capacity. 35% of what? I think they can get 90,000 or so in the Magic Kingdom on NYE so 25% is 31,500...a pretty busy day at Cedar Point.

My kids have the luxury of living in Florida so if they aren't comfortable we will just leave and head back to the pool.

On my visit a few weeks ago, DHS was at capacity the day I was there. Crowds were manageable, with only Galaxies Edge feeling like there were too many people. (It was pretty crowded.) The signature attractions all had waits of 45-60 minutes, which seems like a lot to me, but I guess is pretty good for a Disney park. The lines are kept outside along the walkways in order to avoid cramming people in switchbacks. This makes the lines appear much longer.

I felt perfectly safe during my 2 days. More so because the mask / social distancing was strictly enforced, but also because it seemed that everyone who was at the parks went along because they wanted to enjoy their vacation to the highest extent possible. And this means following rules and not fighting with staff or other guests.

I will say in my experience over the past several WDW visits this past winter is without FP+, the lines do move pretty quickly.

I would say that only the top attractions had more than a 45 minute wait, and most others were well under 30 minutes. Back in November, Soarin was practically a walk on with all three theaters running.

When lines are moving and you are constantly making your way to the load station, a 45 minute wait doesn't feel nearly as long as your traditional standby line where you felt like it was minutes in-between creeping forward.

I actually like the new (non-FP+) system better.

I think it all has to do with expectations. Sufficient manipulation of the Fastpass system can lead to basically no waiting for anything (in a line, anyway. Sometimes you're on It's Tough to Be A Bug killing time waiting for your FoP FastPass window). If you spent any amount of time in one of the old multi-hour standby lines, I'm sure this feels great.

Two years ago at IAAPA, I attended a keynote given by Greg Hale, one of Disney's top executives and the inventor of FP. He actually holds a patent on the concept.

He spoke in detail about FP and said that on average, 80% of an attractions ride capacity is allocated to FP reservations.

So, no wonder why the pre-COVID standby lines were out of control at times, and much more managable today now that FP is gone (at least for now).