nace888
Well-Known Member
:sohappy:
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
If monorail expansion is too expensive, why not peoplemover?
- Thread starter PeterAlt
- Start date
:sohappy:
Lord Pheonix
Active Member
why is one of my posts missing?
googilycub
Active Member
Even if you had tow tractors placed strategically, with drivers sitting in them waiting(which would be a very expensive "what if") you are still talking at least an hour to get things moving again.....
s8film40
Well-Known Member
No, not even close. Even with Disney's current outdated system I have seen trains dealt with towed off the line and everything back to normal in less than 15-20 minutes. With a modern system a disabled train could easily be dealt with without anyone even knowing it happened.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Disney can have most of the prt tracks at ground level, on just asphalt. For Disney to expand their monorail, they need to have elevated concrete beams that are electrified. I was reluctant for wdw to have prts installed, but their design makes them a better alternative to a costly expansion of the monorail lines. They can work with what is already in place and help to balance out when there are peaks times in the transportation system. PRTs can also be used to move supplies around the park without putting more vehicles on the roads.
Uncle Lupe
Well-Known Member
I would be happy with something to take me to just few stops in the World Stage.
nace888
Well-Known Member
If you think, PRTs would be much more expensive.
Look at how much concrete is used here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaqyuAynTw0
Then look at how much concrete the PRT is required to have;
Either more steel or concrete than a monorail...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NCnvBS2SME&feature=related
Plus I think they're ugly...
PRTs need magnets, lots of monitoring systems, to not collide with the wall or another pod, plus they sound annoyingly loud...
I mean, I like them and think they're cool, but they're ugly, and Disney does not need to add these, when they already have a good transit system set up.
Look at how much concrete is used here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaqyuAynTw0
Then look at how much concrete the PRT is required to have;
Either more steel or concrete than a monorail...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NCnvBS2SME&feature=related
Plus I think they're ugly...
PRTs need magnets, lots of monitoring systems, to not collide with the wall or another pod, plus they sound annoyingly loud...
I mean, I like them and think they're cool, but they're ugly, and Disney does not need to add these, when they already have a good transit system set up.
harryk
Well-Known Member
Those pods look great and would be a great asset to WDW for ground level transport and an enhancement to the wed-way system through-out the World as a transportation system. Just how many riders each pod would hold is a question that needs answering to be an effective system especially at opening and closing of the parks.
If they were scheduled as poorly as the closing bus system at Epcot or Holywood Studios - they would not be an asset.
If they were scheduled as poorly as the closing bus system at Epcot or Holywood Studios - they would not be an asset.
s8film40
Well-Known Member
Monorails can also be built on ground level, however at some point with either they will have to cross roads, walkways and other obstacles at some point. When this happens Monorails will be cheaper since they essentially ride on their own support columns rather than having wider and larger support columns to support the track.
More importantly it's the PRT aspect that doesn't really fit with WDW. The whole point of a PRT system is to create a transportation network where the user doesn't have to think about transfers or how to get to their destination they just get in and punch in where they want to go and the system does the rest. For this to work in this way at WDW they would need to replace the existing transportation system so that the PRT would have access to all locations. PRT is usually most practical in a situation where you have many locations with an equal transportation need, college campuses are a great example of this. WDW, however has a few very heavy trip generators and then several smaller trip generators. The beast means of handling this would be to have a mass transit (monorail) capable of moving thousands in just a few minutes to connect all of the heavy trip generators and then provide local transportation at each of these points.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Info on Ultra PRT
The implementation is based on what the client wants. For Disney, they can use at grade asphalt as the guideway and use plastic curbs. The system does not use magnets, the vehicles use lasers to guide themselves. As for the noise, they are going to be just as loud as the monorails.
Disney can have the vehicles built to their own specs, which is what they have done with the monorails. I would suspect that disney will have the vehicles built to hold more passengers per vehicle and also have a look that appeals to guests.
And finally the cost is much less than expanding monorails. The costs per mile for an elevated system is 7 - 15 million. Disney is not going to need this system placed completely on guideways, which is going to reduce the cost. Along with that, the pods can easily transfer from one line to another without having to shut down the system.
Exactly. I could see disney having 5 person pods for vips but also have 8 or 10 passenger systems for general use. They could also have cargo pods that could be turned into standing room only pods for peak hours.
Monorails could be at ground level but they will need to climb back up to an elevated track. The monorail train climbing back up will slow it down and also be difficult and a strain on the train and beams. An empty mark iv weighs 50 tons empty, with another 15 - 25 when you add in how much passengers weigh.
PRT can be viewed like the buses, you pick a destination and the system gets you there. In my mockup I have a central ttc where guests can transfer to different lines, but there can be transfer points between the lines that will not require a guest to switch vehicles. Guests will still need to transfer onto a monorail to get to the MK area, but it is because it will be more effective. Having a PRT system is not to replace the whole system that is already in place but to enhance it.
s8film40
Well-Known Member
The monorails at WDW currently go up and down grades like this all day, it's not an issue it's part of the design. The PRT would have to do this as well there really is no getting around it. The only difference is with PRT it will cost more to accomplish.
The other big issue is capacity. It all sounds great but these PRT cars just don't have the capacity needed in a setting like WDW. High capacity settings are not what PRT was designed for and it won't work. Take for example you have a monorail PRT transfer station, at a peak time you will have a monorail dropping off 350 people every 2 minutes. These people will then board a PRT to take them to their more specific location. If we assume your PRT cars hold 10 people each (which by the way isn't a good number for WDW as families don't want to split up so they will often not meet their capacity) that means you need at minimum 35 PRT cars every two minutes or about 17 per minute. Assuming you could even load them that fast you would need a continuous flow of them to keep up with the monorail, you would need thousands of these cars. Now what do you suppose the odds of malfunctions are 1 in 100, 1 in 200 either way it doesn't matter with thousand of these things running all at once the maintenance issues will be continuously ongoing.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Going from 0' to 20' is going to take up a good amount of room for the monorails, it can not be that extreme of a grade because of how heavy the train is. As for a pod, they are smaller and weigh much less; how would it cost more for a smaller ramp?
As I said before, having a PRT system will work with the existing transportation systems already in place and not replace them. Along with that, the monorail right now doesn't end up at real transport hub. The buses for the MK area are located at MK and not the TTC. At EPCOT, the buses primarily are for just EPCOT and not just a way to ease the strain on the bus stop at MK.
The PRT system is really a mix between the buses and monorail system. Giving guests another option is going to ease the strain on the system and can show parts of the park that guests do not see. Along with that, the system can be easily scalable. The current width of a prt pod is about 5 feet, about half the width of a one lane road. Disney would need one lane as the start and can build out to two lanes if they need it.
s8film40
Well-Known Member
For a monorail to reach a 20' grade increase takes about 300'. A small PRT vehicle will presumably have much smaller motors and in fact may be more difficult for it to carry weight up an incline than the monorail with it's large motors distributed throughout the train. If the PRT is about 5' wide this will mean that the ramp will need to be 5' wide also as opposed to the monorails 26" wide beam. The ramp will need to be supported by beams very similar to monorail beams and then the road/track bed placed on top of that. There are a lot more materials involved to make an elevated PRT line than compared to monorail. This is why it would cost more.
I assume by this and your illustration above that you mean to say that you would eliminate the bus stop at MK have resort guests board the monorail transfer to the Epcot monorail then go to a main transit station where they would agin transfer to one of several PRT systems that would then take them to their final destination.
If this is the case it will not work. The monorail system as is is already over capacity requiring more people to ride it would be disastrous.
It's a nice idea I just don't see the benefit to a system like this. It has none of the benefits of a mass transit system being able to handle heavy loads and efficiently moving thousands of people in minutes at the same time it does not have the flexibility of a bus system since it has to follow rigid tracks. It is essentially just smaller automated buses that can only follow selected routes. It's a labor savings at best but nothing more.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
The pods will have less horsepower but the pods weigh less. The models at heathrow weigh 1800lbs empty. For those pods, they need at most 200 feet to reach 20' and at the least 100 feet. Even though a prt will need a wider platform than a monorail, it can be thinner and does not need as much supports. Also the platform could be made from fiberglass and light weight supports. This is part of why the per mile cost is $7 to $15 million, which is a figure that is much lower than the cost per mile for a monorail.
When did I say anything about closing part of any of the transportation already in place? You talked about a monorail train unloading and there not be enough transportation for those guests. I stated that the monorail does not do that now.
[/QUOTE]
No system disney has moves thousands of people in minutes, the most they can move at one time is 600 on one of the ferries. But PRT systems can handle a large amount of passengers, if planed right and having enough passengers near stations. The proposed system for Amritsar, India would carry 5k an hour. As for cost savings, PRTs run at half the cost.
s8film40
Well-Known Member
If you take a look at the specifications here:http://www.ultraglobalprt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/PDF_Vehicle-features.pdf You'll notice that the PRT can climb a steeper grade than the monorail however it can not go down that grade. All the grades would still need to be around 6% just like the monorail, honestly you wouldn't want to go any steeper than that anyways as you would create an uncomfortable ride for the passengers. There is no way a fiberglass supported track would work. The track has to be steel or concrete and has to be designed to support more than one of these pods so it is built pretty close to monorail track just wider. Take a look at this PRT track does this look cheaper than monorail?
I assumed the purpose of adding PRT would be to eliminate some of the existing less efficient transportation like the buses. If nothing else would be replaced with the addition of PRT what is the point in adding it.
The monorails do in fact carry thousands of people in a matter of minutes. At a peak time at the MK with all monorails running, the Express monorail will cycle 4 trains in ten minutes with 350 passengers each that's 1400 people in 10 minutes. Add to that the resort beam with four trains in about 15 minutes and that's an additional 1050 in ten minutes.
Now for the PRT system to even match that capacity you will need 490 pod cars to come through the station in a ten minute period. I don't think that's possible even if they didn't stop.
The point is PRT is a great transportation solution, it's a way to get people more efficiently to their choice of destinations. It just isn't built for mass transit and that's exactly what WDW requires with parks closing with tens of thousands of people needing transportation all at once.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
If you take a look at the specifications here:http://www.ultraglobalprt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/PDF_Vehicle-features.pdf You'll notice that the PRT can climb a steeper grade than the monorail however it can not go down that grade. All the grades would still need to be around 6% just like the monorail, honestly you wouldn't want to go any steeper than that anyways as you would create an uncomfortable ride for the passengers. There is no way a fiberglass supported track would work. The track has to be steel or concrete and has to be designed to support more than one of these pods so it is built pretty close to monorail track just wider. Take a look at this PRT track does this look cheaper than monorail?
Can!
The support columns for a the prt guide are light weight and be pre-fabbed and setup on site, all they are are just hollow steel poles. As for a monorail, you need the concrete to set and will need a lot of it anyway. That is why it costs so much less than a monorail.
When disney opened EPCOT, did they do it without other modes of transportation? No. The point of PRT is to work with the existing forms of transportation and to lessen their use because PRT is more cost effective. Having a PRT system costs half the cost of a bus system to run. PRT will lower the total cost of operations, it will also enable disney to have all of its land transportation to be green. Also it would speed up travel times throughout the park because buses would not slow down cars.
If we are talking about hypotheticals, because I never mentioned having prts handle the most attended theme park in the world. You would need to have 234 10 person pods in that 10 minute period, which is alot. That is partly why Disney would have various types of these vehicles in their fleet. They would have the small 5 person pods for vips. For general use there would be a 10 person pod. Along with those two, disney could have a pod style that would be used for freight but could also be standing room only during peak times. If Disney could get 15 guests on that standing room only pod, then the number shrinks to 155 pods. Along with that, the whole line does not stop because a pod is disembarking. But as I said, prts wouldn't be used in the mk area. There already are two high capacity transportation modes in place, it would not make sense to mirror all three lines.
nace888
Well-Known Member
Can!
The support columns for a the prt guide are light weight and be pre-fabbed and setup on site, all they are are just hollow steel poles. As for a monorail, you need the concrete to set and will need a lot of it anyway. That is why it costs so much less than a monorail.
When disney opened EPCOT, did they do it without other modes of transportation? No. The point of PRT is to work with the existing forms of transportation and to lessen their use because PRT is more cost effective. Having a PRT system costs half the cost of a bus system to run. PRT will lower the total cost of operations, it will also enable disney to have all of its land transportation to be green. Also it would speed up travel times throughout the park because buses would not slow down cars.
If we are talking about hypotheticals, because I never mentioned having prts handle the most attended theme park in the world. You would need to have 234 10 person pods in that 10 minute period, which is alot. That is partly why Disney would have various types of these vehicles in their fleet. They would have the small 5 person pods for vips. For general use there would be a 10 person pod. Along with those two, disney could have a pod style that would be used for freight but could also be standing room only during peak times. If Disney could get 15 guests on that standing room only pod, then the number shrinks to 155 pods. Along with that, the whole line does not stop because a pod is disembarking. But as I said, prts wouldn't be used in the mk area. There already are two high capacity transportation modes in place, it would not make sense to mirror all three lines.
You're wanting to eliminate bus drivers? That's like taking away Monorail Pilots!! Not only is it (to me) sort of taking away the magic, but you are cutting SO MANY jobs!! Think of how many people would lose their jobs if a PRT were to replace buses... Not only that, but PRTs are a single lane guideway going both ways,
|| /\
|| ||
|| ||
|| ||
\/ ||
If a pod were to break down and it's not near a station, you might as well be stranded until you can find the pod, get a mechanic out there, and move the pod out of the way. With monorails, you can add sidings and a few more tractors, and you would have a vastly less amount of trains to worry about in ratio to PRT pods. Also, you think PRTs would not take much room, if you were to not only widen them for freight and standing passenger room, but you are wanting to lengthen them for freight and guests too. Instead of having the set turnaround ability for a normal sized pod, that would have to double as well to support the turn radius of a longer pod. It takes up MORE ROOM...
s8film40
Well-Known Member
Can!
The support columns for a the prt guide are light weight and be pre-fabbed and setup on site, all they are are just hollow steel poles. As for a monorail, you need the concrete to set and will need a lot of it anyway. That is why it costs so much less than a monorail.
When disney opened EPCOT, did they do it without other modes of transportation? No. The point of PRT is to work with the existing forms of transportation and to lessen their use because PRT is more cost effective. Having a PRT system costs half the cost of a bus system to run. PRT will lower the total cost of operations, it will also enable disney to have all of its land transportation to be green. Also it would speed up travel times throughout the park because buses would not slow down cars.
If we are talking about hypotheticals, because I never mentioned having prts handle the most attended theme park in the world. You would need to have 234 10 person pods in that 10 minute period, which is alot. That is partly why Disney would have various types of these vehicles in their fleet. They would have the small 5 person pods for vips. For general use there would be a 10 person pod. Along with those two, disney could have a pod style that would be used for freight but could also be standing room only during peak times. If Disney could get 15 guests on that standing room only pod, then the number shrinks to 155 pods. Along with that, the whole line does not stop because a pod is disembarking. But as I said, prts wouldn't be used in the mk area. There already are two high capacity transportation modes in place, it would not make sense to mirror all three lines.
I'm not sure what the benefit would be in adding PRT's without eliminating existing bus lines. It's a huge expense to add them when you would still have buses serving all those very same locations.
Again like I said before PRT's can't handle the kind of demand to make any kind of substantial impact at WDW so what's the point. The only realistic use for PRT's at WDW would be for internal systems within certain larger resorts like Fort Wilderness or Coronado Springs.
s8film40
Well-Known Member
Any future transportation expansion will very likely cut jobs, any new monorail system would very likely be automated and that may still happen even to the existing system. This is a good thing those as Disney can better focus it's resources and cast members where they can have a better impact on guests.
Yes one of the inherent problems with this particular PRT system is that each vehicle is independently powered so one has a problem and it takes the whole system down. The same can be said for monorails but with far fewer vehicles the likelihood is much lower. A comprehensive system that served a majority of WDW would require thousands of these vehicle, they would be breaking down on a continuous basis.
flavious27
Well-Known Member
Hey I love the mentality that bus drivers have to be an unverified version of wikipedia, but it isn't like this will eliminate all of the bus drivers, it will take away maybe a hundred or so. At the same time, disney is still going to grow their hotels more and more which would require more drivers anyway. So if anything, disney would have the same staffing level.
Each POD has GPS and other sensors on board that will help keep them in contact with central control. The system will be able to detect when a POD stops unexpectedly. It would also calculate when the battery will be depleted and need to be taken offline to charge. There would be no driver hoping to push it for another trip to EPCOT from AKL. Also an electrical problem in one part of a line will not stop the whole thing.
I will say that it would have the same amount of downtime as the monorail system when there is a breakdown. Also I wouldn't doubt that there would be ways that disney could reroute around any problems. When the system gets busier, the guideways would need to be doubled and that would add redundancy to the system.
There would be a slight change to the current design with larger pods but it wouldn't need to change the system that much. Disney would be smart to futureproof this system. For the weight issue, they can use stronger materials. For the turning radius, the only places that would require a tight turn would be the stations, depending on the the way the stations are setup.
I can see an impact, as long as the system is reliable and it has reach throughout the property. I also see families liking this system, especially at night because they won't be shoved into an overcrowded bus.
I spent some time today to update my map from last year. A system like this would make it easier to get around a resort when having buses would be wasteful. It also would make sense for those staying near dak can get to dak, the same way the friendship boats work for epcot and dhs.