If monorail expansion is too expensive, why not peoplemover?

[s8film40]

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.

I don't understand the purpose of this if your not going to eliminate bus routes. The elaborate system you drew up I would guess has at least 20 miles of track, far more than the monorail expansion idea I posted earlier. To add this just so people have a "cooler" option of transportation just doesn't make sense. This would be a huge project costing hundreds of millions of dollars without a significant reduction in costs from other areas. Obviously a PRT system like this could not handle the heavy flow of guests exiting all the key trip generators you included. How do you even decide who gets to ride the PRT? Maybe once the line gets long enough you close it off and send everyone to the buses? This doesn't seem to be an ideal situation, you'll just have angry guests who weren't quick enough to get out of the park to catch the PRT's and now have to wait for a bus.

 

[flavious27]

I don't understand the purpose of this if your not going to eliminate bus routes. The elaborate system you drew up I would guess has at least 20 miles of track, far more than the monorail expansion idea I posted earlier. To add this just so people have a "cooler" option of transportation just doesn't make sense. This would be a huge project costing hundreds of millions of dollars without a significant reduction in costs from other areas. Obviously a PRT system like this could not handle the heavy flow of guests exiting all the key trip generators you included. How do you even decide who gets to ride the PRT? Maybe once the line gets long enough you close it off and send everyone to the buses? This doesn't seem to be an ideal situation, you'll just have angry guests who weren't quick enough to get out of the park to catch the PRT's and now have to wait for a bus.

I don't see Disney getting rid of the option to have the buses, they carry alot of people at one time with free movement within the property. Also there are places where the buses make more sense to have. To won't be a way to have the prt system added to FW, it would take away from the charm of the place and most of the system would need to be on guideways, which will require a good amount of trees to be cut down. Now this will lessen the need of the bus system, which would also lower the cost for when disney needs to replace the current fleet to something more green, like hybrid bio-diesel with solar cells on the roof. This will have a two fold effect on operational costs, a prt system costs half what a bus fleet does. So if the prt system take away 1/3 of the current usage on the bus fleet, the operational cost for the prt system and bus system would be 17% less. Now when you can update the bus fleet to be more energy efficient, the operation costs drop even more. Just having a hybrid bus drops the operational cost by 15%, to an overall operational cost savings of 27%. Installing solar cells to run the a/c could save another 10%, which would decrease the overall costs by 33%. So at the end of the day disney would have a transportation system that is almost green, with a cost savings of 1/3 to run the buses and the prt.

Yeah guests will be angry if they have to wait for a prt and instead need to use a bus, but that happens now with the monorails and also with the boat fleet. On the same token, if guests are mad they aren't able to get an available pod, it means that they have adapted to this new system and it is their primary choice. Humans do not like change, anything that changes hearts and minds is a good thing.

This system can also be on the forefront of disney using better tech for guest satisfaction. Many people on here have wondered why disney doesn't post the times of arrival for the buses and that it can be frustrating to wait 20 minutes+ and be in the dark for most of it. With the PRT system, guests can be told when the next pod will arrive. Guests can then make a choice of what transportation choice they want with this new knowledge.

 

[nace888]

If Disney were to add PRTs, WHERE THE HECK WOULD THEY STORE THEM? Everything already goes conveniently back to SHOP, so to add a MASSIVE building ANYWHERE for the PRT makes no sense... It wouldn't be all that hard to add to the Monorail Barn, but to build a brand new building housing like 10 guideways and to make it sooo long, plus numerous maintenance bays for these things, to me it's simpler to just add another 4 trains, and 4 beams in the Monorail Shop.

To me it just seems too complicated. Plus have you seen those UGLY fences on either side of the guideways? EW! How could anyone take cool pictures from a convenient vehicle if there are chainlink fences in your way.

I think PRTs are good to use, but not at Disney.

 

[s8film40]

I don't see Disney getting rid of the option to have the buses, they carry alot of people at one time with free movement within the property. Also there are places where the buses make more sense to have. To won't be a way to have the prt system added to FW, it would take away from the charm of the place and most of the system would need to be on guideways, which will require a good amount of trees to be cut down. Now this will lessen the need of the bus system, which would also lower the cost for when disney needs to replace the current fleet to something more green, like hybrid bio-diesel with solar cells on the roof. This will have a two fold effect on operational costs, a prt system costs half what a bus fleet does. So if the prt system take away 1/3 of the current usage on the bus fleet, the operational cost for the prt system and bus system would be 17% less. Now when you can update the bus fleet to be more energy efficient, the operation costs drop even more. Just having a hybrid bus drops the operational cost by 15%, to an overall operational cost savings of 27%. Installing solar cells to run the a/c could save another 10%, which would decrease the overall costs by 33%. So at the end of the day disney would have a transportation system that is almost green, with a cost savings of 1/3 to run the buses and the prt.

Yeah guests will be angry if they have to wait for a prt and instead need to use a bus, but that happens now with the monorails and also with the boat fleet. On the same token, if guests are mad they aren't able to get an available pod, it means that they have adapted to this new system and it is their primary choice. Humans do not like change, anything that changes hearts and minds is a good thing.

This system can also be on the forefront of disney using better tech for guest satisfaction. Many people on here have wondered why disney doesn't post the times of arrival for the buses and that it can be frustrating to wait 20 minutes+ and be in the dark for most of it. With the PRT system, guests can be told when the next pod will arrive. Guests can then make a choice of what transportation choice they want with this new knowledge.

Fuel accounts for a very small fraction of the operating costs for buses, any added efficiencies in that area are negligible differences. Also solar power costs more not less. I'm not sure how you can consider this better tech, if it can't meet demands and buses have to be used in addition to it. Ofcourse people are going to realize that this is a more desirable form of transportation, it's direct and you get a private uncrowded vehicle. This essentially is the same as taxis right now you get a private ride right to where you want to go, the only thing that keeps it manageable is the fact that they charge fares keeping the supply vs. demand in check. That's probably the only way this PRT system like you proposed would actually be able to work you would have to charge extra for it to keep the demand down. Otherwise you would have mad dashes out of the parks right at closing to try to get on of the pod cars before everyone else.

Also from an efficiency point of view you will never fill these cars. Whether it be 5 or 10 passenger vehicles guests don't like to split up and without an extensive amount of grouping and that would be huge labor increase many of the seats in these vehicle will go empty.

 

[nace888]

Fuel accounts for a very small fraction of the operating costs for buses, any added efficiencies in that area are negligible differences. Also solar power costs more not less. I'm not sure how you can consider this better tech, if it can't meet demands and buses have to be used in addition to it. Ofcourse people are going to realize that this is a more desirable form of transportation, it's direct and you get a private uncrowded vehicle. This essentially is the same as taxis right now you get a private ride right to where you want to go, the only thing that keeps it manageable is the fact that they charge fares keeping the supply vs. demand in check. That's probably the only way this PRT system like you proposed would actually be able to work you would have to charge extra for it to keep the demand down. Otherwise you would have mad dashes out of the parks right at closing to try to get on of the pod cars before everyone else.

Also from an efficiency point of view you will never fill these cars. Whether it be 5 or 10 passenger vehicles guests don't like to split up and without an extensive amount of grouping and that would be huge labor increase many of the seats in these vehicle will go empty.

This is especially the case if there were large groups such as a Deaf Gathering, or a cheer competition, or even a field trip from school. Most of these WANT to stay together, and although some are required to stay together, if you have big groups, requesting a monorail car or two for the whole group is better than waiting on 6 pods to show up to shuttle all of them. It's all about MASS transit in ALMOST every case. If it were a small family to use these pods then yes, it would work, but for big groups, they might as well be sent to a monorail or the bus.

 

[flavious27]

If Disney were to add PRTs, WHERE THE HECK WOULD THEY STORE THEM? Everything already goes conveniently back to SHOP, so to add a MASSIVE building ANYWHERE for the PRT makes no sense... It wouldn't be all that hard to add to the Monorail Barn, but to build a brand new building housing like 10 guideways and to make it sooo long, plus numerous maintenance bays for these things, to me it's simpler to just add another 4 trains, and 4 beams in the Monorail Shop.

To me it just seems too complicated. Plus have you seen those UGLY fences on either side of the guideways? EW! How could anyone take cool pictures from a convenient vehicle if there are chainlink fences in your way.

I think PRTs are good to use, but not at Disney.

Most of the pods would be stored at the various stations that would be built. Along the paths other pods would be stored to be charged up and also waiting to be requested. You really would not need to have a large parking lot for them, regardless of how many would be in the system. Being that these pods are EVs, the maintenance for them is much less than the buses. Also if it would be so simple for disney to add another 4 beams to the shed, why didn't they add another two beams when the fleet was expanded to 12 monorail trains? Also you will need to build a new shop on the southern portion of the property if you add more monorail lines, disney can not keep closing down line and line to move a train from one spur to another.

The fences at heathrow was installed by heathrow, it is not required for all prt installs.

This is especially the case if there were large groups such as a Deaf Gathering, or a cheer competition, or even a field trip from school. Most of these WANT to stay together, and although some are required to stay together, if you have big groups, requesting a monorail car or two for the whole group is better than waiting on 6 pods to show up to shuttle all of them. It's all about MASS transit in ALMOST every case. If it were a small family to use these pods then yes, it would work, but for big groups, they might as well be sent to a monorail or the bus.

For larger groups, they are going to use buses until broken down to smaller groups. When my senior class went to wdw, we took buses into and out of the parks. When we went to MK we needed to take the ferry to stay in one group, even though we wanted to take the monorail. Once we were in our smaller groups though, we took whatever form of transportation we wanted. Also, the prt system would not be used at both ends of either monorail line, so a group is not going to wait for a monorail train instead of 6 pods because the destination is going to be different. Really the only groups that can not be broken up are the tour groups and you might as well want them to be on the buses while you are on a pod.

Fuel accounts for a very small fraction of the operating costs for buses, any added efficiencies in that area are negligible differences. Also solar power costs more not less. I'm not sure how you can consider this better tech, if it can't meet demands and buses have to be used in addition to it. Ofcourse people are going to realize that this is a more desirable form of transportation, it's direct and you get a private uncrowded vehicle. This essentially is the same as taxis right now you get a private ride right to where you want to go, the only thing that keeps it manageable is the fact that they charge fares keeping the supply vs. demand in check. That's probably the only way this PRT system like you proposed would actually be able to work you would have to charge extra for it to keep the demand down. Otherwise you would have mad dashes out of the parks right at closing to try to get on of the pod cars before everyone else.

Also from an efficiency point of view you will never fill these cars. Whether it be 5 or 10 passenger vehicles guests don't like to split up and without an extensive amount of grouping and that would be huge labor increase many of the seats in these vehicle will go empty.

In addition, a year-long evaluation from NREL indicates that operational costs for hybrids are 15
percent lower than conventional diesel buses

The solar panels on the buses would run the AC, which will increase fuel efficiency and lower operating costs.

If Disney is able to convert their used cooking oils to bio-diesel, that will lower operating costs for both the buses and food services.

If people are going to be fighting to use the system, there won't be many empty seats. Also the system would be able to balance the needs of the system by what size vehicles it is sending out to the stations. During the day the smaller pods would be in use, when parks are opening and closing the large pods would be used more.

 

[s8film40]

In addition, a year-long evaluation from NREL indicates that operational costs for hybrids are 15
percent lower than conventional diesel buses

The solar panels on the buses would run the AC, which will increase fuel efficiency and lower operating costs.

If Disney is able to convert their used cooking oils to bio-diesel, that will lower operating costs for both the buses and food services.

If people are going to be fighting to use the system, there won't be many empty seats. Also the system would be able to balance the needs of the system by what size vehicles it is sending out to the stations. During the day the smaller pods would be in use, when parks are opening and closing the large pods would be used more.

Like I said before solar panels increase costs not lower it. A typical solar panel costs more than the amount of fuel needed to generate the power equivalent to the solar panel for the life of the panel. If solar panels were an inexpensive way to get free energy they would be everywhere. Of course even if it were financially feasible it's not possible to run the AC off of them in Florida (assuming they would even generate that much power) on a crowded bus you still need AC when it is dark or cloudy.

As for the Pod cars creating a demand out of fear is not a positive. People wouldn't be fighting over them because they like them so much but rather because they know the system can't handle the demand and those who don't claim a pod quickly simply lose out. Again these cars will not be full just because people realize they are in high demand doesn't mean they will easily share their space. Not to mention grouping for this will be a nightmare and hugely labor intensive. It would be one thing to just group for the number of seats but you would have to group for the destination as well. I can already hear the cast members yelling now "is there a party of two going to Carribean Beach". Maybe you could build a single rider line for every destination:ROFLOL:
The other aspect of this is with theme parks you can really ruin them with a transportation system that can't meet it's demands. Guests will feel a need to skip that last show or leave halfway through the fireworks to try to get ahead of others so they don't miss out on the easier transportation.

This PRT system would be a ridiculous waste of money for Disney and would create far more problems than it would solve.

 

[freediverdude]

monorails + PRT

In my opinion I think monorails should connect the 4 parks and downtown Disney, with something like PRT running from each of those stations to the resorts/smaller destinations surrounding it. I don't think it's terribly difficult for someone to follow signs to make the transfers to get to their resort or whereever they are going. People already transfer from trams to either the ferry or monorail at MK, or from bus to bus at Ft. Wilderness, and most people seem to get where they are going, lol.

Of course Disney should keep a bus fleet (however smaller) as the backup plan. But buses should mainly be the backup plan, not the main transport. Unfortunately Disney should have been building out the transportation at the same time as they were building the resorts, so the costs would have been incremental along the way, but now they are left with a huge task to expand the transportation all at once.

But, it NEEDS to be done. Yes, it isn't a profit center and doesn't make money on its own. But this is something that is absolutely needed in order to facilitate a large vacation destination covering tens of square miles visited by tens of millions of people annually.

There's no excuse, for example, for someone to plunk down 10 grand for a vacation at Disney's Boardwalk Resort, only to have to squeeze onto a crowded bus at MK and stand and wait through 4 miserable bus stops to get back to the Boardwalk over an hour later. No excuse whatsoever. I hear the bus horror stories all the time. Disney pulls in beaucoup bucks from these parks and resorts. There needs to be an up to date and convenient transport system. Ok end of rant, proceed with the usual programming.

 

[jwm]

I am a huge fan of the monorails as a transit system, when & where appropriate. Like many of you, I have designed detailed systems of an expansion across WDW. In one scenario, I have 25 separate stations distributed across 4 "loops" (MK, EPCOT, Animal/Studios & Downtown/Vista. I have stops at each park, most resorts (shared or sole), both waterparks, Wide World of Sports & Downtown.

I left the TTC (TTC-1) unscathed and added a system-wide hub (TTC-2) just north of EPCOT as the links for the supplemental loops. I added sour lines and an additional maintenance facility that is accessible to the 3 loops not directly serviced by the MK maintenance facility north of the Contemporary.

I really wanted these scenarios to logical, efficient and sustainable. In reality, the cost of the additional infrastructure alone (footings, rails, electrical infrastructure, terminals) alone are near astronomical. The ongoing cost structure of maintenance, electrical load to the WDW grid and salaries would likely seem to doom this project, at least in the scope that my largest scenario has evolved into.

A smaller expansion from an expanded EPCOT terminal to just the 2 parks (Studios & Animal) would likely drop the project cost down by approximately 35-40%, purely my ‘guestimation’. I now believe that the limited expansion coupled with newer forms of mass transit utilizing existing proven and efficient technologies would seem to be the best compromise.

I believe that a dedicated series of paved lanes and/or roadways utilizing Articulated diesel-hybrid-electric Trolleybuses would greatly reduce the overcrowding of the present system. Depending on the location or application, the trolley-bus can be powered purely by bio-fuel or low sulfur diesel, a hybrid system with diesel or battery supplement (similar to the Chevrolet Volt powertrain) or by an overhead powered catenary system.

Depending on layout, each articulated trolley-bus can easily approximately 200 people. In addition to the economic benefits, the riders would benefit from increased seat allocation per route as well as reduced staging times from overcrowding. The combination of diesel power for the open areas separating the main facilities combined with either a Hybrid system or the overhead lines for use in or around terminals, resorts, parks, etc. Approximately 30% of the daily load would be by internal combustion. The power plant load settings could be designed that the trolley-bus is motivated through purely electrical means with the internal combustion as power generation as needed. With an appropriate battery pack, the use of the diesel engine could be minimized to the point of extreme uses such as high heat, extended traffic scenarios, etc. Overnight, central power regeneration stations could charge the fleet during “off-peak hours”.

The improvement in the cost-effectiveness of the this new transit system could easily justify the cost of additional dedicated motorways throughout the WDW resort (i.e. direct lines from the All-Star Resort facility to Animal Kingdom or Downtown Disney. If laid out correctly, the new motorways could actually add some scenic aspects to the journey instead of a purely urban bus trip. Obviously, it isn’t feasible to have dedicated routes or Trolleybus utilization through all areas of the Resort. However, there are obvious routes that have higher value to the guests. MK-BW, MK-DD, AK-BW, AK-DD, Vale Resorts to MK. Depending on the level of Monorail expansion, if ever, the routes could easily be modified for supplemental uses. Using the main roadways in concert with dedicated ‘short-cuts’ alone would be of value both to the infrastructure and guest.

The expected improved efficiency combined with increased load capacity per unit in conjunction with the reduction of harmful greenhouse emissions alone would help to reduce the amortized cost of the system.

 

[GeorgiaPinesRJB]

Sorry...that's what the title made me think of. I'll stop trolling now.

 

[jwm]

A point of clarification and/or supplement. I apologize for the length of these replies but there is quite a bit to say on this topic.
Using my uninformed and amateur vision, I foresee four basic scenarios for WDW in the future and I hope that the Imagineers are thinking 10-20 years in the future as well.
Option 1). Status Quo. This is the worst case scenario going forward. The present transportation system is adequate but with some severe restrictions and deficiencies. The Monorails are aging through constant use and the present Mark VI cars seem to be getting outdated. Also, the interior layout while offering a reasonable amount of seating seems like it could be redesigned. Maybe longitudinal benches or some other seating arrangement would be better.
In addition, the present bus system is overwhelmed on medium to high capacity days. People are forced to wait extended periods of time only to be bypassed by loaded busses. In addition, the present system of having routes crisscrossed bus routes across the Resort does offer some benefit; but, you just can’t please everyone all the time with the combined routes. They are long, slow, crowded and often not worth the headache.

Option 2). The massive overhaul of the WDW Resort Transit system. The addition of a central hub on the EPCOT loop just north of the parking lot to act a s a TTC Hub for additional loops. A new loop servicing the Animal Kingdom and Hollywood Studios Parks as well as all the resorts and facilities west of EPCOT. Another Loop for Downtown Disney, Resorts and facilities east of EPCOT. As I mentioned earlier, I could imagine 24-26 stations servicing almost all WDW locations with busses acting a mere supplement to locations cross-loop or out of the network. Obviously, the cost of building Option 4 would be prohibitive. In addition, while the capability of taking the Monorail throughout the Resort definitely has its appeal, the bottlenecks, loop transition and transfer times, in addition to the magnified cost of maintenance would rule this option out.

Now, here are two options that are more realistic and more obtainable.

Option 3). To add a third spur loop to the existing Monorail infrastructure. By expanding the present EPCOT Hub into a TTC-like transfer hub, a new loop that connects to Hollywood Studios and Animal Kingdom suddenly connects all four Parks with a high-capacity rapid transit system. In all likely-hood, a few additional stations could be added with reasonable cost at locations like the Boardwalk Resort area and Animal Kingdom Lodge. This would connect Parks areas with a large amount of primarily Deluxe accommodations. A further extension to Downtown Disney could increase the perceived value of the plan but including additional Resorts and/or other facilities would not be fiscally justified.

Within this option would be a variation of the Hub-and-Spoke transit mechanism. The buses would now be routed from their origins (i.e. Blizzard Beach, Art of Animation, etc) to the nearest Resort Transit Hub. There, riders would utilize the Monorails throughout the Resort utilizing transfers. This would likely cause bottlenecks at the EPCOT and MK TTC Hubs so additional throughput would need to be designed into the grand scheme of the plan.

A variation of this proposal would be the addition of high-capacity Trolleybuses to the Hub-and-Spoke design. By utilizing the more efficient and higher capacity Trolleybuses to feed the hubs, you could increase your Resort transit throughput all the while improving customer satisfaction (more seats, fewer buses bypassing stops) as well as utilizing the hybrid approach with bi-fuels, LNG, catenary overhead lines and/or expanded battery power packs per vehicle. As with Options 2-3, any systemic issues with the Monorail systems would cause massive delays throughout the Resort with little to no capability to recover from it. If the monorails have ongoing reliability issues, networks faults, etc, the network would be crippled.

Option 4). Utilize the above referenced Hybrid Trolleybuses as the new backbone for the majority of ridership throughout the Resort. The articulated vehicles can hold approximately 200 people both seated and standing. By having a higher number of vehicles with more seats would increase comfort for the riders while still maintaining the required passenger volume. These Trolleybuses can be adapted to WDW and use. Double-decking? Multiple articulations (2-3 cars per vehicle). Bio-diesel, LNG, large battery packs, overhead catenary power lines are all safe, efficient and reliable sources of power for these vehicles. Obviously, expanding the WDW power grid to incorporate one or multiple overnight charging and storage facilities near the geographical center of the WDW resort would be ideal. An independent and/or supplemental power source at this location with environmentally aware resources such as LNG powered gas turbines, solar, wind, geo-thermal, etc would complement the new system.

Within this scenario, there would also be Hub-and-Spoke theories utilized but this approach would be less affected by independent vehicle failures and/or incidents. By using a combination of main throughways (i.e. World Dr.) in addition to dedicated and restricted Trolleybus routes, the system would be very adaptable as well as nearly capable as Option 2 but at a huge cost savings, both invested and ongoing.

Ideally, A TTC hub created within the EPCOT loop north of the EPCOT main parking area and adjacent to World Dr would offer a centralized location from which the ‘spokes’ would radiate. Dedicated Trolleybuses from Magic Kingdom, Hollywood Studios and Animal Kingdom would congregate here. Having the MK visitors transit from Main Gate to TTC via the MK LOOP, transfer to the EPCOT loop only to have transfer again is most likely to intensive. EPCOT visitors would merely ride the EPCOT Loop north for minutes to reach the hub.

Each Park, major Resort area and common facilities would offer protected transit hubs for riders to wait and disembark. The vehicles from these stations would then feed to the centralized hub for connections while connecting through the nearest Park area. By minimizing stops throughout the transit, ride times would be minimized and disruptions would be reduced. For example, one Trolleybus route would originate at Animal Kingdom Lodge and then stop at Animal Kingdom Resort, Blizzard Beach, Coronado Springs and arrive at the WDW Transit Hub. Another route may start at Wide World of Sports, stop at Art of Animation and Pop-Century, Hollywood Studios, Caribbean Beach resort and continue on to the WDW Transit Hub.

By investing in this new ‘light transit’ component, the ongoing operating and maintenance costs will be less than the other proposed options. Also, higher capacity vehicles in equal or greater numbers the present surface option would result in more ‘seated’ and satisfied passengers. The eventual replacement of the existing buses with conventional hybrids still results in a more efficient and environmentally responsible transit system. The conventional buses would be utilized for cross-spoke transits as well as lower capacity routes (i.e. WDW Transit Hub to Miniature Golf, Downtown Disney area to Boardwalk area. The expandability and scalability of this option would result in a transit system that would satisfy both guests and management.

 

[FettFan]

Disney needs to work on the development of a Star Trek type of transporter system. There's your solution.

Disney teleportation?

Bad idea.

 

[Timon]

I think the novelty of WDW is the variety of Transportation available and how often there is more than one type of mode to a location such as Monorail, Bus, Ferryboat, Boat Launch and Car.

Most major mass transit systems have lines running in various directions and transfer stations. Adding a major Monorail line running East-West connecting major destinations and select luxury resorts. Buses and PRTs would collect lesser passenger areas to Monorail stations. This would reduce the number of buses while spreading crowds over all transportation options. The Epcot Line could be extended south to Celebration for a North - South line.

In Lake Buena Vista a PRT could connect the area resorts together. Another PRT could cover Hotel Plaza. At Downtown Disney could be an Inter-modal station for Monorail, PRT, Bus and Taxi. A water canal connection from the LBV resorts to Typhoon Lagoon would add value to the hotels and divide the crowds.

 

[FettFan]

I think the novelty of WDW is the variety of Transportation available and how often there is more than one type of mode to a location such as Monorail, Bus, Ferryboat, Boat Launch and Car.

Most major mass transit systems have lines running in various directions and transfer stations. Adding a major Monorail line running East-West connecting major destinations and select luxury resorts. Buses and PRTs would collect lesser passenger areas to Monorail stations. This would reduce the number of buses while spreading crowds over all transportation options. The Epcot Line could be extended south to Celebration for a North - South line.

In Lake Buena Vista a PRT could connect the area resorts together. Another PRT could cover Hotel Plaza. At Downtown Disney could be an Inter-modal station for Monorail, PRT, Bus and Taxi. A water canal connection from the LBV resorts to Typhoon Lagoon would add value to the hotels and divide the crowds.

Unless you are going to get rid of all the buses, you don't need anything quite this complex.

 

[Timon]

Unless you are going to get rid of all the buses, you don't need anything quite this complex.

It's too expensive to run Mass Transit everywhere. Monorails can run between where large numbers of people are to popular destinations. Buses Boats & Taxis are needed to service outlying areas, PRTs could cover some of these areas, too. With an East-West Monorail line, Disney could reduce the number of buses by finding a balance in their transportation mix. There isn't a single solution in mass transit, often it's a mix that is most efficient.

 

[G00fyDad]

The bottom line, and the one major obstacle that some have already pointed out for this extended monorail line, is that in the end Disney investors and board members will ask one ultimate question before doing anything.


"Will it make money for the company?"


If they cannot answer that with a "yes" then it is likely not going to happen. I would love to have an extended monorail, but where is the financial benefit? I think that the only reason WDW has a monorail is because Walt built one in DL.

 

[copcarguyp71]

I am going to go on record as saying I am one of the few who seem content with bus transportation. Now admittedly we go during off-peak season so I have not had the full-park experience. Although not exactly a "magical" experience the busses seem fine to me. I would rather see the money put INTO the parks either in terms of refurbishments or in a perfect world bringing EPCOT Center and the pavilions back to their former glory without the need for corporate sponsorships. Of course this is all hypothetical AS IF they were going to spend money on monorail/people mover expansions....which of course they will not. Just my two cents on things.

 

[Timon]

I would love to compare 20 years of Monorail costs vs 20 years of Bus costs. Factoring in a percentage of road maintenance, too for the buses. Costs for accidents and litigation. On the intangible side, guest complaints per thousand. Since none of the Mass Transit are profit centers the Monorail is a unique "differentiator" compared to the competition.

Transportation would be included for Disney Hotel guests and Day guest with a valid park ticket. Transportation could be bought certain stations like DTD and water parks. Non-Disney Hotels at LBV Hotel Plaza, Dolphin/Swan and Bonnet Creek resorts could bulk buy Transportation passes for their guests. Advertising hasn't played a big role with Disney Mass Transit but even limited to Disney products it could count as value in vehicles and stations.

Another option is to have RCID create a Mass Transit department instead of the WDC although this complicates operations.

 

[jwm]

I would like to propose a compromise that I believe seems to meld many of these suggestions into a cohesive, comprehensive, resilient and sustainable solution. Once again, this is my completely uninformed opinion. BTW, I dont work for WDW or any transit-related industry.



There are many interesting suggestions being posted here. The addition of a third Monorail line that would service the newer parks (AK & HS) and possibly service Boardwalk & Downtown would be ideal. I understand that the EPCOT monorail station was originally conceived to function as a transfer hub for future lines but I believe that the added infrastructure wouldn’t be acceptable by WDW management. I believe that the additional station structure, rail trusses over the EPCOT loop, increased space for shaded passenger staging areas as well as the need to re-route 10’s or possibly 100’s of bus routes directly into the EPCOT drop-off area in order to properly support the new transit system would force the Imagineers and upper management to reject this option. In Addition, the aesthetics of an enlarged station would probably be rejected as the view now coming into the Park would not be of Spaceship Earth but this new transit hub. Could they design a futuristic and beautiful facility that looks straight out of Disney’s original EPCOT theory? Sure. Would they? Probably not.



Now, if a hub that linked the EPCOT loop and a future AK-HS-BW-DD loop were created within the existing EPCOT loop on vacant land, a massive and efficient Resort-wide Transit Hub (Resort Transit Center ? RTC ?, anything better ?) could be created. A location that offers excellent access (World Dr.), large amounts of vacant land, geographical significance (almost centered on property) with the space to handle Monorail, Trolleybus, conventional bus, private vehicles for parking or drop-off, as well as expansion with a potential PRT addition as many of you have proposed. In addition, this area could function as the transit support facility; network power-gen, maintenance, storage, charging facilities, centralized Transit Operations Control Center. This location could house a centralized parking for day-visitors that may not be visiting a sole Park and leaving. Going to MK and then dinner at Cat Coura’s, no problem. This hub connects to all Monorail loops, Trolleybus paths as well as functioning as a bus stop and PRT access station. This would simplify the travel between these locations without the need to move cars and find parking in two separate lots.



The east-west monorail link is very alluring. There are footings and easements scattered about Lake Buena Vista and we have all seen the artist’s impressions with the monorail passing through the DD parking lot. I believe that this loop would have the ridership to justify the cost if it reached enough key locations. AKL, AK, Transit Hub, BW, HS, DD, and maybe a stop somewhere near Buena Vista to service the area DVC resorts. The marriage of Monorail conveyance that would service numerous Resorts, all Parks as well as secondary entertainment complexes would prove to extremely sellable to guests booking expensive vacations. Obviously, additional spur lines for casualty, maintenance and tug staging would be required. In addition, it would seem logical to have Monorail Maintenance facilities on each physical loop to reduce track-swapping and system disruptions. One large facility could probably service both the EPCOT loop as well as the proposed additional AK-HS-DD loop.



Next, by implementing the use of Hybrid Trolleybuses in a Hub-and-Spoke system originating at the Transit Hub, passenger throughput Resort-wide would be fast, comfortable and efficient. Theses vehicles would become the backbone of the Resort Transit System. The Trolleybuses would follow dedicated and isolated surface road-lanes and direct roadways built solely for their use. The benefit of traffic avoidance combined with minimal to no personal vehicle interactions would dramatically increase safety and reduce transit times. These ‘Transit-Roads’ would be multi-lane and may be restricted (RF gates?) and only accessible for Trolleybuses and PRT’s as deemed appropriate by system designers. This level of service is almost as adaptable as a simple bus system. Rescheduling, redirecting around incidents, modification of service are all easily handled by this flexible solution. As I mentioned earlier, the Trolleybus would offer a combination of higher-capacity, good transit speeds, increased passenger seat-miles with higher approval ratings as reduced operating and maintenance including lower fuel use and emissions discharge. Design the vehicles and stations correctly and you have the next ‘transit of the future’ for guests to rave about. With an appropriately sized fleet and engineered routes, these vehicles would provide high-capacity, smooth, quiet, efficient, comfortable, low-stress and attractive service? All these are transit systems goals.



Upgrading and reducing the number of the existing fleet of busses over time to Hybrid would gradually reduce operating costs as well as reducing the carbon footprint of this massive fleet. Reducing the number of buses would be accomplished through the Hub-and-Spoke Trolleybus system leaving more conventional and smaller buses to satisfy less congested and/or ‘cross-spoke’ routes (i.e. AKL - Blizzard Beach, HS - DD, FW – BW). Although similar to the Trolleybus, the standard bus is smaller, less efficient but more maneuverable. Buses would still serve needed to supplement the upgraded system but on a smaller scale than at present. Special events and/or extremely high demand would press supplemental buses into service as needed.



Finally, with the improved transit system throughput as laid out above, families and small groups still have individual and specific needs. They could utilize the new PRT system that would focus on point-to-point transits. To clarify, if the improved Transit system is now more satisfactory for users transiting throughout the Resort, then the supplemental transits such direct trips for families could now be serviced by PRT’s. Family ventures that previously would require the use of the existing bus service, taxis or rental cars would now be serviced by PRT. A family of 5 staying at the Wilderness Lodge that would like to goto the Boardwalk area for a night of dining and entertainment would now simply use the PRT system to/back. They would simply goto their Resort PRT access-point (PRT station ?, PRT Valets ?) and utilize the private and safe PRT vehicles. There would be PRT stations throughout the Resort at Resorts and secondary locations such as Downtown Disney. The family is comfortable knowing that there is a large fleet of PRTs moving constantly throughout the Resort to safely carry them to their destination. I don't believe that creating a dedicated track-based system would be financially or structurally beneficial. Any individual casualties would cripple this system in much the same way a out-of-service Monorail would inhibit that system. Would they follow the same dedicated and proprietary routes as Trolleybuses, maybe? Obviously, any major roadways would be programmed off-limits but secondary surface roads with the dedicated and isolated lanes not accessible by motor vehicle traffic would offer efficient pathways for the PRTs. In addition to the restricted lanes on the roadways, PRTs could utilize the system roadways that would be constructed throughout the Resort that are Transit only. Once again, does this system remove the need for buses and taxis, no. But it can dramatically reduce the need for private and commercial vehicles transiting on Resort roadways. Placing PRTs at Parks themselves may add unnecessary volume that would be best served by one of the high-capacity systems. This would need to be based on research based numbers. How many taxis are requested to Parks proper? If there is a need for individuals to return to their Resorts, do they really want to go through Transit transfers? Would direct PRT service from Park to Resort be warranted? Maybe but only if the infrastructure does not becoming unwieldy and cumbersome for the higher-capacity units.



Supplying such a large fleet of these PRT vehicles for free use may be too cost prohibitive for WDW to implement. It is reasonable to think that if the guests are able to utilize a private, safe and comfortable means of intra-resort transportation, then a reasonable surcharge to help alleviate system costs would be appropriate. If you are willing to pay for a rental car or taxis, then this new mechanism offered at a smaller and consistent rate would be acceptable to most families. For example, if a family would spend $12-15 each way for transport for 5 from AKL to Downtown Disney, then a standardized system-wide rate $5 is a bargain. No gouging, no haggling. Would intra-resort rates be necessary? Using the established major Park & Resort locations as guidelines, you could implement a fair and equitable rate structure (i.e. starting at staying within a region such as the Magic Kingdom; Magic Kingdom Park, Contemporary/Bay Lake, Wilderness Lodge, Fort Wilderness, Polynesian Resort, Grand Floridian Resort, Shades of Green, TTC) for $5 per PRT trip, regardless of passenger count up to the car capacity (4-6-8-10?). Transiting to another region (i.e. MK to DD) could cost $10 using the same passenger guidelines. Maybe, offereing the option of family plan for $10/day on your Resort RFID Key Card for unlimited use throughout your stay. That’s still a bargain that is also convenient, safe and efficient.



Obviously, the economics of the above system could be discussed endlessly. The likelihood of WDW, Inc. of ever implementing any or all of these suggestions is unlikely at best. Could someone else come up with a better suggestion that these, absolutely. Do I believe the above to be a good start to a sustainable transit system that could last decades, yes? Please feel free to comment, good or bad.

 

[flavious27]

The bottom line, and the one major obstacle that some have already pointed out for this extended monorail line, is that in the end Disney investors and board members will ask one ultimate question before doing anything.


"Will it make money for the company?"


If they cannot answer that with a "yes" then it is likely not going to happen. I would love to have an extended monorail, but where is the financial benefit? I think that the only reason WDW has a monorail is because Walt built one in DL.

Well a better infrastructure would allow the park to expand. Upgrading the transportation to be more efficient would mean a lower cost to operate.

I believe that a dedicated series of paved lanes and/or roadways utilizing Articulated diesel-hybrid-electric Trolleybuses would greatly reduce the overcrowding of the present system. Depending on the location or application, the trolley-bus can be powered purely by bio-fuel or low sulfur diesel, a hybrid system with diesel or battery supplement (similar to the Chevrolet Volt powertrain) or by an overhead powered catenary system.

Well this is basically what a PRT system would add and how it would constructed. They do not run on fossil fuels, they are EVs, but how they run is the same. All you need for s PRT system is just asphalt and bumpers along the sides. The system's biggest advantage is that it is on demand and customized to the guest. Also this system can handle different sized vehicles if needed.

As for the bus system, they should be switched out to be hybrids that can run on bio-diesel with solar panels on top and regeneration brakes. A vehicle with that many next generation technology can be subsidized by the manufacturer of the bus, the solar panels, the brakes, and also the USDOT. Disney can easily make the case that with the amount of guests that visit, the advertising would pay for itself when guests request these technologies in their personal vehicles and also from their local public transit agencies.