Monorail Yellow Evacuation - Bus entrance to MK closed...detouring now (somewhere)

French Quarter · Oct 12, 2015

Rteetz said:
https://twitter.com/hintofspy/status/652974637467439109

Cool pic...

monothingie · Oct 12, 2015

ford91exploder said:
Deferred maintenance is the most expensive kind but it seems to be the only type WDW understands, In transit equipment many of the parts are good for a lifetime unless damaged others are 'wear' components which need to replaced/refurbished when they reach wear limit, Others are time limited components ie good for a guaranteed life of N hours,

No they generally don't turn into pumpkins at N+1 hours but they DO when someone tries to push them to N X 2 hours. there is always some margin built into a time limited component but it's not wise to push it too hard, Hoses are a fine example these break down with exposure to UV and ozone both of which are found in abundance in FL so they need scheduled replacement except for CM's working on the monorails we'll never know what failed but as an engineer I'd bet it's some time limited component which was pushed way over it's design lifetime as a 'cost saving' measure.

I agree with you about deferred maintenance and there is no doubt it is being done with the "cosmetic" end of things such as cleaning, A/C, etc. But if you have people (I am assuming this) doing routine inspections on equipment, the lifespan of such equipment becomes variable. Hydraulic fluid has a fixed lifespan, based on hours operated, that is something that can be quantified. Batteries have a variable lifespan which can swing in years based on use and temperature. Most often they will fail without warning. Hoses for example are one of those things in which the lifespan can't be quantified. You can have a 20 year hose be as solid as the day it was installed, but a 2 month hose fail because it wasn't coupled properly.

I am not trying to be an apologist here, but putting aside the cosmetic and comfort issues that is plaguing the trains, have there really been that many cases in which a train or the system has failed because of components breaking down? (Not including power failures, weather, etc.) Things happen, tires blow, batteries fail, but is there really a systematic problem of these trains breaking down given the amount of time in which they are in service? (Again this does not excuse cosmetic and comfort issues that are continuing major problems.)

ford91exploder · Oct 12, 2015

monothingie said:
I agree with you about deferred maintenance and there is no doubt it is being done with the "cosmetic" end of things such as cleaning, A/C, etc. But if you have people (I am assuming this) doing routine inspections on equipment, the lifespan of such equipment becomes variable. Hydraulic fluid has a fixed lifespan, based on hours operated, that is something that can be quantified. Batteries have a variable lifespan which can swing in years based on use and temperature. Most often they will fail without warning. Hoses for example are one of those things in which the lifespan can't be quantified. You can have a 20 year hose be as solid as the day it was installed, but a 2 month hose fail because it wasn't coupled properly.

I am not trying to be an apologist here, but putting aside the cosmetic and comfort issues that is plaguing the trains, have there really been that many cases in which a train or the system has failed because of components breaking down? (Not including power failures, weather, etc.) Things happen, tires blow, batteries fail, but is there really a systematic problem of these trains breaking down given the amount of time in which they are in service? (Again this does not excuse cosmetic and comfort issues that are continuing major problems.)

Batteries almost never fail without warning they will either fail quickly as part of the 'bathtub curve' or they fail because operating conditions are not correct 'over/under charge ambient temp too high/low' but with voltage measurements a battery will maintain a normal range of voltages and if it changes radically in either direction battery is about to fail.

Hoses especially hydraulic and coolant hoses fail from electrochemical degradation there is a reason the car makers want you to change out your hoses at 7 years - yes they can last for 20 years but sticking with the replacement interval is your best insurance against unexpected failure.

DW and I both have diesel pickup trucks and parts have recommended replacement intervals injectors at 200K etc. Yeah they will probably run 300K but why push your luck and strand yourself somewhere.

monothingie · Oct 12, 2015

ford91exploder said:
Batteries almost never fail without warning they will either fail quickly as part of the 'bathtub curve' or they fail because operating conditions are not correct 'over/under charge ambient temp too high/low' but with voltage measurements a battery will maintain a normal range of voltages and if it changes radically in either direction battery is about to fail.

Hoses especially hydraulic and coolant hoses fail from electrochemical degradation there is a reason the car makers want you to change out your hoses at 7 years - yes they can last for 20 years but sticking with the replacement interval is your best insurance against unexpected failure.

DW and I both have diesel pickup trucks and parts have recommended replacement intervals injectors at 200K etc. Yeah they will probably run 300K but why push your luck and strand yourself somewhere.

Playing devil's advocate, do you rebuild your pickup's engine every X miles or do you inspect and replace as needed? I know with my pickup (and my fire trucks) I have a maintenance schedule that goes over a schedule of replacement of "consumables" (tires, plugs, brakes) But the only way I'll know if my exhaust manifold is about ready to rust through is get under the engine and look. Unfortunately inspection and testing for somethings may not be the guaranteed way to prevent failure.

French Quarter · Oct 12, 2015

**Stacy** said:
If I were evacuated from the monorail, it would have been the most interesting/entertaining thing to happen to me at WDW since I rode TOT with the lights on from beginning to end(not as scary as riding Space Mountain with the lights on btw). I want to be evacuated from rides just to see something new. Yes, I've got a bad case Disney burnout.

I don't have Disney burnout but I am the weirdo that would find this exciting. But I'm an extremely go with the flow kind of person.

googilycub · Oct 12, 2015

lunchbox1175 said:
Define transportation industry....because most people don't drive 25 year old cars on a daily basis, cities don't use 25 year old buses, and airlines don't use 25 year old planes.

French Quarter · Oct 12, 2015

danlb_2000 said:
This sounds strangely familier....

http://www.doctordisney.com/2013/08...dom-pics-guests-not-evacuated-monorail-towed/

Wow...it's almost the exact same story!

French Quarter · Oct 12, 2015

Jahona said:
Jumping in kinda late the conversation. Just some posts about lifespan of vehicles by the FTA (Federal Transit Administration). The life expectancy for a bus as deemed by the FTA is 12 years. FTA's mandatory life expectancy for rail cars is 25 years. This goes for light rail and heavy rail. I'm not sure how a Monorail fits into this as it seems to be a bit of a grey space.

So it might be fair to say that these particular trains might be reaching the end of their lifespan.

French Quarter · Oct 12, 2015

Bob said:
There are all kinds of 25 year old planes out there flying. Pretty much any of the MD-80 variants used by American and Delta are that age, or older.

Average age of aircraft for the top 15 US air carriers.

Virgin America -- 5 years
Spirit Airlines -- 5.2 years
Republic Airways -- 5.5 years
JetBlue -- 7.4 years
Frontier Airlines -- 8.2 years
Alaska Air -- 9.6 years
Hawaiian Airlines -- 10 years
AirTran -- 10.9 years
SkyWest -- 11 years
Southwest Airlines -- 11.7 years
US Airways -- 12.1 years
American Airlines -- 13.6 years
United Airlines -- 13.6 years
Delta Air Lines -- 16.9 years
Allegiant Travel -- 22 years

Thank you for this. I was sure when that poster said that that they had to be wrong. Planes cost a fortune. I can't image in airlines are trading them in every few years...especially since they receive such good care.

Jahona · Oct 12, 2015

French Quarter said:
So it might be fair to say that these particular trains might be reaching the end of their lifespan.

If you go by FTA rulings, and include the Monorail as a light rail vehicle, then yes. Although as others have mentioned you could replace key components that are more likely at the end of their lifespan than the entire train.

rucifee · Oct 12, 2015

French Quarter said:
Thank you for this. I was sure when that poster said that that they had to be wrong. Planes cost a fortune. I can't image in airlines are trading them in every few years...especially since they receive such good care.

They don't get completely replaced but just about everything inside the shell of the plane does. That's not the case with the monorail based on the amount of gross we saw under the hood.

rucifee · Oct 12, 2015

Some of the nasty:

Bob · Oct 12, 2015

monothingie said:
@Bob, makes rare appearance steerage with useful consumer advice. If you want to live, don't fly Allegiant.

Had to get my quota filled. Otherwise @wdwmagic starts sending me loitering notices for spending 100% of my time in the Ivory Tower.

French Quarter said:
Thank you for this. I was sure when that poster said that that they had to be wrong. Planes cost a fortune. I can't image in airlines are trading them in every few years...especially since they receive such good care.

Planes do cost a fortune. That's why most of them are leased. US carriers aren't that old when you compare them to Eastern European, African and Southeast Asian airlines. The age of those aircraft is truly frightening.

007mickey · Oct 12, 2015

French Quarter said:
Cool pic...

View attachment 114298

So I assume that's my buddy's bus in the background. Still don't know if they finally drove off in the bus or did they evacuate them as well? I just don't know why they left guests sit for over 2 hours on a bus. Can't wait to hear the whole saga tomorrow when he returns.

Brad Bishop · Oct 12, 2015

mousehockey37 said:
Well, when there's little downtime and high demand to get guests from points A to B, you do what you can with what you've got and hope for the best (at least it seems that is what Disney is doing anyway). There was just an announcement this morning that the MK hours were extended until midnight tonight. Well, that extra time the park is open means the monorails will run longer and have less time for maintenance.

I disagree with this. It does mean that with today's situation. If you're keeping your parks open late and reducing the maintenance time on the current fleet (25yo) then it seems to me that you can alleviate that with:
- another maintenance shop / more bays
- more trains

Then you can take several off line while others run and the load on each train is reduced and the maintenance time on each train is increased - assuming you're paying a staff to take care of them.

NelsonRD · Oct 12, 2015

ford91exploder said:
I'd fly Allegiant before I would fly AA or United, Alliegiant's executives actually fly with the passengers on their planes not like AA/United where the executives fly on a fleet of private jets.

Yes I know a few of the HQ staff at Allegiant from my aviation days. In fact some of the executives may actually be FLYING the planes as reserve pilots. Yes it's a pilot's airline.

So that is it? A little simple little PR trick to show that they are 'saving money' because they are 'one of us'? You are not going to attract the best talent when potential employees find out their compensation package includes standby flights to attend meetings.

I do not care if they fly private jets, if the planes are save. Just like I don't care that the Doctor who saved my life drives a Tesla.

PhotoDave219 · Oct 12, 2015

googilycub said:
You would be wrong there.

Delta's MD 88 fleet, oldest delivered in 1987.
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...las&subtype=MD-88&fleetStatus=current&sort=dd

Delta's 767 fleet, oldest delivered in 1987.
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...g&subtype=767-300&fleetStatus=current&sort=dd

United's 747 fleet, oldest built in 1989
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...ufacturer=Boeing&type=747&fleetStatus=current

United's 757 fleet, oldest built in 1989
https://www.planespotters.net/production-list/search?fleet=United-Airlines&manufacturer=Boeing&type=757&fleetStatus=current

American's MD82 fleet, oldest built in 1986.
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...onnell-Douglas&type=MD-80&fleetStatus=current

American's 767 fleet, oldest delivered in 1987
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...ufacturer=Boeing&type=767&fleetStatus=current

Southwest's 737 fleet, oldest delivered in 1989
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...r=Boeing&type=737&fleetStatus=current&sort=dd

British Airway's 767 fleet, oldest from 1990.
https://www.planespotters.net/produ...ufacturer=Boeing&type=767&fleetStatus=current

This is just a sample of planes 25 years old and older flying for major airlines.

Those aren't monorails.

You're flying off topic.

ford91exploder · Oct 12, 2015

NelsonRD said:
So that is it? A little simple little PR trick to show that they are 'saving money' because they are 'one of us'? You are not going to attract the best talent when potential employees find out their compensation package includes standby flights to attend meetings.

I do not care if they fly private jets, if the planes are save. Just like I don't care that the Doctor who saved my life drives a Tesla.

You really don't get WHY they fly on their OWN flights, You might have heard about how Walt and Eisner both had their executives walk and work the park so they would experience the park from the CUSTOMER point of view. As to it being standby no they are listed as regular pax.

Amazingly it's only the airlines where the executives DONT FLY with the customers have that lovely 'cattle car' ambiance and nasty staff while the executives are whisked around in their luxury planes far removed from the actual customer experience.

ford91exploder · Oct 12, 2015

PhotoDave219 said:
Those aren't monorails.

You're flying off topic.

Not so much - some posters think it's the age (instead of lack of maintenance) as to why the monorails break down so frequently, Since the airlines can fly 25 y/o planes which look like they just rolled off the assembly line, and the NYC subway can run 54 year old cars every 5 minutes or so on the busiest subway system in the world the difference of course is proper maintenance and cleaning of the vehicles/

The point being made is it's the lack of MAINTENANCE which has made the WDW monorail into unreliable smelly wrecks, Not their age.

Andrew C · Oct 12, 2015

I don't think Allegiant is the best example right now to prove a point about the monorails. They have received a ton of bad press recently, with their "summer of emergency landings and mass cancellations". And, didn't one of their planes catch fire in Vegas yesterday? Yeah, definitely not the best example to prove a point.

I have never had a bad monorail experience, BUT, pictures and breakdowns don't lie...at the very least, the interiors seem like they need to be maintained better...again, at the very least.

Monorail Yellow Evacuation - Bus entrance to MK closed...detouring now (somewhere)

Well-Known Member

Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.

Resident Curmudgeon

Evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

B00b

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Resident Curmudgeon

Resident Curmudgeon

You know what's funny?