connect the Animal Kingdom by monorail

[righttrack]

Because buses are scalable. They are totally demand-based whereas a monorail train would be running constantly with a fixed number of passengers each way for a long distance. Monorails are at WDW because they are cool more than how great they actually move people. The short hops aren't bad. Surely, I prefer a monorail as a passenger, but they can fill/empty a park a lot quicker by sending a bunch of buses somewhere.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Nothing will thin the crowds except meaningful expansion.

 

[Ralphlaw]

I still never understood why they never built a monorail system near Animal Kingdom. Epcot,Magic Kingdom, and Hollywood Studios have them and much quicker compared to bus rides which takes minutes.

To summarize:
1. Ridiculously expensive to build.
2. Ridiculously expensive to operate.
3. When they go down, buses are needed to bypass them. (You can't bypass a broken monorail on that same monorail line.)
4. Most of us get our monorail fix at Epcot and Magic Kingdom.
5. For the same money, a really cool additional attraction could be built somewhere.
6. Buses, although not as fun, are far more flexible to deploy for openings/closings, etc . . .
7. Monorails were super cool in the 70's; not so much now.

I hope this is helpful.

 

[Brer Panther]

I'm curious. Why DIDN'T Disney make a monorail track for the Studios and Animal Kingdom when they were built? I mean, they built one for EPCOT...

 

[sshindel]

I'm curious. Why DIDN'T Disney make a monorail track for the Studios and Animal Kingdom when they were built? I mean, they built one for EPCOT...

Because building a monorail is

 

[rkelly42]

They will never construct a monorail to HS or AK due to cost. Why would they when buses do the job they need them to do. I would like to see something set up between AKL and AK, but do not think that would ever happen either.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Although cost is certainly a major consideration, it is not the real reason, in my opinion. The real reason has to do with liability. Highway in the sky is a cool pet name, but, with that comes the constant possibility that a train could get stranded on those rails for an extended period of time. There is no way off in case of a fire and even when the rescue shows up, it is a wild experience taking people off it. Just think about how high in the air you are when you leave the Contemporary in route to MK. It was a wonderful idea and I love the things, but, I'm just happy that they haven't decided to make them history.

 

[fireworksandfairytales]

I agree with all the points made here (especially because I would rather see new attractions than an added form of transportation when busses work just fine) and also a monorail absolutely wouldn't fit in with DAK's theme at all? I understand it would be outside of the park gates, but you would still undoubtedly see it going by from parts of the park.

 

[wm49rs]

Although cost is certainly a major consideration, it is not the real reason, in my opinion. The real reason has to do with liability. Highway in the sky is a cool pet name, but, with that comes the constant possibility that a train could get stranded on those rails for an extended period of time. There is no way off in case of a fire and even when the rescue shows up, it is a wild experience taking people off it. Just think about how high in the air you are when you leave the Contemporary in route to MK. It was a wonderful idea and I love the things, but, I'm just happy that they haven't decided to make them history.

No, it's money....

 

[WondersOfLife]

I feel like more monorail transportation will just make Hollywood Studios and Animal Kingdom more crowded... Animal Kingdom is like the last theme park on earth that I can get away from the crowds after 4:30

 

[POLY LOVER]

Although cost is certainly a major consideration, it is not the real reason, in my opinion. The real reason has to do with liability. Highway in the sky is a cool pet name, but, with that comes the constant possibility that a train could get stranded on those rails for an extended period of time. There is no way off in case of a fire and even when the rescue shows up, it is a wild experience taking people off it. Just think about how high in the air you are when you leave the Contemporary in route to MK. It was a wonderful idea and I love the things, but, I'm just happy that they haven't decided to make them history.

Isn't there liability and accident potential with every bus that runs the highways at Disney? I bet there have been more law suits resulting from bus accidents than monorails. There has been all this talk about reducing crowds I just think AK is a park that could use some easy access too. I bet it's the least hopped park in Disney. When I want to go to the AKL I drive. I just find AK a difficult park to get to and hop out of all the others. I think the times quoted here Don't factor in waiting for the bus to arrive. No way it's 21 minutes counting the bus wait times.

 

[French Quarter]

Monorails, for whatever reason, are now ridiculously expensive to build and operate. I like them, but I get my monorail fix at MK and Epcot. Plus, when one goes down, there's no easy bypass. Buses are brought in. With the need for that redundancy, spending the millions for an extra monorail makes little financial sense. For the same money, they could erect a new e-ticket attraction somewhere.

I agree with this and the others who talk about the huge cost of building monorails. I highly doubt that they will ever build them to the other 2 parks but I agree that it would be very convenient.

 

[French Quarter]

They will never construct a monorail to HS or AK due to cost. Why would they when buses do the job they need them to do. I would like to see something set up between AKL and AK, but do not think that would ever happen either.

I think it is much more likely that they will build something between AK and AKL. And I think the likelihood will increase after this big upgrade to the park. They could easily do some sort of wildlife tram thing.

 

[French Quarter]

Although cost is certainly a major consideration, it is not the real reason, in my opinion. The real reason has to do with liability. Highway in the sky is a cool pet name, but, with that comes the constant possibility that a train could get stranded on those rails for an extended period of time. There is no way off in case of a fire and even when the rescue shows up, it is a wild experience taking people off it. Just think about how high in the air you are when you leave the Contemporary in route to MK. It was a wonderful idea and I love the things, but, I'm just happy that they haven't decided to make them history.

I don't think you are accurate about evacuating a monorail. It's something that comes up so rarely that I'm not sure how this is done. But in the case of emergency, I am willing to bet that there is a system in place and that you wouldn't be stranded up in the air. Maybe someone else could clarify what the protocol is, for curiosity's sake?

 

[Goofyernmost]

No, it's money....

Yup, and everything I just mentioned is about the money as well. The insurance, that need for more mostly idle rescue and so on. It just isn't worth the money. They have a fairly extensive Monorail system in place where everyone can get their monorail fix. The question should be... why don't they have a light rail system set up by now. That could work in the system as well with a lot less costs, but, not cheaper then using buses, so that is what it will be for the foreseeable future.

 

[wm49rs]

Yup, and everything I just mentioned is about the money as well. The insurance, that need for more mostly idle rescue and so on. It just isn't worth the money. They have a fairly extensive Monorail system in place where everyone can get their monorail fix. The question should be... why don't they have a light rail system set up by now. That could work in the system as well with a lot less costs, but, not cheaper then using buses, so that is what it will be for the foreseeable future.

And yet they're still running an even-older system on a daily basis. So liability is not at the top of their concern list....

 

[Goofyernmost]

Isn't there liability and accident potential with every bus that runs the highways at Disney? I bet there have been more law suits resulting from bus accidents than monorails. There has been all this talk about reducing crowds I just think AK is a park that could use some easy access too. I bet it's the least hopped park in Disney. When I want to go to the AKL I drive. I just find AK a difficult park to get to and hop out of all the others. I think the times quoted here Don't factor in waiting for the bus to arrive. No way it's 21 minutes counting the bus wait times.

Most bus problems are minor in nature. They usually don't go fast enough to be any major disaster and from little I have read about cars vs. buses incidents most of them have not been the bus drives fault. Someone stranded or dying in a monorail, which as far as guests are concerned, hasn't happened yet, but, as long as there is a possibility the insurance premiums are going to be high and the payout is going to be huge.

I, personally, do not find going to AK to be any hassle at all. It's a quick trip on World Drive and an even quicker jump from World Drive to AK. All the rest of the stuff is going to happen at any park. You have to get to the bus or the parking area and they are all relatively in the same area with the exception of MK. So whether you are taking a bus and waiting or riding a tram to your car there really isn't a huge difference in time in my mind. I hop all those parks, and never even give it a thought. I just do it and have never felt that I missed out on anything by doing so.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I don't think you are accurate about evacuating a monorail. It's something that comes up so rarely that I'm not sure how this is done. But in the case of emergency, I am willing to bet that there is a system in place and that you wouldn't be stranded up in the air. Maybe someone else could clarify what the protocol is, for curiosity's sake?

It depends on the situation, but, if they do indeed have to evacuate a monorail car the only what it is done is with a cherry picker type of lift truck, fire truck or other vehicle with an extendable arm. Most of the time they do not have to do that because other then no AC sitting there isn't creating any physical danger and they wait for the tow vehicle to get to them and then slowly pull them to the nearest platform. Municipal monorails like the one in Vegas has a side mounted sidewalk on the monorail tracks so if people have to get out they can walk to the nearest ladder or staircase and get back to ground level. WDW does not have that, probably because of the fact that it isn't real attractive.

 

[Goofyernmost]

And yet they're still running an even-older system on a daily basis. So liability is not at the top of their concern list....

Oh, I think it is and it is a primary reason why no future lines were added even back when it was more affordable. It is represented in a huge manner with the Epcot connection and as an example of possible future mode of transportation it has all that is needed. Cost or no cost, it isn't the best way to transport people anymore and it probably never really was. The monorail has come to identify WDW in such a strong way that getting rid of what they already have would be like tearing down the castle and putting up a Wendy's. So they are stuck with it, at least for now.

 

[MikeTaylorSound]

The best/shortest way to do this (a form of new construction and transportation) from EPCOT to Animal Kingdom would be starting it by the buses and ending at a new, second location at the rear of Rafiki's Planet Watch.