Front of Monorail

[Master Yoda]

My memory is a little foggy on this, but, didn't that happen because someone overrode the safety system?

It did, but it also appeared that overriding the safety system was a common thing when guests were still on the monorails.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Yes, but the accident occurred under normal conditions as well. Like I said previously, I do believe the decision was either dictated or strongly suggested by the federal government. I do not think Disney or their lawyers were up for the fight necessary to resume the perk of cab riding. Maybe the issue will be revisited following automation.

I am a believer in technology up to a point. The thought of an automated service has me feeling that I will have ridden my last monorail as soon as that happens (if it happens). I think humans are more reliable then transistors are. How many computers have you been through?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I am a believer in technology up to a point. The thought of an automated service has me feeling that I will have ridden my last monorail as soon as that happens (if it happens). I think humans are more reliable then transistors are. How many computers have you been through?

I'm using a six year old laptop right now and routinely use ones running Windows XP. Automated rail systems have a pretty good track record so far and computers also control most of the ride systems at Walt Disney World. I believe the Matterhorn was the first ride to utilize rudimentary computers for ride control.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I'm using a six year old laptop right now and routinely use ones running Windows XP. Automated rail systems have a pretty good track record so far and computers also control most of the ride systems at Walt Disney World. I believe the Matterhorn was the first ride to utilize rudimentary computers for ride control.

Pretty good is not good enough. I have never gotten on Test Track without remember how many times my computer has crashed and that isn't a word I like to think about when getting into a driverless car.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Pretty good is not good enough. I have never gotten on Test Track without remember how many times my computer has crashed and that isn't a word I like to think about when getting into a driverless car.

Yes, but you've only had a software crash, not a physical crash. Has there been a serious incident with the sort of systems that will automate the monorails? Walt Disney World is hardly paving a new road as many monorail systems are automated.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Yes, but you've only had a software crash, not a physical crash. Has there been a serious incident with the sort of systems that will automate the monorails? Walt Disney World is hardly paving a new road as many monorail systems are automated.

I'm sure your right, but, I'm not driving my computer. They are going to let their computer drive the Monorail and their computer also contains software.

Example... On my first ever flight, I flew from Montreal to Portugal. Somewhere shortly after the flight passed over the coast to the Atlantic Ocean, the pilot came wondering out and asked if it were alright to sit in the only empty seat left on the plane which was right next to me. I told him sure, content in the thought that the co-pilot was still up front. He fell asleep almost immediately. An hour or so later I looked up and the Co-pilot was standing there getting a cup of coffee from a particularly attractive stewardess (don't judge me, that's what they were called back then).

Anyway I felt compelled to ask him who the hell was flying this thing, to which the Co-Pilot replied. Don't worry it's on Auto Pilot. I got very indignant and told him to get his butt (filtered for family) back up there in case a buffalo or something jumps out in front of the plane. I wanted someone to be looking out the windshield.

The Pilot, in the meantime, stayed sound asleep and never awoke until the Co-Pilot slowed down the engines as we approached Portugal. The engines quieted down and he leaped up and glassy eyed looked around, muttered "Oh, crap", again filtered, and literally ran up to the cockpit. And that was with people operating, I don't think I can describe how I feel about complete hands off operation.

 

[s8film40]

I wouldn't be surprised is Disney's insurance carrier put the kibosh on the cockpit rides after the accident; otherwise they pull coverage.

Disney does not have an insurance carrier, they are self insured.

 

[s8film40]

It did, but it also appeared that overriding the safety system was a common thing when guests were still on the monorails.

Overriding the safety system was and is a common thing. It would be reasonable even if a little unnecessary to restrict riding in the front cab during certain periods of the day when trains are being added or removed from service regularly.

 

[englanddg]

Disney does not have an insurance carrier, they are self insured.

Well, sortof. They have two captive providers managed by an external company (Aon Insurance Managers). They, like many insurance setups, are based out of Vermont due to favorable state regulations.

One of the captives is Buena Vista Insurance, as I recall, which then shops reinsurance rates through Lloyds (among other reinsurance markets).

They certainly do have valid general liability insurance. It's just that it's through a sister / child company (hence the term..."self-insured", which is misleading.

Back in the 90s, I believe their excess was covered by Aetna, but I'm not sure that is the case any longer. They didn't use captives before 2002.

 

[s8film40]

Well, sortof. They have two captive providers managed by an external company (Aon Insurance Managers). They, like many insurance setups, are based out of Vermont due to favorable state regulations.

One of the captives is Buena Vista Insurance, as I recall, which then shops reinsurance rates through Lloyds (among other reinsurance markets).

They certainly do have valid general liability insurance. It's just that it's through a sister / child company (hence the term..."self-insured", which is misleading.

Back in the 90s, I believe their excess was covered by Aetna, but I'm not sure that is the case any longer. They didn't use captives before 2002.

Yeah basically if your in the high end theme park business you don't want an insurance company telling you what you can and cannot do, hence these sort of set ups. Great to know the details of just how it works, Thanks!

 

[englanddg]

Yeah basically if your in the high end theme park business you don't want an insurance company telling you what you can and cannot do, hence these sort of set ups. Great to know the details of just how it works, Thanks!

Well, it's more to control premiums. They handle the insurance for all the divisions, not just the theme parks. I believe that's why they spun off another captive after Buena Vista, so they could isolate the risks between certain business units (like ESPN and ABC) vs the higher liabilities involved with Theme Park and Resort operations.

But, I don't know that for certain. It's just that a setup like that would make sense when they start marketing the risk to the reinsurance market (aka...Lloyds or Factory Mutual, etc...etc...).

Captives have a mixed vibe in the insurance market, because the risk is essentially (though not on paper) tied to the parent company (in this case, DIS), which means that losses have the potential to leak through to investors.

What happens is actually good for Disney, as the sister company pays the claim, and then writes it off on their taxes. If they used a third party non-captive insurer, then the tax write off wouldn't benefit any of the Disney organizations, rather it would be the non-captive insurer.

But, if there was a series of large catastrophic losses, it could prove rather difficult for Disney to keep everything isolated from the parent company. So, that's why some investors / risk managers, don't recommend it. However, when you are dealing with numbers the size of Disney's numbers, it's hard to overlook the benefits, especially with how rates skyrocketed after 9/11 (it's no coincidence that Disney set up their first captive in early 2002!).

 

[thomas998]

Do they ever have any cause to back up monorails or have more than 1 train on the track in DL? If they don't then collision is not a concern.

The trains in DL are also different (DL has a Mark 7, WDW uses a Mark 6) and they may have some form of impact protection in the new design.

They run multiple trains on the same loop at the same time... last time we were there they had the orange and purple because they told my kids they should wait for the purple because the air conditioner wasn't working in the orange.... I've also heard that sometimes they run even more at the same time. And yes they can backup. They aren't going to have anymore crash protection than the ones in WDW, these are all really just fancy above ground subways and as such they don't design them to have crumple zones like cars.

 

[Rob562]

Pretty good is not good enough. I have never gotten on Test Track without remember how many times my computer has crashed and that isn't a word I like to think about when getting into a driverless car.

You make it sound like amusement park rides are controlled by Windows...

Also, the information that's out there says that the automated monorails will still have an on-board CM, but their job will be to push a Dispatch button to tell the system they're ready to go, and to monitor for problems. They won't have direct control over the speed or motion of the train.

-Rob

 

[englanddg]

You make it sound like amusement park rides are controlled by Windows...

-Rob

Well....

I'll say this, there are a lot of kiosks at Disney that run it. I've seen BSODs and windows errors quite a few times over the years.

 

[Rob562]

Well....

I'll say this, there are a lot of kiosks at Disney that run it. I've seen BSODs and windows errors quite a few times over the years.

Kiosks, yes. But most automated amusement park rides (and most automated machinery in general) use programmable logic controllers to monitor inputs and control vehicles. Those are essentially hard-coded controllers that run things.

-Rob

 

[englanddg]

Kiosks, yes. But most automated amusement park rides (and most automated machinery in general) use programmable logic controllers to monitor inputs and control vehicles. Those are essentially hard-coded controllers that run things.

-Rob

I know, I was just being facetious.

 

[Rob562]

For those who are curious about PLCs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmable_logic_controller

-Rob

 

[s8film40]

The company installing the automation system is the same as the ones in Vegas. Those trains run very efficiently and have had no issues with the automation. They don't have anyone at all on board monitoring their trains.