• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Rumor Higher Speed Rail from MCO to Disney World

biggy H

Well-Known Member
People also take into account the Enviromental effects when comparing the different modes of transport. An Electrified train will be more environmentally friendly than airplanes and driving (until electric cars take over) so people would use it over flying.
 

Movielover

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
People also take into account the Enviromental effects when comparing the different modes of transport. An Electrified train will be more environmentally friendly than airplanes and driving (until electric cars take over) so people would use it over flying.
And then when they realize that taking a train will take literally twice the amount of time as a airplane they will quickly go back to flying...
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
And then when they realize that taking a train will take literally twice the amount of time as a airplane they will quickly go back to flying...
Except you have to add in clearing security, getting baggage, finding parking..... Someone once worked out to fly from Boston to Washington vis the train it ended up actually faster to get to your destination by train
 

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
I actually take the train from Pittsburgh to Philly whenever I visit friends out there. A round trip flight is $300+ regardless of departure time compared to the $150ish for business class on Amtrak. $300+ is nuts when compared to the cost of flying to Orlando.

Sure the train is 7 hours but the fact I can walk around easily, have stupid huge seats, and really relax is great. No security and seeing things from a different point of view is nice too. They could shave 2 hours off if they built dedicated rail from Pitt to Harrisburg for passenger traffic instead of sharing freight rail. Harrisburg onwards, you're averaging 80mph with stretches of 110. Cruising through Amish country is great (and passing Strasburg RR is neat too).

Point is, if you can deal with the longer travel time then do it. You save some money and will arrive completely rested.

I'd still like to do Amtrak to Orlando one day, just 'cause.

Horseshoe curve...just because!
365142
 

NobodyElse

Well-Known Member
The link quotes "Jim Powell, co-inventor of the bullet train and current director of Maglev 2000", who is a great authority.

So for more context, in reference to the originally proposed California segment:
"Powell has tried out the same route for a possible "bullet train"-style maglev track, and says the the increased speed makes turns extremely difficult. At high speeds, even a gentle turn pulls passengers to the side. If the loop turns too sharply, the force will make passengers sick. Powell's research finds that passengers can withstand about a tenth of a G in lateral force before causing problems. At 600 mph, that gives the Hyperloop a turning radius of 40 miles. That’s an extremely straight line, and it means the project will likely have to travel through some populated areas."

What he's talking about is a (valid and relevant) comfort issue, at the top speed. Yes, for the longest segment at the highest speed, you would want the straightest route. But near end-points, at slower speeds tighter turn radii are possible.

Hyperloops can turn. Saying they can't is like saying Amtrak trains can't turn. For tighter turns, they slow down. Because of their slower speeds, and physical limitations their routes will generally allow for more and tighter turns than a hyperloop should have, but much wider turns than that of a Smartcar. It's all relative. Different modes of transportation are often more appropriate for different situations and applications than others. It's situational (as others have mentioned above).

(And sorry for my typo. A's = as. I wasn't smart enough to proof-read what my smart phone produced.) :)
 

TrainChasers

Well-Known Member
We are talking Miami, Tampa, Orlando here. Flying is never going to be “twice as fast.”

All forms of transit have pros and cons. Flying actually takes a long time on either end (not just the tsa stuff. Boarding is a long process on planes compared to trains, and then the shuttle to and from the gate to the runway and the wait for take-off or the wait to get into a gate.... obviously this time varies but all of that time adds up.) On a long cross country trip the fast speeds in the air make up for the time on the ground and in the terminal, but on a short trip other modes of transit can easily beat out air travel.

I’m not sure why anyone would be against more options for getting to Disney! Ha.
 

raymusiccity

Well-Known Member
The link quotes "Jim Powell, co-inventor of the bullet train and current director of Maglev 2000", who is a great authority.

So for more context, in reference to the originally proposed California segment:
"Powell has tried out the same route for a possible "bullet train"-style maglev track, and says the the increased speed makes turns extremely difficult. At high speeds, even a gentle turn pulls passengers to the side. If the loop turns too sharply, the force will make passengers sick. Powell's research finds that passengers can withstand about a tenth of a G in lateral force before causing problems. At 600 mph, that gives the Hyperloop a turning radius of 40 miles. That’s an extremely straight line, and it means the project will likely have to travel through some populated areas."

What he's talking about is a (valid and relevant) comfort issue, at the top speed. Yes, for the longest segment at the highest speed, you would want the straightest route. But near end-points, at slower speeds tighter turn radii are possible.

Hyperloops can turn. Saying they can't is like saying Amtrak trains can't turn. For tighter turns, they slow down. Because of their slower speeds, and physical limitations their routes will generally allow for more and tighter turns than a hyperloop should have, but much wider turns than that of a Smartcar. It's all relative. Different modes of transportation are often more appropriate for different situations and applications than others. It's situational (as others have mentioned above).

(And sorry for my typo. A's = as. I wasn't smart enough to proof-read what my smart phone produced.) :)
California is the absolute worst example to cite. Their segment turned into such a boondoggle that they've already pulled the plug!!:oops:
 

NobodyElse

Well-Known Member
California is the absolute worst example to cite. Their segment turned into such a boondoggle that they've already pulled the plug!!:oops:
Sorry. The California example I was referring to was the initial Musk hypothetical hyperloop between Los Angeles and San Francisco used for comparison to other modes of transportation. Not the existing public HSR project.
 

Trackmaster

Well-Known Member
While the tickets for a family will cost way more than driving I could see it being successful.

Especially if the build the Disney stop.

I've done day trips of 4 to 5 hours and it makes a SUPER long and stressful day for the driver.

Especially on FL roads as heading to Tampa you have the boring dangerous stretch of Allegator Ally. And heading to Orlando you have long boring stretches on the Turnpike.

I took the Amtrak to Orlando once since was meeting friends so could use there car for local travel and it was actually pretty nice. Arrived rested and relaxed.

4 hour away day trips mean leaving at like 5am and not getting home till like 2am.
Not exactly the ideal for families.
Yeah, but its going to cost billions of dollars. I know that its supposedly a private venture from Virgin, but transportation is never really completely private. Its a great public amenity, but rail is never really profitable from a private sector standpoint. Its going to end up being heavily subsidized by public money, and I'd rather not spend billions to subsidize trips to Disney. I'd rather subsidize commuter traffic to stimulate the economy and take the edge off of rush hour traffic. Its not really my problem, since I live in Tampa, and not Miami anymore, but Miami-Dade really needs some relief with its rush hour. But Tampa does too. Heck, any major city in the country needs some help with its rush hour.
 

Trackmaster

Well-Known Member
We are talking Miami, Tampa, Orlando here. Flying is never going to be “twice as fast.”

All forms of transit have pros and cons. Flying actually takes a long time on either end (not just the tsa stuff. Boarding is a long process on planes compared to trains, and then the shuttle to and from the gate to the runway and the wait for take-off or the wait to get into a gate.... obviously this time varies but all of that time adds up.) On a long cross country trip the fast speeds in the air make up for the time on the ground and in the terminal, but on a short trip other modes of transit can easily beat out air travel.

I’m not sure why anyone would be against more options for getting to Disney! Ha.
Honestly, I don't know why you wouldn't just drive from Miami to Disney. Leave Miami at 5:00 AM or earlier, your local roads, I-95, and the turnpike will be dead, and you'll still get to Disney by rope drop. A lot quicker than any train or plane could get you from a door to door standpoint. And if you're carting a family around, gas and tolls would be nothing compared to ticketing all the people in the car for a train or plane.
 

Thebolt

Active Member
The idea of getting a train direct to the Magic Kingdom, like in Paris or Hong Kong, appeals.
Unfortunately, that isn't what this is offering. This is a train station near the ESPN World of Sports.

The idea is not likely to take a significant segment of traffic onto property unless Disney pushes traffic that way.
If it comes with a new Monorail line to HS and Epcot.... it would be transformative. A new bus station and replacing Magical Express, again would push some traffic to the train station.
If (as seems likely) it remains a taxi/Uber connection from the station to the parks and hotels, then its going to be a small volume of customers who find that more convenient, mostly from the cities to the south on the train line.
 
Last edited:

TrainChasers

Well-Known Member
Honestly, I don't know why you wouldn't just drive from Miami to Disney. Leave Miami at 5:00 AM or earlier, your local roads, I-95, and the turnpike will be dead, and you'll still get to Disney by rope drop. A lot quicker than any train or plane could get you from a door to door standpoint. And if you're carting a family around, gas and tolls would be nothing compared to ticketing all the people in the car for a train or plane.
Well I wouldn’t because I’m typically coming from a cruise to Disney and don’t have a car with me. I don’t want to rent a car, so I choose to take the train. I’ve taken Amtrak from Miami and I’ve also taken brightline as far north as I could and transferred to Amtrak just for fun.

I also regularly take Amtrak to Anaheim when visiting Disneyland.

It seems strange to me how someone can’t understand that people might not want to use their chosen form of transit. I can understand why some people would prefer to fly, drive, or take red coach from Miami to Disney. They all provide good transit options and each have their pros and cons.

You are correct that any form of transportation is subsidized. Interstates, airports, etc. it’s part of living in a civilized country... our taxes help with infrastructure.
 
Last edited:

mm121

Well-Known Member
Honestly, I don't know why you wouldn't just drive from Miami to Disney. Leave Miami at 5:00 AM or earlier, your local roads, I-95, and the turnpike will be dead, and you'll still get to Disney by rope drop. A lot quicker than any train or plane could get you from a door to door standpoint. And if you're carting a family around, gas and tolls would be nothing compared to ticketing all the people in the car for a train or plane.
You must be driving way over the speed limit, from where I am in north Broward Google says 3 hours and 5 minutes, but we all know it always takes longer than what Google says.

The times I've done it it probably takes 4 hours or so as there's usually at least one or two quick stops involved. And that's still not allowing for any traffic jams or accidents.
 

TP2000

Well-Known Member
People also take into account the Enviromental effects when comparing the different modes of transport. An Electrified train will be more environmentally friendly than airplanes and driving (until electric cars take over) so people would use it over flying.
People actually don't do that. There might be a few, but they are a tiny, tiny minority of people living in this country.

I live in SoCal and am politically right of center, but I have dear friends up in Seattle who are left of center. Actually far left of center, as they are a lovely Lesbian couple who do all the right things politically and socially that a lovely Lesbian couple living in leftist Seattle are supposed to do. (We went to college together, and back in those ancient days a gay man like myself and a Lesbian like her had to stick together for safety) And twice a year they fly Alaska Airlines in First Class down to SoCal; either to Palm Springs Airport or to Orange County John Wayne Airport. For the sole reason to get out of the Seattle rain for a bit, to go out to dinner with me, go to Disneyland for a day or two, and just generally sit in the sun and dry out their Seattle rust. They use a huge amount of carbon to do this, but they don't care. It's worth it to get out of the Seattle rain for an upper-middle class Lesbian couple. They'd be ostracized for voting for Donald Trump like I did, but no one in their social circle bats an eye over them pumping tons of carbon into the atmosphere as they shoot themselves 1,500 miles through the stratosphere in a kerosene powered commercial jet twice a year for purely selfish reasons. Their leftist Seattle friends also jet off to Palm Springs, or Maui, or Cabo San Lucas every winter too. I can't blame them; I've lived in Seattle and February there is incredibly dreary.

The funny thing is that when I go up to visit them about once a year, I take the Amtrak Coast Starlight in the Sleeper Car, a 36 hour trip from LA to Seattle that has some of the most stunning views of any train journey in America. I can also get a decent steak in the Dining Car, and a passable and properly made Manhattan in the Lounge Car.


My visits up to Seattle as a Trump voter on the Coast Starlight are a fraction of the carbon use, even with my steak dinner and ham and eggs for breakfast, compared to what they rack up as Hillary voters on a 737 streaking thru the stratosphere to SoCal getting the vegetarian meal in First Class, but we don't mention that at dinner.

In short, not even my friends the Lesbian Hillary voters from Seattle care about the "environmental effects" of different modes of transport. It's just not a thing.
 
Last edited:

biggy H

Well-Known Member
People actually don't do that. There might be a few, but they are a tiny, tiny minority of people living in this country.
…….

….In short, not even my friends the Lesbian Hillary voters from Seattle care about the "environmental effects" of different modes of transport. It's just not a thing.
I sort of realise that at this moment in time but the US is way behind Europe for example in being environmental aware and will eventually catch on bigger numbers.
 
Top Bottom