Rumor Higher Speed Rail from MCO to Disney World

[Ismael Flores]

What kills me is that people cite having to get to the airport early as a concern. The ONLY thing that slows me down at the airport is getting there early due to the transpiration to get there (the Uber, the tram, etc.). Once I'm physically in the airport, I just need 10 minutes at most. 5 minutes if I already know the airport well. With my Pre-Check its always a walk-on (don't you just love the Disney terms?), and even without Pre-Check it wouldn't be more than 10 minutes. If they're not doing pre-check it'll be dead anyway. And the reality is that rail has the same paradox of having to get there early due to unforeseen transportation issues are an airport. So to me, you still have to get to a flight or a train departure 45 minutes early. I don't consider the TSA to add any time to my plans at all.

you must not use LAX , that airport is a nightmare and just driving the min loop can take almost an hour to get from one terminal to the other.
I agree that using TSA-pre check is great but that doesn't work for every airline. If traveling on better serviced internationally owned airlines the option is mostly unavailable. When the option is available it does cut down on the wait, i love my global entry pass whenever i can use it but the travel time is an issue to and within the airport.
Many of times using rail has been a much better peace of mind even if it cost more but i believe the cost of use it mostly an issue here because of the limited availability. There must be a way to increase transportation via trains, monorails or high speed options and keep costs down. projects here in California have a high cost due to the extra earthquake requirements but it seems like most of the cost on projects goes to administration cost and constant delays. Most of my life i keep seeing revamped proposals for the LAX rehabilitation and everytime it is delayed or unapproved because of high costs of because a minority group of people are against it. Project is delayed and reworked or gets put on hold for the back and forth concerns and then gets propsoed again and at a higher cost and the whole cycle continues. years later project is still up in the air with only minor changes done to correct that airports aging infrastructure.

If other countries can build these things then we should be able to do it as well don't you think?

 

[Voxel]

I think another hassle factor is the inconveniences of loading and trying to maneuver luggage on and off a passenger train. Not much in the way of overhead or underseat room to stow things, too.

Actually it depends. Many Trains have Luggage racks for large luggage, esp trains from Airports

While the Over Head can fit up to a 25 inch Suitcase. I was actually impressed with how much personal luggage people go on the Trains in Japan..

you must not use LAX , that airport is a nightmare and just driving the min loop can take almost an hour to get from one terminal to the other.
I agree that using TSA-pre check is great but that doesn't work for every airline. If traveling on better serviced internationally owned airlines the option is mostly unavailable. When the option is available it does cut down on the wait, i love my global entry pass whenever i can use it but the travel time is an issue to and within the airport.
Many of times using rail has been a much better peace of mind even if it cost more but i beleiev the cost of use it mostly an issue here because of the limited availability. There must be a way to increase transportation via trains, monorails or high speed options and keep costs down. If other countries can do it then we should be able to do it as well don't you think?

I can get into the Terminal of Most Airports in about 5 to 10 minutes with TSA Pre-Check. Except LAX. Oh Goodness, that was terrible.


Also the environmental effect of Aircraft is being looked at and address in unique ways. One concept is to fly international jets in a V-Formation like Birds or military Jets. It's proven to improve fuel efficiency, but for commercial it's still in the research phase.

 

[Ismael Flores]

I think another hassle factor is the inconveniences of loading and trying to maneuver luggage on and off a passenger train. Not much in the way of overhead or underseat room to stow things, too.

You should see the train system in Norway. The Trains depart constantly from downtown Oslo to the airport. The trains are designed with luggage areas that are spacious and clean and You can get from the airport to Oslo in minutes and then transfer to any public transportation to anywhere in the city.

The metrolink train system here in LA area also has luggage areas as well as bicycle and surf board storage areas now. The problem is that the system is designed for commuters and not the overall population that can be able to use the trains as transport to the many airports in the area.

 

[Ismael Flores]

I can get into the Terminal of Most Airports in about 5 to 10 minutes with TSA Pre-Check. Except LAX. Oh Goodness, that was terrible.

LAX need to be demolished and rebuilt from scratch somewhere else if you ask me. LAX is an eyesore compared to other airports in the country and a blemish compared to airports around the world.

 

[Trackmaster]

you must not use LAX , that airport is a nightmare and just driving the min loop can take almost an hour to get from one terminal to the other.
I agree that using TSA-pre check is great but that doesn't work for every airline. If traveling on better serviced internationally owned airlines the option is mostly unavailable. When the option is available it does cut down on the wait, i love my global entry pass whenever i can use it but the travel time is an issue to and within the airport.
Many of times using rail has been a much better peace of mind even if it cost more but i believe the cost of use it mostly an issue here because of the limited availability. There must be a way to increase transportation via trains, monorails or high speed options and keep costs down. projects here in California have a high cost due to the extra earthquake requirements but it seems like most of the cost on projects goes to administration cost and constant delays. Most of my life i keep seeing revamped proposals for the LAX rehabilitation and everytime it is delayed or unapproved because of high costs of because a minority group of people are against it. Project is delayed and reworked or gets put on hold for the back and forth concerns and then gets propsoed again and at a higher cost and the whole cycle continues. years later project is still up in the air with only minor changes done to correct that airports aging infrastructure.

If other countries can build these things then we should be able to do it as well don't you think?

But other countries also have extensive subway and commuter rail systems in their major cities too. I just think that if we're going to pour billions of dollars into a system, it should go into one that would actually solve problems that matter, like cutting down rush hour traffic so that parents can get home to their kids an hour earlier, so that traffic fatalities will be drastically reduced, and so that economies can expand... not just so that you can get to Disney World 10 minutes faster. I don't see why Florida and the federal government should be pouring billions of dollars into something of limited use just to get people to Disney World a little faster.

But you raise a fair point about the airports: people who go into Orlando probably won't have pre-check, so they'll be stuck waiting in the 45-60 minute stand-by TSA lines. I've seen that Orlando's lines get crushed. To be honest, Florida would be better off to quadruple the size of MCO before they put a dime into the high speed rail. People can barely move in that airport and its so tiny.

 

[NobodyElse]

I think another hassle factor is the inconveniences of loading and trying to maneuver luggage on and off a passenger train. Not much in the way of overhead or underseat room to stow things, too.

Note also that many longer-range Amtrak trains (think Coast Starlight v. Pacific Surfliner) give you the option to check baggage, much like commercial aircraft.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

To be honest, Florida would be better off to quadruple the size of MCO before they put a dime into the high speed rail.

Why are you against rail transit? The above quote makes no sense at all. I personally love trains, but I’m not against the airport expansion at Orlando, I’m for it and I’m for more rail in Florida because the 2 will both compliment each other and serve the needs of state residents and tourists.

 

[lazyboy97o]

But other countries also have extensive subway and commuter rail systems in their major cities too. I just think that if we're going to pour billions of dollars into a system, it should go into one that would actually solve problems that matter, like cutting down rush hour traffic so that parents can get home to their kids an hour earlier, so that traffic fatalities will be drastically reduced, and so that economies can expand... not just so that you can get to Disney World 10 minutes faster. I don't see why Florida and the federal government should be pouring billions of dollars into something of limited use just to get people to Disney World a little faster.

But you raise a fair point about the airports: people who go into Orlando probably won't have pre-check, so they'll be stuck waiting in the 45-60 minute stand-by TSA lines. I've seen that Orlando's lines get crushed. To be honest, Florida would be better off to quadruple the size of MCO before they put a dime into the high speed rail. People can barely move in that airport and its so tiny.

This project isn’t focused on getting people to Walt Disney World. It’s a single station that the project does not in any way revolve around. It’s about moving people between population centers within the state. The local systems you want have to build out of a larger organization. Commuter transit to all of the poorly developed subdivision is the messy bus networks that already exist.

And once again, Brightline is not high speed rail.

 

[Ismael Flores]

But other countries also have extensive subway and commuter rail systems in their major cities too. I just think that if we're going to pour billions of dollars into a system, it should go into one that would actually solve problems that matter, like cutting down rush hour traffic so that parents can get home to their kids an hour earlier, so that traffic fatalities will be drastically reduced, and so that economies can expand... not just so that you can get to Disney World 10 minutes faster. I don't see why Florida and the federal government should be pouring billions of dollars into something of limited use just to get people to Disney World a little faster.

But you raise a fair point about the airports: people who go into Orlando probably won't have pre-check, so they'll be stuck waiting in the 45-60 minute stand-by TSA lines. I've seen that Orlando's lines get crushed. To be honest, Florida would be better off to quadruple the size of MCO before they put a dime into the high speed rail. People can barely move in that airport and its so tiny.

true about the rail system, i guess we need to see the numbers to fully understand the purpose of a rail system to for example WDW.
I believe WDW itself accounts for more than 60% of the tourism in Orlando. If the percentage number is correct can you imagine how many cars this system can remove from the busy highway 4. If planned properly this can be an incentive that not only benefits travelers but also locals that have to deal with tourism traffic.

 

[Hitmanatee]

Note that Disney is currently in negotiations with an Orlando-area developer on the sale of ~33 acres near the intersection of World Drive and I-4 for an "entertainment complex," which would be virtually adjacent to where the high-speed rail station was last slated to go eight years ago.

The plot thickens...

 

[JoeCamel]

Note that Disney is currently in negotiations with an Orlando-area developer on the sale of ~33 acres near the intersection of World Drive and I-4 for an "entertainment complex," which would be virtually adjacent to where the high-speed rail station was last slated to go eight years ago.

The plot thickens...

Great news! Now we know where Fun Spot is going......

 

[larryz]

On average, a pedestrian is killed by a car about every three days in South Florida.

And I bet he's getting pretty tired of it, too!

 

[NobodyElse]

You should see the train system in Norway. The Trains depart constantly from downtown Oslo to the airport. The trains are designed with luggage areas that are spacious and clean and You can get from the airport to Oslo in minutes and then transfer to any public transportation to anywhere in the city.

That dedicated airport train was probably the smoothest train ride I've ever had. A great experience.

 

[Trackmaster]

Why are you against rail transit? The above quote makes no sense at all. I personally love trains, but I’m not against the airport expansion at Orlando, I’m for it and I’m for more rail in Florida because the 2 will both compliment each other and serve the needs of state residents and tourists.

I'm not against rail transit. I've actually lived in cities where I used it as my primary mode of transportation, where I only used a car once every 2-3 months. I'm just saying that you need to use it in ways that yield the biggest benefit. It makes sense to move people within a 30 mile radius at most... preferably a 2-3 mile radius. It just stops making sense when the distances get to be too far, and when the trips are infrequent.

 

[Rich Brownn]

I'm not against rail transit. I've actually lived in cities where I used it as my primary mode of transportation, where I only used a car once every 2-3 months. I'm just saying that you need to use it in ways that yield the biggest benefit. It makes sense to move people within a 30 mile radius at most... preferably a 2-3 mile radius. It just stops making sense when the distances get to be too far, and when the trips are infrequent.

Its not just that - its changing people's mentality. When I lived in Miami I walked 2 blocks to Metrorail and took that to MetroMover which dropped me off at work. Total transit time - 30 minutes. One of my co-workers lived 3 houses down and drove, and it normally took her an hour due to traffic. When I asked why she drove instead of the train she said "Its more convenient".

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Its not just that - its changing people's mentality. When I lived in Miami I walked 2 blocks to Metrorail and took that to MetroMover which dropped me off at work. Total transit time - 30 minutes. One of my co-workers lived 3 houses down and drove, and it normally took her an hour due to traffic. When I asked why she drove instead of the train she said "Its more convenient".

When I was taking the subway/bus system on the daily in Boston, the ONLY time driving was more convenient was when I was hauling a ton of stuff (I'm talking armloads of stuff). Does it FEEL more convenient...sure - especially if you're unused to public transit. It's likely a comfort-zone thing too.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I'm just saying that you need to use it in ways that yield the biggest benefit. It makes sense to move people within a 30 mile radius at most... preferably a 2-3 mile radius. It just stops making sense when the distances get to be too far, and when the trips are infrequen

By what logic? You are talking about 2 completely different types of services. Commuter rail vs. intercity / regional rail (which is what brightline is) and long distance rail.

Long distance rail is a tricky thing, at some point flying will always beat long distance rail but long distance rail serves smaller towns and intermediate city centers. To me as long as people are using it, it’s a good transit system to have in place as it serves a unique need, however I can see the argument against it compared to the cost.

But regional rail like brightline, and the state funded corridors that run by Amtrak in California, Oregon, Illinois, Michigan, North Carolina and of course the north east.... those make total sense. The transit time is similar to driving, you avoid city center traffic, and you can relax. Plus this country should have public transit options in place for people that do not want, or can’t drive for various reasons.

You have failed to explain why regional rail like brightline does not make sense.

 

[DisneyCane]

When I was taking the subway/bus system on the daily in Boston, the ONLY time driving was more convenient was when I was hauling a ton of stuff (I'm talking armloads of stuff). Does it FEEL more convenient...sure - especially if you're unused to public transit. It's likely a comfort-zone thing too.

Mass transit (trains, busses, gondola, whatever) works great for daily commuting when there is a high population density. It does not work well in areas that are developed like Florida where the metropolitan areas are giant connected suburbs with some small downtown areas mixed in.

I went to the University of Miami. While in school, the Metrorail/Metromover was great because there was a Metrorail station across the street from Campus. For the general population, it is only convenient if you live within a couple of miles of a station and either work right near a station or work in downtown Miami. Ridership is relatively low because not enough people live close enough to a station.

If you built out the system to where it was convenient enough for high ridership, it would cost an insane amount of money to have a grid of tracks. You'd be better off actually paying people to carpool.

When I was in Manhattan for a week a few years ago, I took the subway everywhere because it was convenient. Living in South Florida I won't take mass transit anywhere because it is the opposite of convenient.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Ridership is relatively low because not enough people live close enough to a station.

69,000 a day is relatively low? (Metro rail)
33,000 a day for metromover. So that’s a combined 102,000 daily riders.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Mass transit (trains, busses, gondola, whatever) works great for daily commuting when there is a high population density. It does not work well in areas that are developed like Florida where the metropolitan areas are giant connected suburbs with some small downtown areas mixed in.

I went to the University of Miami. While in school, the Metrorail/Metromover was great because there was a Metrorail station across the street from Campus. For the general population, it is only convenient if you live within a couple of miles of a station and either work right near a station or work in downtown Miami. Ridership is relatively low because not enough people live close enough to a station.

If you built out the system to where it was convenient enough for high ridership, it would cost an insane amount of money to have a grid of tracks. You'd be better off actually paying people to carpool.

When I was in Manhattan for a week a few years ago, I took the subway everywhere because it was convenient. Living in South Florida I won't take mass transit anywhere because it is the opposite of convenient.

As I pointed out, it was very convenient for me. Of course, part of the idea was to get cars off the road going into downtown so some stations you can drive to and park (and its still faster during rush hour).

One of the other problems is, if you wait for the place to build up, there either no place left to run the rail (Hello, Metrorail phantom station!) or it becomes expensive to buy the land.

One of the smart things Brightline is doing is building condos, apartments, shop, etc around each station.