Huge Monorail expansion?

[cloudboy]

What? You don't think we should have a giant undeground tunnel built all around the resort that costs absurd amounts of money with millions in overruns and disrupts everything for ten years which in the end fails to fix the problem? Oh, did I sound a little bitter there?

Hey, at least it was entertaining for us Bostonians to watch.

Why would you need four tracks from Epcot?

 

[tomm4004]

Hey, at least it was entertaining for us Bostonians to watch.

Just curious. I visited Boston in June 1997 and saw the massive construction project downtown - putting in a tunnel, right? How's that going? Is it finished yet?

 

[marni1971]

And get S.I.R. to operate them? :lol:

 

[WDWFREAK53]

Originally posted by tomm4004
Just curious. I visited Boston in June 1997 and saw the massive construction project downtown - putting in a tunnel, right? How's that going? Is it finished yet?

That "huge massive construction project" is known as "The Big Dig". It's purpose was to remove all the elevated roadways and put them (in essence) under the city...through means of a huge tunnel. Also, a beautiful bridge was put up at the end of the tunnel that really adds to the look and feel of the city. Is it finished yet? No...not quite...but things are moving along rather quickly now (believe it or not). The Northbound and Southbound tunnels have opened up and the bridge has opened...the major part now...is removing the temporary roads that they put up and ripping down the old elevated expressway.

Question: Has it relieved the traffic problem?
Answer: :zipit:

Question: Can you see the traffic problem?
Answer: Nope...not from the traffic copters

Here's the bridge.

 

[cloudboy]

Warning - major thread drift

What happened to the lights on the bridge? I finally rode by on the T at night last week, and there were no more lights on it (the big blue ones). Where'd they go?

And just wait until the traffic backs up onto the surface roads. THEN you will see it!

And to tie this back in to Disney - the whole thing with the monorail, what if they used it as a giant bilboard type contstruction. Many sities use something like the bridge, or Calatrava's Art Museum in Millwaukee, as a giant symbol. Eisner has already tried doing this with some of the non-park buildings like Tem Disney and the Swan and Dolphin.

The monorail is often percieved as a theme park type ride. Wouldn't a signature engineering project give it a little more "legitimacy" as a transportation device?

 

[ArchiDanDisney]

Originally posted by imagineer99
This is an urban legend that boat/bus drivers love to tell guests. It is/was never true.

Never ever have I told my guest that. I tell them the exact opposite, I've done the research, its in the other thread, 100k's of dollars would be lost a night if that was the case. Swan and Dolphin with monorails destroying the form, unthinkable, Michael Graves would never allow it.

 

[imagineer99]

Originally posted by ArchiDanDisney
Never ever have I told my guest that. I tell them the exact opposite, I've done the research, its in the other thread, 100k's of dollars would be lost a night if that was the case. Swan and Dolphin with monorails destroying the form, unthinkable, Michael Graves would never allow it.

I'm not referring to you personally.
However, I have had at least three boat captains on the friendships announce this "fact" to guests.

I had a bus driver say it once too.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I was told something like that when I did the firework cruise. The driver did say he was sceptical but thats what hed been told. he did say that he had seen a survey being carried out about pylon sites. this had happened a few times in his tenure but it always came to nothing.

 

[Aw_phooey!]

Even if WDI are planning, it will sit yellow lighted for years (maybe it already has) due to one thing. Money.

but right now we are talking billions of dollars worth of infrastructure.

to be sure. it'd take money. however, the cost of monorail construction (not maintainence) of the type already in place at WDW runs about $68 million/mile. this is one of the MOST expensive monorail designs (cheaper versions run about $6-7 million/mile), but still far less than some forms of public transit -- subway construction often costs $250 million/mile (that figure is based on $50,000/ft estimate...no lie).

this has surely been analyzed extensively elsewhere, but my guess it the original concept for the monorail had more to do with image, guest comfort, futuristic appeal, etc. than transportation efficiency. any cost of an expansion now would need to be justified not just by the added benefit to moving people, but also to any effects (positive or other) on guest experience. my guess is additional monorails would add marginal positive effects for guests, thus making the monorail a bad investment.

there...hopefully i've taken the full fun and romance out of the monorail debate with my antiseptic over-analysis. :animwink:

 

[cloudboy]

my guess is additional monorails would add marginal positive effects for guests, thus making the monorail a bad investment.

Really. You think Monorail will not be as attractive to guests as busses or light rail? I would think the opposite - monorails appear cleaner and quieter. Certainly much more so than busses.

There are some light rail systems that may be more attractive looking, but many of those heve never been run in the US. Of course at Disney it would be an independant system and not under control of the FRA regulations, but would it be likely any of those companies would bring those systems over here? And even then, is light rail any more attractive or futuristic than monorail?

 

[Aw_phooey!]

Really. You think Monorail will not be as attractive to guests as busses or light rail? I would think the opposite - monorails appear cleaner and quieter. Certainly much more so than busses.

well...i did say "marginal".

i DO think monorail had less noise, less pollution, more pleasant ride, etc. (save the unsightly concrete track coursing through the property). if i had a preference as a customer, i'd take the monorail. if i'm tranportation consultant recommending ways to ease congestion, move people, etc., i'd say a fixed monorail line offers little to no flexibility vs. busses. SO...if The Company wanted to run more monorails, it'd do so NOT b/c of increased tranport benefits, but b/c they believed the monorail offered some latent aesthetic benefits (which they certainly do)...but i simply don't think those benefits are worth the cost of extending the monorail.

also, "attractive" to guests the first time they ride it no doubt. but how about the guests leaving at 11:00 pm with 3 kids in tow heading for their hotel. "we're oh so tired, mummy. OH NO! the monorail doesn't service our hotel!" meaning they have to take the monorail to a "hub" then tranfer to a bus, etc.....you see where i'm headed with that. just not as flexible when you need it to be.

 

[Bill]

I think the monorail would be an EXCELLENT investment if it serviced the other Deluxe Resorts... or even just connected them to a WEDway. The resorts could raise the prices a bit and still have the same amount of occoupancy as they do now. Plus many busses and drivers could be removed. Anyone realize you'd need 5 busses just to replace one monorail? That's a big number, trust me. 300-372 If the monorails were automated, then we could even eliminate more CMs. Sure, we'd still have to have them at the stations, but that's still not as many CMs as we need now for the current fleet. Plus gas prices would be gone. Not as much congestion. It makes a lot of sense.

 

[Invero]

Originally posted by Bill
Anyone realize you'd need 5 busses just to replace one monorail?

A more accurate number would be 3.

 

[cloudboy]

Depends on the bus. I would say it's more like four (90 to a bus on average crush load). But that is just winging it. You also have to figure that a monorail vehicle - well, maybe NOT the Bombardier, but the Hitachi and Mitsubishi, would probably live for about as long as 2 busses. So really you are talking 8 busses.

 

[Bill]

If a bus's crush load is 90, and the monorail's crush load is 372, you'd need 5 busses.

 

[Bill]

Originally posted by cloudboy
Depends on the bus. I would say it's more like four (90 to a bus on average crush load). But that is just winging it. You also have to figure that a monorail vehicle - well, maybe NOT the Bombardier, but the Hitachi and Mitsubishi, would probably live for about as long as 2 busses. So really you are talking 8 busses.

I'm not sure about that. I mean, I'll go along with it since it's my side, but if I'm not mistaken, we still have busses from the 80s.

 

[Invero]

I'm not comparing crush numbers... I'm comparing average real-time numbers.

Remember... on buses, all the strollers must be folded. On the monorail, they stay open, and take up TONS of space. So while the monorail has a 364 crush capacity, the average real time capacity is around 260-270.

With the RTS, average load is 72, and on the Nova low floor, it's around 90.


As for life of vehicle... both have an average lifespan of 30 years.

 

[cloudboy]

That's procedural. So guests have to fold their strollers up.

Do the Novas get that kind of lifespan? That is cool. I know that mechanically the RTS's were good for many miles but the body panels on them looked like hades after a few years. Any idea what the lifespan is on vehicles like the Civis and Invero, ah Invero?

 

[cloudboy]

Oh, you are supposed to Work in the fantasy world and live in the real one. Hm, got THAT one all wrong.

 

[PhotoDave219]

... An infinite number of monkeys in front of an infinite number of computers and we find the one who stumbles onto our forums..... Aye Caramba....