Large Piece Falls off Monorail - Being Evacuated

[larryz]

I'd almost guess though that if they've been checking the monorail with the mentality of cracks etc in the fiberglass and they found nothing, then the shoe was ripped off by the bus bar. There's been a couple of people state that enough force can come from that and rip the thing off. Blue lost 3 and yellow lost 1... It happens. Storms down there happen, and debris blows around, which can result in a bent up bus bar.

If that were the case, I'd expect more than one shoe to fall off, and on more than one train.

 

[larryz]

You don't believe that they do safety checks daily?

Don't make the mistake of confusing safety for maintenance. They're not going to do anything that they knowingly think is unsafe. But it's easy to convince yourself that there's nothing inherently unsafe in stretching out maintenance intervals if you have data showing mean time before failure is higher than the recommended maintenance/replacement interval. Accountants are not engineers, so if they see an opportunity to save money by extending maintenance intervals, there's no doubt in my mind they'll suggest that. Which is fine, and usually works out.

Until something critical to ride safety breaks, of course.

 

[larryz]

WRONG, lots of people looked at it once it was all over the internet!

I meant, of course, before it fell off the monorail...

 

[peter11435]

If that were the case, I'd expect more than one shoe to fall off, and on more than one train.

Which is exactly what happened

 

[21stamps]

Don't make the mistake of confusing safety for maintenance.

They are massively intertwined.

 

[RustySpork]

I meant, of course, before it fell off the monorail...

Oh, right, before. I'm guessing that would be a no.

 

[21stamps]

Don't make the mistake of confusing safety for maintenance. They're not going to do anything that they knowingly think is unsafe. But it's easy to convince yourself that there's nothing inherently unsafe in stretching out maintenance intervals if you have data showing mean time before failure is higher than the recommended maintenance/replacement interval. Accountants are not engineers, so if they see an opportunity to save money by extending maintenance intervals, there's no doubt in my mind they'll suggest that. Which is fine, and usually works out.

Until something critical to ride safety breaks, of course.

An inspection would see if something was not right, regardless of scheduled maintenance intervals.
Isn't that the point of daily checks?

 

[larryz]

They are massively intertwined.

Theme park management is all about finding the balance between adequate maintenance and lowest possible cost to maintain safe operation. I believe, as I said above, and based on the frequency of monorail and attraction malfunctions, that WDW is flexing their schedules to find that balance.

So do I think WDW is safe? Yes, overall. They're doing maintenance, and they're clearly fixing things when they break. The ride safety systems seem to be working well, or there wouldn't be as many ride stops as people have mentioned.

As for as the danger of being hit by flying monorail parts, I assess it as very low. But until this happened, I would have said practically impossible.

 

[s8film40]

This incident isn't by any means an indication of a reduction in maintenance. In fact collector shoes ripping off has rarely, but always occurred. However it's clear to those who pay attention that there has been an effective reduction in maintenance. I've seen this personally. A clean and shiny monorail or lack thereof isn't a direct indication of this as well but it is an indication nonetheless. Yes regular safety checks take place and I'm sure every or at least most rules in place are being followed. These trains have aged a lot and the maintenance hasn't kept up. If someone is willing to cut corners keeping things looking nice they're almost always willing to cut corners keeping things running properly, these things just go hand in hand. Most importantly there's a large lack of pride in work. There is an amazingly huge difference between a maintenance person who cares and one who doesn't. A maintenance person who cares won't let a train look the way some of these look. They're not going to clean them, but they're not going to leave things loose, cracked or ripped. A maintenance person who doesn't care is simply looking for the quickest route to be able to say the job is done so they can go back to smoking a cigarette out back and talking with their coworkers. A lot of these guys get frustrated and eventually stop caring because those in charge above them are cutting corners as well and making decisions to get they're job done as quickly and efficiently (cheaply) as possible.

 

[larryz]

Which is exactly what happened

My impression was that the Blue shoes were a separate incident, not the same day...

 

[lazyboy97o]

You said that the same culture exists as when that comment was made. But there is nothing to back up your claim. I think Ouimet became president after that, correct? And nothing has shown that his successor or anyone else is taking safety risks.

I said nothing about the culture remaining the same. The business model is the same and there is nothing that inherently prevents a similar culture from reoccurring.

 

[natatomic]

I said nothing about the culture remaining the same. The business model is the same and there is nothing that inherently prevents a similar culture from reoccurring.

Except for the "unusual conditions" policy which tells cast members what to do if anything seems out of the ordinary.

 

[nace888]

My impression was that the Blue shoes were a separate incident, not the same day...

Blue's shoes and Yellow's shoes may have not happened on the same day, but they happened. If you think about it, if those shoes were absolutely not movable, the train would slam to a stop and much more damage would ensue because of the jolt.

For them to easily pop off in the event of a situation seems like it's most proper so as to not cause any worse damage. I could only imagine shoes ripping into a bus bar causing huge electrical issues, bending that bar all the way out of it's place and damaging the train as it slams to a stop causing damage to other parts of the trains...

Either way, it's been stated that shoes came off the trains all the time, though it was rare.

 

[RustySpork]

Except for the "unusual conditions" policy which tells cast members what to do if anything seems out of the ordinary.

Seems like the cast member that was approached when parts fell off of Monorail Blue missed that memo.

 

[lazyboy97o]

An inspection would see if something was not right, regardless of scheduled maintenance intervals.
Isn't that the point of daily checks?

Despite daily checks, parks have still had equipment failures. Daily checks isn't some big new invention.

Except for the "unusual conditions" policy which tells cast members what to do if anything seems out of the ordinary.

That assumes there will be a noticeable issue beforehand.

 

[larryz]

Blue's shoes and Yellow's shoes may have not happened on the same day, but they happened. If you think about it, if those shoes were absolutely not movable, the train would slam to a stop and much more damage would ensue because of the jolt.

For them to easily pop off in the event of a situation seems like it's most proper so as to not cause any worse damage. I could only imagine shoes ripping into a bus bar causing huge electrical issues, bending that bar all the way out of it's place and damaging the train as it slams to a stop causing damage to other parts of the trains...

Either way, it's been stated that shoes came off the trains all the time, though it was rare.

Now you've got me concerned about a potential design issue.

When a subway with a third rail throws a shoe, no biggie -- everything's (sub)ground level.

When an elevated monorail throws a shoe, now you've got a flying debris issue. Admittedly, exposure to guests from the monorail crossing their paths is low, but there are several such points, and as the photo showed, timing becomes an important consideration. -- as in not being under a monorail when a shoe could come flying off.

I will now go and rethink my life vis-a-vis walking, driving or standing under monorail beams.

 

[s8film40]

Seems like the cast member that was approached when parts fell off of Monorail Blue missed that memo.

Some people perceive an unusual condition as a "not my problem" situation. Sadly at WDW sometimes it's better not to get involved in something.

 

[RustySpork]

I will now go and reconsider my life vis-a-vis walking, driving or standing under monorail beams.

Alternate ending: go on vacation to WDW, get hit with debris, profit.

 

[RustySpork]

Some people perceive an unusual condition as a "not my problem" situation. Sadly at WDW sometimes it's better not to get involved in something.

Sadly true of many employees at many companies.

 

[s8film40]

Now you've got me concerned about a potential design issue.

When a subway with a third rail throws a shoe, no biggie -- everything's (sub)ground level.

When an elevated monorail throws a shoe, now you've got a flying debris issue. Admittedly, exposure to guests from the monorail crossing their paths is low, but there are several such points, and as the photo showed, timing becomes an important consideration. -- as in not being under a monorail when a shoe could come flying off.

I will now go and reconsider my life vis-a-vis walking, driving or standing under monorail beams.

I said this previously in this thread and have said this for years. You should never walk under a monorail. Personally I don't think they should even have track crossing pedestrian areas without guards. There are thousands of parts in a monorail any one of them could kill someone in just the right circumstances.