• 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.

Monorail Automation Testing

EricsBiscuit

Well-Known Member
I was at MK on Friday and they said the monorails are fully autonomous. They still have a driver for emergencies. They said they did it because some monorail drivers were to rough when speeding up or slowing down so it started to damage the monorails.
 

zulemara

Well-Known Member
I was at MK on Friday and they said the monorails are fully autonomous. They still have a driver for emergencies. They said they did it because some monorail drivers were to rough when speeding up or slowing down so it started to damage the monorails.
eh, that's been the case since inception. P5 all the way baby! Some pilots pay no attention to the cycle so they fly through to the hold point then have to sit rather than keeping a slower forward motion.

From what I was told, it was more about allowing the monorails to operate at closer intervals since the trains are talking to each other. Additionally, I believe they will be able to do switching operations without shutting down the whole beam.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I was at MK on Friday and they said the monorails are fully autonomous. They still have a driver for emergencies. They said they did it because some monorail drivers were to rough when speeding up or slowing down so it started to damage the monorails.
eh, that's been the case since inception. P5 all the way baby! Some pilots pay no attention to the cycle so they fly through to the hold point then have to sit rather than keeping a slower forward motion.

From what I was told, it was more about allowing the monorails to operate at closer intervals since the trains are talking to each other. Additionally, I believe they will be able to do switching operations without shutting down the whole beam.
Automation is a response to the fatal collision.
 

Monorail_Red

Active Member
They said they did it because some monorail drivers were to rough when speeding up or slowing down so it started to damage the monorails.
eh, that's been the case since inception. P5 all the way baby! Some pilots pay no attention to the cycle so they fly through to the hold point then have to sit rather than keeping a slower forward motion.
I'I agree but certainly not all the pilots fell into this category. But there were a few whose driving style made me cringe. For example, the limit through the Contemporary on express is/was 15MPH. Not as fast as you can get the train to go by gunning it in and timing the braking before you get an overspeed. The more speeding the more braking. This driving style was basically hurry up and wait.

Maybe... This project bought the mark vi's another 10-15 years.
I agree - I'm sure there are going to be some bugs to iron out here and there, but I think this has the potential to reduce maintenance issues and justify a longer lifespan. That is, if the new controls do what they're supposed to do.

Automation is a response to the fatal collision.
I'm sure it may have been a contributing factor but don't believe it to be the exclusive reason.
 
Last edited:

articos

Well-Known Member
From what I was told, it was more about allowing the monorails to operate at closer intervals since the trains are talking to each other. Additionally, I believe they will be able to do switching operations without shutting down the whole beam.
Automation is a response to the fatal collision.
I'I agree but certainly not all the pilots fell into this category. But there were a few whose driving style made me cringe. For example, the limit through the Contemporary on express is/was 15MPH. Not as fast as you can get the train to go by gunning it in and timing the braking before you get an overspeed. The more speeding the more braking.

I agree - I'm sure there are going to be some bugs to iron out here and there, but I think this has the potential to reduce maintenance issues and justify a longer lifespan. That is, if the new controls do what they're supposed to do.

I'm sure it may have been a contributing factor but don't believe it to be the exclusive reason.
Maybe... This project bought the mark vi's another 10-15 years.
The automation project has been in the works for years. It is to allow the trains to operate at closer intervals, which was not allowed via the original block system, and to reduce wear on the trains by standardizing the train movements, which should allow for better control over parts inventory and maintenance upkeep. The automation system also has the added effect of allowing the trains to switch independently of other train movements on the beam, which became a much higher priority (requirement) after the accident.

The trains themselves are due cosmetic upgrades. They will not continue in the condition they're in for another 10 years. The automation project took priority.
 

monothingie

Skyliner Survivor
Premium Member
Original Poster
In the Parks
No
The automation project has been in the works for years. It is to allow the trains to operate at closer intervals, which was not allowed via the original block system, and to reduce wear on the trains by standardizing the train movements, which should allow for better control over parts inventory and maintenance upkeep. The automation system also has the added effect of allowing the trains to switch independently of other train movements on the beam, which became a much higher priority (requirement) after the accident.

The trains themselves are due cosmetic upgrades. They will not continue in the condition they're in for another 10 years. The automation project took priority.
The switching and spacing "advantages" brought about by the automation system seem dubious.

First you will still have a temporary shutdown of the beam while trains are added and removed from service. The automation system only eliminates/minimizes the human component that led to the accident. It may not drastically improve the cycle time to complete a switch operation.

Train spacing improvement is a misnomer because there is a maximum efficient number of trains per beam, and you can not predict guest behavior in loading and unloading. All this means is that you will experience more traffic holds because the trains will be closer together. So on the resort line, instead of all trains leaving stations and cycling at the same time, they will leave when needed and queue more often when they don't have clearance. On the express beam it just means more queuing at the TTC or MK. Maybe minor improvements in cycle time because the trains know when to advance faster than a human can get clearance to.

Trains got new carpets the a couple years back. That's probably the extent of updates you will get for a while. It's unfortunate that when the last couple of trains were out for extended periods because of accidents (teal/pink, peach/purple, coral, lime) no effort was made to fix/improve the interiors and on board systems like AC and communications. That's 1/3 the fleet that could have been updated right there.
 

Monorail_Red

Active Member
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. They've done some things here and there. They replaced the drive motors in the early 2000's, started re-wiring trains in 2010, suspension components were enhanced/replaced on Peach while the cabs were rebuilt, new fire suppression systems have been rolled out, etc. Maybe they won't go quite another 10 years but I think it will be at least 5 or so. Time will tell.
 

Thelazer

Well-Known Member
I'm all for nostalgia and keeping people employed... but you know how many of you arrived at the Orlando Airport, and took the driver-less shuttle from one terminal to the other...without issue. Same tech, same thing as a monorail, just one less beam.

Honestly it's time guys, automate them fully, remove the drivers, staff the platforms with a few extra folks and spend the money to expand it out to service a few more resorts and parks.

Or do we just let Uber bring in the driver-less shuttles around the resorts, because that tech is already outpacing this old junk..
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
I'm all for nostalgia and keeping people employed... but you know how many of you arrived at the Orlando Airport, and took the driver-less shuttle from one terminal to the other...without issue. Same tech, same thing as a monorail, just one less beam.

Honestly it's time guys, automate them fully, remove the drivers, staff the platforms with a few extra folks and spend the money to expand it out to service a few more resorts and parks.

Or do we just let Uber bring in the driver-less shuttles around the resorts, because that tech is already outpacing this old junk..
You still need the pilot for evacuations and as the 'eyes and ears' of the controllers. The MCO shuttle has a platform along the full length of its track for evacuations. The monorail does not
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. They've done some things here and there. They replaced the drive motors in the early 2000's, started re-wiring trains in 2010, suspension components were enhanced/replaced on Peach while the cabs were rebuilt, new fire suppression systems have been rolled out, etc. Maybe they won't go quite another 10 years but I think it will be at least 5 or so. Time will tell.
A drive motor installed in the '00s is worn out mechanically the coils are still good but bearings etc are now at the end of their useful life.

Its why the trains are expensive to maintain now - because you are constantly needing to remove components which are meant to be removed only during full overhauls.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I'm all for nostalgia and keeping people employed... but you know how many of you arrived at the Orlando Airport, and took the driver-less shuttle from one terminal to the other...without issue. Same tech, same thing as a monorail, just one less beam.

Honestly it's time guys, automate them fully, remove the drivers, staff the platforms with a few extra folks and spend the money to expand it out to service a few more resorts and parks.

Or do we just let Uber bring in the driver-less shuttles around the resorts, because that tech is already outpacing this old junk..
The shuttles at Orlando International Aiport are just that, shuttles. There is only one vehicle per track and it goes back and forth. The chances of two trains colliding are 0%. So it's not really comparable.
 

MansionButler84

Well-Known Member
The shuttles at Orlando International Aiport are just that, shuttles. There is only one vehicle per track and it goes back and forth. The chances of two trains colliding are 0%. So it's not really comparable.
There have been accidents however. Didn't a guy die a few years back?
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
There have been accidents however. Didn't a guy die a few years back?
A passenger died in May 2015, but that was due to him being allowed to manually drive the vehicle during a maintenance run. He was thrown through the window when he let go of the controls and initiated an emergency stop. I don't know of any prior incidents, but that does not mean anything.
 

zakattack99

Well-Known Member
There have been accidents however. Didn't a guy die a few years back?
Yes he did, but my understanding he was standing up against the glass during an emergency stop, he hit the glass and fell out...

However I think this was during a test in the morning and I do not know if he was supposed to be on the tram during that time or not. I will have to find the article.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
A passenger died in May 2015, but that was due to him being allowed to manually drive the vehicle during a maintenance run. He was thrown through the window when he let go of the controls and initiated an emergency stop. I don't know of any prior incidents, but that does not mean anything.
That was the maintenance guy, Ever since then I've avoided sitting on the window ledges in the front direction of travel at MCO.
 

ford91exploder

Resident Curmudgeon
Yes he did, but my understanding he was standing up against the glass during an emergency stop, he hit the glass and fell out...

However I think this was during a test in the morning and I do not know if he was supposed to be on the tram during that time or not. I will have to find the article.
He was supposed to be there, He was the maintenance guy for the tram I believe they were testing the e-stop system (as they are required to do) The OS article has the details and I believe so does the NTSB database
 

zakattack99

Well-Known Member
Top Bottom