Monorail Expansion...maybe..

[DisneyFreak529]

As much as I would love to see this happen I agree with the others. It would seem so costly and so large of a project to do. On the other had it would be soo wonderful if you could just ride it park to park!! If not connect to animal kingdom then at least connect to MGM, or should I say Disney Studios.

 

[Thrawn]

By the way, there's a CM out there known as "Mr Monorail" because of his obsession with the trains. If he ever tells you anything (and he will) don't believe it. It's not that he creates things to tell stories, he just lives in a fantasy world.

Hmm, Tyler, are you "Mr Monorail"? :lol:

 

[no2apprentice]

It can't be Tyler...he doesn't live in fantasy world, he just works there. :animwink:

I used to think the #1 reason for no expansion was the cost. Too much money, any resort it connected to would go up in price, etc., etc. After finally understanding some of the explanations that Tyler has provided over many threads, I now realize that it would be a major mistake to do a monorail expansion.

As magical as it might be (and yes, I agree that it does add magic to the WDW experience), the type of crowd pattern that WDW experiences does not work with a monorail system.

Why build it if it's not going to work? That would be bad for guest satisfaction.

 

[PeterPan1031]

I know this has been tlaked about, but TWO Monorail CM's that I talked to said that what they have heard was that the plan was to expand it to MGM ad AK. Of Course who knows if or when this might take place, but at least the Cast mambers are talking about it.
They have the monorail down to the resort one, and he said "Take this one to the resorts, and to busses, and to parking..."
I said something like...
"Wish I could take it to MGM!"
and he replied,
"Not yet, but maybe within the next year!"
and I said,
"Really"
and he replied,
"That's the plan"

So why knows.. It does seem that it's a much better transportation device then going on the busses, well more convienent anyways, and more fun!

ITs funny because I always ask my dad why dont they expand it....and he said it would be too much money....but if this happened it would be soooooo COOL!

 

[mattb]

What about a peoplemover-type system to expand the transportation system? I don't know how effective these systems are in terms of cost. Note I don't mean necessarily the MK peoplemover, but a similar system wherein many people can go from any certain point A to point B via a rail system or something like that.

I'm trying to be vague here for a reason--to steer this thread away from monorail expansion bashing )) to how WDW might implement further development.

 

[M:SpilotISTC12]

I doubt it. They want to work on the parks first.

 

[Thrawn]

What about a peoplemover-type system to expand the transportation system? I don't know how effective these systems are in terms of cost. Note I don't mean necessarily the MK peoplemover, but a similar system wherein many people can go from any certain point A to point B via a rail system or something like that.

I'm trying to be vague here for a reason--to steer this thread away from monorail expansion bashing )) to how WDW might implement further development.

Thats what the peoplemover was supposed to be. Its also exactly what is needed. The same basic premise is also called light rail, which I mentioned earlier.

Here's a link:
http://www.lightrail.com/definition.htm

 

[no2apprentice]

You can't add capacity to a monorail, and what happens if one of the trains breaks down at say, the AK station? Then no other trains can get in.

Same problem with light rail. One car goes down, the whole line freezes. And then we're back to the issue that it's on the ground. Existing roads and waterways would be a challenging work-around.

 

[Thrawn]

Same problem with light rail. One car goes down, the whole line freezes. And then we're back to the issue that it's on the ground. Existing roads and waterways would be a challenging work-around.

On the ground is better than above the ground. And since its on a rail, its not hard to get it pushed out of the way. Thats something you can do with a light rail that you cant with a monorail, link "trains" (for lack of a better term) together.

 

[CRO-Magnum]

Don't rule out economics just yet...

perhaps a bigger issue would be environmental impact. On the plus side for monorails, the cost of the Las Vegas monorail was $87M/mile but experts believe it can be built for $50M/mi. Linking resorts would increase their value and therefore the cost per night. It would reduce the number of busses and risk exposure of accidents as well as be environmentally friendly. And Disney knows they can dramatically increase the traffic at Downtown Disney (I've seen estimates in the past of double the current traffic) by linking it to the monorail. If the monorail led to $100k/day in extra spending just for linking in Downtown Disney, that's $3M/mo or $36M/yr or a payback period of just under 10 years for 7mi of track.

There would be additional cost in having to realistically relocate the TTC to somewhere closer to Epcot. Let's assume three loops: MK, Epcot/MGM, Downtown Disney/AK with resort access (single loops, no express). They could extend the Resort loop to the existing Epcot track, add the Wilderness Lodge, and loop it just north of Epcot. Loop the Epcot track at the same point and extend it south along the waterway to MGM. Create 3rd loop looping to Downtown Disney, behind Typhoon Lagoon to AK, to AKL, eastward just north of Blizzard Beach and then north along the entrance road from 192 to the new TTC. A fourth loop would be the long infamous light rail to the airport.

Creating this kind of a setup would add Wilderness Lodge, Yacht & Beach Club, Boardwalk, Swan & Dolphin if desired, AK Lodge, and potentially other resorts to the monorail (CBR, Port Orleans, etc.). In addition new resort locations with monorail access would be established. Of course it would also bring Downtown Disney, Typhoon Lagoon, and possibly Blizzard Beach closer to the guests (who likes taking 2 buses, waiting for one for 30min, or having to figure out how to get from A to B). Having four resorts per line would be optimal.

Looking at the economics, let's assume this adds 20mi of track at a cost of $1B ($50M/mi) plus additional costs of $300M for a total price tag of $1.3B. For a 20 year payback (it would be amortized over 30yrs so the final 10yrs would be 100% profit - operating expenses) that would require an additional business benefit of $65M/year which comes to $180k/day. If you raised the cost of the 35,000 hotel rooms $4/night that would cover the cost in itself (assuming 75% occupancy) assuming NO CHANGE in room rates for resorts newly attached to the monorail.

I would appreciate comments/feedback.

 

[CRO-Magnum]

There is a solution if you look back in time...

Same problem with light rail. One car goes down, the whole line freezes. And then we're back to the issue that it's on the ground. Existing roads and waterways would be a challenging work-around.

to the old west - bypasses. The reason they created sidings and bypasses was so they had somewhere to park trains off the main line including those broken down. I believe with a little creativity and some engineering it's a solvable problem with as many options as light rail.

 

[TurboCaroline]

Looking at the economics, let's assume this adds 20mi of track at a cost of $1B ($50M/mi) plus additional costs of $300M for a total price tag of $1.3B. For a 20 year payback (it would be amortized over 30yrs so the final 10yrs would be 100% profit - operating expenses) that would require an additional business benefit of $65M/year which comes to $180k/day. If you raised the cost of the 35,000 hotel rooms $4/night that would cover the cost in itself (assuming 75% occupancy) assuming NO CHANGE in room rates for resorts newly attached to the monorail.

Well said...I'm all for it!! Bring on the monorail!

 

[goofyman]

perhaps a bigger issue would be environmental impact. On the plus side for monorails, the cost of the Las Vegas monorail was $87M/mile but experts believe it can be built for $50M/mi. Linking resorts would increase their value and therefore the cost per night. It would reduce the number of busses and risk exposure of accidents as well as be environmentally friendly. And Disney knows they can dramatically increase the traffic at Downtown Disney (I've seen estimates in the past of double the current traffic) by linking it to the monorail. If the monorail led to $100k/day in extra spending just for linking in Downtown Disney, that's $3M/mo or $36M/yr or a payback period of just under 10 years for 7mi of track.

There would be additional cost in having to realistically relocate the TTC to somewhere closer to Epcot. Let's assume three loops: MK, Epcot/MGM, Downtown Disney/AK with resort access (single loops, no express). They could extend the Resort loop to the existing Epcot track, add the Wilderness Lodge, and loop it just north of Epcot. Loop the Epcot track at the same point and extend it south along the waterway to MGM. Create 3rd loop looping to Downtown Disney, behind Typhoon Lagoon to AK, to AKL, eastward just north of Blizzard Beach and then north along the entrance road from 192 to the new TTC. A fourth loop would be the long infamous light rail to the airport.

Creating this kind of a setup would add Wilderness Lodge, Yacht & Beach Club, Boardwalk, Swan & Dolphin if desired, AK Lodge, and potentially other resorts to the monorail (CBR, Port Orleans, etc.). In addition new resort locations with monorail access would be established. Of course it would also bring Downtown Disney, Typhoon Lagoon, and possibly Blizzard Beach closer to the guests (who likes taking 2 buses, waiting for one for 30min, or having to figure out how to get from A to B). Having four resorts per line would be optimal.

Looking at the economics, let's assume this adds 20mi of track at a cost of $1B ($50M/mi) plus additional costs of $300M for a total price tag of $1.3B. For a 20 year payback (it would be amortized over 30yrs so the final 10yrs would be 100% profit - operating expenses) that would require an additional business benefit of $65M/year which comes to $180k/day. If you raised the cost of the 35,000 hotel rooms $4/night that would cover the cost in itself (assuming 75% occupancy) assuming NO CHANGE in room rates for resorts newly attached to the monorail.

I would appreciate comments/feedback.

Ah Finally an answer with some thought to cost of doing business instead of "It just would cost to much" I like it! :sohappy:

 

[goofyman]

It will never happen. Period. Even at $3 a gallon for diesel, it would be 333 million gallons of diesel to pay back $1 billion of the cost of the monorail. It would probably be more like 4-5 billion to bring each park to each resort. Tyler has posted the more exact figures.

A much better idea would be either light rail or just a fleet of hybrid/alternate fuel busses.

Regardless of the gas and money issue, there are other irrefutable knocks against it, besides the ones I posted. Please, read the other 20+ page long threads before posting again.

Excuse me! I have read and this is MY OPINION. NO one can say "it will never happen" You have good points light rail is a interesting choice but please DO NOT belittle my thoughts we are all giving opinon and this was mind. you may want to actually look at the cost of business and return not just state what you think is a bad idea for difference reason. every problem has a solution and the expansion does not have to be complete all at once, it came be done in parts and technology change over time. so please alow us to give our educated opinons and not tell me to read 20 pages of thread before posting!

 

[Lynx04]

to the old west - bypasses. The reason they created sidings and bypasses was so they had somewhere to park trains off the main line including those broken down. I believe with a little creativity and some engineering it's a solvable problem with as many options as light rail.

To make a bypass that would cost millions if not billions of dollars extra. On top of that if a train happnes not to be in one of these bypassable areas, which will happen, it will still take time to at least push/pull it to a bypass section. Mean while you have guests stuck in the monorail that is broke down and I bet they won't have nice things to say about their vaction.

Reality is, even though they monorail is cool, it doesn't make logistical sense as a source of main transportatoin. On top of that, it doesn't make economic sense to pay billions of dollars as a secondary source of transportation.

If a monorail expansion ever happens, it will be when Disney is trying to find ways to spend money. It is no where near the top of the priority list.

 

[CaptainMichael]

perhaps a bigger issue would be environmental impact. On the plus side for monorails, the cost of the Las Vegas monorail was $87M/mile but experts believe it can be built for $50M/mi. Linking resorts would increase their value and therefore the cost per night. It would reduce the number of busses and risk exposure of accidents as well as be environmentally friendly. And Disney knows they can dramatically increase the traffic at Downtown Disney (I've seen estimates in the past of double the current traffic) by linking it to the monorail. If the monorail led to $100k/day in extra spending just for linking in Downtown Disney, that's $3M/mo or $36M/yr or a payback period of just under 10 years for 7mi of track.

There would be additional cost in having to realistically relocate the TTC to somewhere closer to Epcot. Let's assume three loops: MK, Epcot/MGM, Downtown Disney/AK with resort access (single loops, no express). They could extend the Resort loop to the existing Epcot track, add the Wilderness Lodge, and loop it just north of Epcot. Loop the Epcot track at the same point and extend it south along the waterway to MGM. Create 3rd loop looping to Downtown Disney, behind Typhoon Lagoon to AK, to AKL, eastward just north of Blizzard Beach and then north along the entrance road from 192 to the new TTC. A fourth loop would be the long infamous light rail to the airport.

Creating this kind of a setup would add Wilderness Lodge, Yacht & Beach Club, Boardwalk, Swan & Dolphin if desired, AK Lodge, and potentially other resorts to the monorail (CBR, Port Orleans, etc.). In addition new resort locations with monorail access would be established. Of course it would also bring Downtown Disney, Typhoon Lagoon, and possibly Blizzard Beach closer to the guests (who likes taking 2 buses, waiting for one for 30min, or having to figure out how to get from A to B). Having four resorts per line would be optimal.

Looking at the economics, let's assume this adds 20mi of track at a cost of $1B ($50M/mi) plus additional costs of $300M for a total price tag of $1.3B. For a 20 year payback (it would be amortized over 30yrs so the final 10yrs would be 100% profit - operating expenses) that would require an additional business benefit of $65M/year which comes to $180k/day. If you raised the cost of the 35,000 hotel rooms $4/night that would cover the cost in itself (assuming 75% occupancy) assuming NO CHANGE in room rates for resorts newly attached to the monorail.

I would appreciate comments/feedback.

WOW!!!!! I like the way you think! :sohappy:

 

[Lynx04]

If you raised the cost of the 35,000 hotel rooms $4/night that would cover the cost in itself (assuming 75% occupancy) assuming NO CHANGE in room rates for resorts newly attached to the monorail.

I would appreciate comments/feedback.

Or you could raise the room rate like you suggested, not build a monorail and but add that money towards additional operating costs, new attractions, shareholders, exec bonuses, ect.

Disney has the money to do it, the real question is, is it worth the money to do it. I would say it isn't. Could that money be better spent some where else, yes. That is aside from that fact that monorails are very less efficent then buses.

 

[mkepcotmgmak]

in the long run, wouldn't this save disney money, as to not run buses, bus drivers, gas and maintenance on the bus?

 

[Invero]

Disney has the money to do it, the real question is, is it worth the money to do it. I would say it isn't. Could that money be better spent some where else, yes. That is aside from that fact that monorails are very less efficent then buses.

I agree, the money could be much better spent elsewhere.

As for monorails being less efficient than buses... it really all depends on the situation. If you have a hub & spoke system for public transit, a fixed guideway system would work well. But for Disney's purposes, you're right, buses are more efficient because they are highly flexible.

 

[AngryEyes]

Well, I've read and re-read the OP and I don't see where it says anything about linking all resorts to all parks or whatever you guys went off on. He simply said he was at the monorail and mentioned to a CM he'd like to take it to MGM and the CM said it might happen. I figured he meant a loop from TTC to MGM and one to AK and you guys turned it into this monstrosity.

Now, whether or not any of it will happen is certainly up for debate, but you guys started arguing against something completely different from the OP.