Monorail Expansion

[danlb_2000]

Well seeing as how we are well into the "few cars being tested" if not already past that I think five years from now it will be far more common. Five years is a long time as far as technology progressing.

Yes the safety factor does differentiate autonomous vehicles and cell phones, but is that really a factor? Autonomous cars already at this early stage have a better track record than human drivers. If safety is truly a factor and not merely public fear of the unknown than the need to get this technology out sooner is abundantly clear.

You are trying to apply a logical argument (autonomous vehicles have a better track record) to a non-logical fears. Flying is statistically safer then driving, but a lot of people are afraid to fly. I don't doubt that autonomous vehicles will eventually become common place, but I think the way things will play out is that we will start to see some level of adoption of them, but then there will be the inevitable rash of highly publicized incidents with them which will cause backlash and will slow down their adoption.

 

[s8film40]

You are trying to apply a logical argument (autonomous vehicles have a better track record) to a non-logical fears. Flying is statistically safer then driving, but a lot of people are afraid to fly. I don't doubt that autonomous vehicles will eventually become common place, but I think the way things will play out is that we will start to see some level of adoption of them, but then there will be the inevitable rash of highly publicized incidents with them which will cause backlash and will slow down their adoption.

I'm not sure we disagree. What you describe though is the recent past not the future. Google has had several cases make the news which of course makes people question the technology and fuels the backlash and fear. One interesting story was one where the car was pulled over for driving too slow but police were unable to ticket the car since tickets can only be given to people, which highlighted an interesting aspect of it. Also just about a week ago a Tesla driver fell asleep while his car was driving in traffic and of course the video of that was quickly passed around by the media. I didn't say five years because that's how long I think it will take I said that because as you said I expect the adoption of the technology to be slowed down by people's fears.

 

[trr1]

but aren't the PRT/ ULTr's nothing more than a self driving vehicle that have guard rails so no one gets hurt?

 

[s8film40]

but aren't the PRT/ ULTr's nothing more than a self driving vehicle that have guard rails so no one gets hurt?

Yep, that's all they are. It's really yesterdays technology as the technology has progressed so much further than when these PRT things first started appearing. They also usually require some guidance as well, if not a track barriers to define the edge of the path.

 

[montyz81]

http://www.caradvice.com.au/447112/land-airbus-to-straddle-chinas-roads-by-the-end-of-the-year/
Here is Disney's answer to both bus and monorail transportation. Not that I want to get rid of the monrails, but this would stop all traffic problems. Two systems in one. I bet there could even use some of the existing Monorail stations for this. I could see the two holes widened into one in the Contemporary. I know, there would be lots of initial construction, but I bet the replacement costs of trains is far better then replacing both buses and monorails.

 

[s8film40]

http://www.caradvice.com.au/447112/land-airbus-to-straddle-chinas-roads-by-the-end-of-the-year/
Here is Disney's answer to both bus and monorail transportation. Not that I want to get rid of the monrails, but this would stop all traffic problems. Two systems in one. I bet there could even use some of the existing Monorail stations for this. I could see the two holes widened into one in the Contemporary. I know, there would be lots of initial construction, but I bet the replacement costs of trains is far better then replacing both buses and monorails.

This is a really neat concept but it will likely never be anything more than a concept and certainly wouldn't be a good fit at WDW. If you've ever seen a large truck run into an overpass where they misjudged the clearance than you already see the problem here. If your talking about putting this through the monorails path through the contemporary then your talking about putting this on an elevated track which would defeat the purpose and essentially just make a wider elevated rail vehicle.

 

[montyz81]

This is a really neat concept but it will likely never be anything more than a concept and certainly wouldn't be a good fit at WDW. If you've ever seen a large truck run into an overpass where they misjudged the clearance than you already see the problem here. If your talking about putting this through the monorails path through the contemporary then your talking about putting this on an elevated track which would defeat the purpose and essentially just make a wider elevated rail vehicle.

The first full size concept is in production right now. Will see if it goes further then that. I can see all the shortcomings. I guess I envision using the existing roadways for the track and the elevating around the water bridge to go into the Contemporary all the way around bay lake to just after the Poly where it goes back down to road level to travel to the rest of the parks lifting up where necessary. I could easily see it being elevated along the existing monorail track through Epcot. Imagine a glass bottom going through Epcot!

 

[s8film40]

The first full size concept is in production right now. Will see if it goes further then that. I can see all the shortcomings. I guess I envision using the existing roadways for the track and the elevating around the water bridge to go into the Contemporary all the way around bay lake to just after the Poly where it goes back down to road level to travel to the rest of the parks lifting up where necessary. I could easily see it being elevated along the existing monorail track through Epcot. Imagine a glass bottom going through Epcot!

Like I said it's a neat concept. In actuality WDW is probably one of the few places in the US it could work as they have more control over the layout of the whole resort area. Lets put it this way, in order for it to work the routes it travels would have to be pre-determined so that all trucks and large vehicles could be banned from those roads (including DME buses). Additionally height barricades would need to be added to prevent these taller vehicles from entering the roadways. All deliveries would have to be rerouted through back roads, motorhomes going to Fort Wilderness would need to go through back roads as well. Some facilities that require large vehicles coming and going would probably need to be moved to other areas of the property. Any type of overpass that this couldn't fit under would need to be completely rebuilt or an alternate route constructed.This is designed for roadways so using it on the monorail track would require building a wider roadway on top of the track. It's likely the monorail pylons and track weren't designed for all that weight so the track would probably have to be completely replaced or instead just torn down and a new special track built just for this. All in all this would probably cost significantly more than expanding the monorail as well as disrupting much of the way WDW as a whole operates.

 

[montyz81]

Like I said it's a neat concept. In actuality WDW is probably one of the few places in the US it could work as they have more control over the layout of the whole resort area. Lets put it this way, in order for it to work the routes it travels would have to be pre-determined so that all trucks and large vehicles could be banned from those roads (including DME buses). Additionally height barricades would need to be added to prevent these taller vehicles from entering the roadways. All deliveries would have to be rerouted through back roads, motorhomes going to Fort Wilderness would need to go through back roads as well. Some facilities that require large vehicles coming and going would probably need to be moved to other areas of the property. Any type of overpass that this couldn't fit under would need to be completely rebuilt or an alternate route constructed.This is designed for roadways so using it on the monorail track would require building a wider roadway on top of the track. It's likely the monorail pylons and track weren't designed for all that weight so the track would probably have to be completely replaced or instead just torn down and a new special track built just for this. All in all this would probably cost significantly more than expanding the monorail as well as disrupting much of the way WDW as a whole operates.

right. I figured startup costs would be extremely expensive. I am thinking that it this cost could be absorbed over a large period of time. Anyway, it was just an interesting thought to keep with the "future concept" that Walt always imagined.

 

[danlb_2000]

I'm not sure we disagree. What you describe though is the recent past not the future. Google has had several cases make the news which of course makes people question the technology and fuels the backlash and fear. One interesting story was one where the car was pulled over for driving too slow but police were unable to ticket the car since tickets can only be given to people, which highlighted an interesting aspect of it. Also just about a week ago a Tesla driver fell asleep while his car was driving in traffic and of course the video of that was quickly passed around by the media. I didn't say five years because that's how long I think it will take I said that because as you said I expect the adoption of the technology to be slowed down by people's fears.

This should be interesting. As far as I know this is first death as a result of an error made by an autonomous driving system. In this case it was a semi-autonomous vehicle but the same mistake could have been made by a fully autonomous one. This also highlights another issue, once we get over a minimum level of automation there is no in between it has be 100% perfect. If the car is going to be responsible for driving there is no way you are going to get the passenger to remain engaged in case of a situation the car can't handle.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/this-fatality-could-slam-the-brakes-on-driverless-cars/

 

[s8film40]

This should be interesting. As far as I know this is first death as a result of an error made by an autonomous driving system. In this case it was a semi-autonomous vehicle but the same mistake could have been made by a fully autonomous one. This also highlights another issue, once we get over a minimum level of automation there is no in between it has be 100% perfect. If the car is going to be responsible for driving there is no way you are going to get the passenger to remain engaged in case of a situation the car can't handle.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/this-fatality-could-slam-the-brakes-on-driverless-cars/

It is a tragic yet interesting situation. One thing I really like about Tesla is they document so much information. They have documented over 130 million miles using the autopilot feature before this first fatality. The fatality rate in the US is 1 fatality per 94 million miles and in the world 1 fatality per 60 million miles. So while this is tragic and everyone is tempted to jump to the it was the autopilot fault we can't really do that without acknowledging that this also proves the autopilot is safer than human driving. As time goes by more statistics will give us a better picture but as it is now this fatality came later than expected from human drivers and likely somewhere along the way saved a life.

 

[Master Yoda]

This should be interesting. As far as I know this is first death as a result of an error made by an autonomous driving system. In this case it was a semi-autonomous vehicle but the same mistake could have been made by a fully autonomous one. This also highlights another issue, once we get over a minimum level of automation there is no in between it has be 100% perfect. If the car is going to be responsible for driving there is no way you are going to get the passenger to remain engaged in case of a situation the car can't handle.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/this-fatality-could-slam-the-brakes-on-driverless-cars/

What people will ignore is that they make far more mistakes behind the wheel than even the current systems do. They will insist that they would never make such an obvious error and in the same breath they will look down at the radio while traveling 70 mph in traffic.

 

[danlb_2000]

It is a tragic yet interesting situation. One thing I really like about Tesla is they document so much information. They have documented over 130 million miles using the autopilot feature before this first fatality. The fatality rate in the US is 1 fatality per 94 million miles and in the world 1 fatality per 60 million miles. So while this is tragic and everyone is tempted to jump to the it was the autopilot fault we can't really do that without acknowledging that this also proves the autopilot is safer than human driving. As time goes by more statistics will give us a better picture but as it is now this fatality came later than expected from human drivers and likely somewhere along the way saved a life.

Again, you are going back to a rational assessment of the situation, which a lot of people won't do.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Again, you are going back to a rational assessment of the situation, which a lot of people won't do.

One of the main reasons is the 1 fatality in 90 million miles is all well and good unless that one fatality is you or one of your loved ones and then those statistic are of no comfort.

 

[Bacon]

 

[Aurora85]

Hey all! Loved reading this looooong discussion and seeing all the different views

As a frequent visitor to WDW (just got back XD <3) I wanted to touch on something I had read. It was in regards to the bus fleet and monorail pushing similar passenger numbers through the disney transit system.

As much as I love the monorail - AND bus systems ... when im at WDW I use my own car as a primary source of transport (unless im planning on getting just wrecked ) because its faster and more flexible than the aforementioned options. But i do end up being forced to use the monorail due to the TTC design. Im not knocking this decision - far from it - I adore it and truly wish it could be expanded. But it is a forced use - if Disney presented me the option to park at a lot directly adjacent to TMK - I absolutely would...in a heartbeat. That is probably something that Disney looked at and decided against say - a fixed line to say Animal Kingdom. Since it has an adjoining lot - would there be enough ridership to warrant driving the piles and lifting rails up - adding new trains to the system etc? And as far as Epcot - which has both an adjoining lot and a rail link up - the ridership on the Epcot line surely sufffers from that fact - I have never had to fight for space on the Epcot line...but I practically have to mug people on the resort and express (again due to the forced ridership)

Sorry if I sound stupid..I'll disappear again XD

 

[Master Yoda]

Hey all! Loved reading this looooong discussion and seeing all the different views

As a frequent visitor to WDW (just got back XD <3) I wanted to touch on something I had read. It was in regards to the bus fleet and monorail pushing similar passenger numbers through the disney transit system.

As much as I love the monorail - AND bus systems ... when im at WDW I use my own car as a primary source of transport (unless im planning on getting just wrecked ) because its faster and more flexible than the aforementioned options. But i do end up being forced to use the monorail due to the TTC design. Im not knocking this decision - far from it - I adore it and truly wish it could be expanded. But it is a forced use - if Disney presented me the option to park at a lot directly adjacent to TMK - I absolutely would...in a heartbeat. That is probably something that Disney looked at and decided against say - a fixed line to say Animal Kingdom. Since it has an adjoining lot - would there be enough ridership to warrant driving the piles and lifting rails up - adding new trains to the system etc? And as far as Epcot - which has both an adjoining lot and a rail link up - the ridership on the Epcot line surely sufffers from that fact - I have never had to fight for space on the Epcot line...but I practically have to mug people on the resort and express (again due to the forced ridership)

Sorry if I sound stupid..I'll disappear again XD

The decision to have you travel from the parking lot via monorail or ferry to the MK was an artistic one. It was meant to be a like build up in a story. While this effect is achieved, the reception by a less than zero number of the public is not quite as Disney hoped. This is more than likely why the same thing has never been done again to the same degree.

It is also my understanding that the TTC was intended to be the central transportation hub for the entire property. That did not work out as planned either.

 

[Javier Antonio Nisa Avila]

I think the monorail system is a modern and efficient transport. The only thing is the need to modernize comboys by others that can be customized according to the need of ridership. The truth larger preview the draft to AK and HS would be perfect, so all the parks would be interconnected and reaching any park could move smoothly. Moreover, this was one of the dreams of our dear Walter Elias Disney

 

[Brad Bishop]

It is also my understanding that the TTC was intended to be the central transportation hub for the entire property. That did not work out as planned either.

I've heard the same thing but the location of it doesn't make sense with regards to that. It's way too far North to really be a transportation hub for the entire property.

It's probably more likely that it was the transportation hub for the property in 1971. It got you to the park, the resorts around the lake, and to future resorts (of which only Grand Floridian was really built).

 

[Master Yoda]

I've heard the same thing but the location of it doesn't make sense with regards to that. It's way too far North to really be a transportation hub for the entire property.

It's probably more likely that it was the transportation hub for the property in 1971. It got you to the park, the resorts around the lake, and to future resorts (of which only Grand Floridian was really built).

A centrally located transportation hub is not always better...it produces more consistent travel times to all locations...but that is not always the best thing to do.

It has been a while since I have done much research on it, but from what I remember the most supported concept was to have the hub closer to the places receiving the most traffic.This shortens the travel time and allows you to maximize the effectiveness of whatever form of transportation methods you are using.

For instance, if you have 10k people per hour going to location A and 1k per hour going to location B and a transportation system that can handle 250 passengers per trip, it would be better to locate the hub closer to location A so you can make more trips per hour.