News New Gondola Transportation - Disney Skyliner -

[s8film40]

I was referring to options when booking specifically. But if a guest complained once at the resort a lateral resort transfer would be a potential option.

Yeah people don't research stuff like that. There are countless people who really know nothing about WDW as a whole when arriving much less the exact transportation options at their resort.

Edit: Also if someone is really adamantly complaining they would possibly end up with an upgrade lateral moves don't usually go over too well.

 

[Cesar R M]

Port Orleans Riverside is a little bigger then the pre-renovation Coronado, but I assume Coronado will end up with more rooms when the expansion is done.

POR really has more rooms than Coronado? they did a really good job in not looking like a massive hotel. POR and DAK are my favourite resorts.

 

[Cesar R M]

The monorail doesn't sway in the wind like these will.

That along with "just a single cable" (I know, it's a thick steel cable, but it's a perception thing) holding you in the air freaks her out.

Except The monorails sway with normal movement and while accelerating AND during some turns.

 

[s8film40]

Except The monorails sway with normal movement and while accelerating AND during some turns.

Fun thing to look for: If you're in the GF station and an express train goes by, around the time it passes the pool and DVC you can watch the monorail beam sway back and forth.

 

[Cesar R M]

Only when the monorails are down.

and on busy days?
I seen buses going to the contemporary and poly last year's (2015-2016) new years.

 

[Cesar R M]

Fun thing to look for: If you're in the GF station and an express train goes by, around the time it passes the pool and DVC you can watch the monorail beam sway back and forth.

Please tell me the beams are supposed to do that by design to dissipate energy and not by the soft land in D:

 

[peter11435]

and on busy days?
I seen buses going to the contemporary and poly last year's (2015-2016) new years.

Correct. There are a few scenarios where buses are provided from those resorts. Guests being afraid of the monorail is not generally one of them.

 

[s8film40]

Please tell me the beams are supposed to do that by design to dissipate energy and not by the soft land in D:

Yeah, it's actually pretty amazing just how flexible they are. They're pre-stressed concrete, so there are cables running through the concrete pulling it together.

 

[s8film40]

Correct. There are a few scenarios where buses are provided from those resorts. Guests being afraid of the monorail is not generally one of them.

Guests afraid of the monorails ride the boats.

 

[peter11435]

Guests afraid of the monorails ride the boats.

Not from the contemporary. And a boat won't take to Epcot from any of the monorail resorts.

 

[Minthorne]

I think the actual number of guests that won't ride and who do not realize their resort choice limits their transportation options will be low.

 

[s8film40]

Not from the contemporary. And a boat won't take to Epcot from any of the monorail resorts.

There's a walkway. The MK monorail resorts have Epcot busses.

 

[peter11435]

There's a walkway. The MK monorail resorts have Epcot busses.

The MK monorail resorts only run buses to Epcot when the monorail is down.

 

[mmascari]

Really? I thought I had read 50' somewhere?

While I don't know the actual height, it's not that hard to guess about what it will look like.

The few easy rules:

Higher towers that are far apart allow for a larger sag in the line and still have the low point high enough.
More towers allow for less of a sag and a more constant height.
We have no idea the number of towers, but the easy guess is somewhere in the middle range balancing how many, height, and distance between them. Higher is more expensive, greater number of shorter is more expensive. Someplace in the middle is a balance.

But, the even easier height guess is based on the road crossings and rescue equipment. In the woods surrounded by trees the height doesn't matter much. For rescue, they already have monorail rescue equipment. Something about the same height, or within the capabilities of that existing equipment would minimize the need for new stuff.

Finally, the road crossing are the real determination. Minimum height of the bottom of any car needs to be taller than the normal truck traffic road height plus some safety margin. The easy guess for this is the bottom of a car will be at least as high as the top road surface is above the lower road service where there are overpasses. Trucks already have to be able to pass under the overpasses, and the overpass thickness is a stand in for that safety margin.

The other road consideration is oversized load restrictions. Things like when they bring in a huge crane or water tower or other gigantic item. If all the roads being crossed already go under overpasses, the overpass already sets the limit for that stuff. If one of them doesn't though, then the cable (not the car bottom, so a different measure point) should be high enough to allow any future oversized load to pass under the cable. They can remove the cars, but getting the cable out of the way is a lot more work. Not impossible, but if they already KNOW they've got cranes that need to pass through and the cranes are X feet tall and already following special routes to avoid overpasses, they'll not want the cable to complicate that already messy process.

Thinking about all of those, you can kind of visualize something balanced in the middle. And it's nowhere near as tall as the Whistler PEAK 2 PEAK is. Probably lower than many ski lifts too.

 

[larryz]

Doesn't the main option still exist? You know the one that says that you can go to a resort that doesn't have the gondola or should WDW be a once size fits all type of place? Choice is a wonderful thing!

Good question -- as WDW "re-values" the resorts by proximity to attractions instead of amenities/service, who's to say they won't start charging and placing guests by "transportation distance/time" to the parks than by "room/amenity value level"? IOW, "Close/short" replaces "Deluxe," "Medium/medium" replaces "Moderate," and "Distant/long" replaces "Value." In that case, they could make good on their fine print advice that they won't guarantee a room in a specific resort, but only in a resort matching the category room rate charges the guest desires to pay... the Gondola system thereby elevating the former values they connect to Epcot and DHS to "medium/medium" status -- maybe even "Close/short" if the cable moves fast enough...

 

[GoofGoof]

There are indeed a small minority of people who don't like the monorails. It's not an issue they simply take the boat or the bus. Same will be true here. It's not like gondalas are going to be the only option, just the primary one.

Just to clarify all of this debate. The monorail resorts do not run buses for people with fear of heights to MK or EPCOT. They only run buses in special circumstances like the monorail being down or huge crowd days. It's possible to avoid the monorail at some of those resorts by using your own car or car service, walking/boat if available or by taking a bus somewhere else and switching but the resorts serviced by the gondola do not have boats or walking trails to DHS or EPCOT so that won't be an option. I see those resorts operating the same way as the monorail resorts. They will not offer buses and the gondola at the same time to those parks. If the gondolas go down for any reason they will have buses as a backup.

As far as height goes, the monorail at its peak height is over 60 feet off the ground. The gondolas will not likely go higher so there's a similar height level as the monorail. I think some people are picturing a ski lift on the side of a mountain. Peak to peak at whistler is over 1,000 feet above the ground at its high point. This will be nothing like that.

 

[GoofGoof]

While I don't know the actual height, it's not that hard to guess about what it will look like.

The few easy rules:

Higher towers that are far apart allow for a larger sag in the line and still have the low point high enough.
More towers allow for less of a sag and a more constant height.
We have no idea the number of towers, but the easy guess is somewhere in the middle range balancing how many, height, and distance between them. Higher is more expensive, greater number of shorter is more expensive. Someplace in the middle is a balance.

But, the even easier height guess is based on the road crossings and rescue equipment. In the woods surrounded by trees the height doesn't matter much. For rescue, they already have monorail rescue equipment. Something about the same height, or within the capabilities of that existing equipment would minimize the need for new stuff.

Finally, the road crossing are the real determination. Minimum height of the bottom of any car needs to be taller than the normal truck traffic road height plus some safety margin. The easy guess for this is the bottom of a car will be at least as high as the top road surface is above the lower road service where there are overpasses. Trucks already have to be able to pass under the overpasses, and the overpass thickness is a stand in for that safety margin.

The other road consideration is oversized load restrictions. Things like when they bring in a huge crane or water tower or other gigantic item. If all the roads being crossed already go under overpasses, the overpass already sets the limit for that stuff. If one of them doesn't though, then the cable (not the car bottom, so a different measure point) should be high enough to allow any future oversized load to pass under the cable. They can remove the cars, but getting the cable out of the way is a lot more work. Not impossible, but if they already KNOW they've got cranes that need to pass through and the cranes are X feet tall and already following special routes to avoid overpasses, they'll not want the cable to complicate that already messy process.

Thinking about all of those, you can kind of visualize something balanced in the middle. And it's nowhere near as tall as the Whistler PEAK 2 PEAK is. Probably lower than many ski lifts too.

Good post. I think they will try to keep it low enough that emergency services equipment and plans used for the monorail could be used for this system too. If they need to emergency evac a gondola car they need a way to reach it. The processes and equipment are in place for the monorail so it wouldn't be hard to expand that to the gondolas assuming they don't exceed the height limits of the emergency equipment.

 

[Laketravis]

Over time we could see an increase in quick, paid direct service offerings with changes to the current slow, free, multi-point service. I'd like to think Disney still has some innovative energy left and might see the usefulness of a large fleet of for-a-fee autonomous electric vehicles in the not so distant future. Ground transportation could slowly shift to that model while the "free" mass people mover is overhead.

Well whadaya know:

LA TIMES: Walt Disney World plans to deploy driverless shuttles


.

 

[s8film40]

The MK monorail resorts only run buses to Epcot when the monorail is down.

Just to clarify all of this debate. The monorail resorts do not run buses for people with fear of heights to MK or EPCOT. They only run buses in special circumstances like the monorail being down or huge crowd days. It's possible to avoid the monorail at some of those resorts by using your own car or car service, walking/boat if available or by taking a bus somewhere else and switching but the resorts serviced by the gondola do not have boats or walking trails to DHS or EPCOT so that won't be an option. I see those resorts operating the same way as the monorail resorts. They will not offer buses and the gondola at the same time to those parks. If the gondolas go down for any reason they will have buses as a backup.

I seem to remember the Epcot busses running pretty regularly, it's been a while though so I don't know.

Still no one answered my question: If the MK resorts have monorails why do they also have boats?

In any case the whole discussion is kind of silly. We all agree that there is only the slimmest minority that will have an issue with these gondolas and even then there are other options. Maybe not the most convenient options, but options nonetheless.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Won't most people who are afraid of heights have their own vehicle at WDW? After all, did they fly in on a plane that goes much higher?

Irrational fears can be situational. A plane can be fine while something else is not. Even one larger gondola could be fine while a smaller one is terrifying.

While I don't know the actual height, it's not that hard to guess about what it will look like.

The few easy rules:

Higher towers that are far apart allow for a larger sag in the line and still have the low point high enough.
More towers allow for less of a sag and a more constant height.
We have no idea the number of towers, but the easy guess is somewhere in the middle range balancing how many, height, and distance between them. Higher is more expensive, greater number of shorter is more expensive. Someplace in the middle is a balance.

But, the even easier height guess is based on the road crossings and rescue equipment. In the woods surrounded by trees the height doesn't matter much. For rescue, they already have monorail rescue equipment. Something about the same height, or within the capabilities of that existing equipment would minimize the need for new stuff.

Finally, the road crossing are the real determination. Minimum height of the bottom of any car needs to be taller than the normal truck traffic road height plus some safety margin. The easy guess for this is the bottom of a car will be at least as high as the top road surface is above the lower road service where there are overpasses. Trucks already have to be able to pass under the overpasses, and the overpass thickness is a stand in for that safety margin.

The other road consideration is oversized load restrictions. Things like when they bring in a huge crane or water tower or other gigantic item. If all the roads being crossed already go under overpasses, the overpass already sets the limit for that stuff. If one of them doesn't though, then the cable (not the car bottom, so a different measure point) should be high enough to allow any future oversized load to pass under the cable. They can remove the cars, but getting the cable out of the way is a lot more work. Not impossible, but if they already KNOW they've got cranes that need to pass through and the cranes are X feet tall and already following special routes to avoid overpasses, they'll not want the cable to complicate that already messy process.

Thinking about all of those, you can kind of visualize something balanced in the middle. And it's nowhere near as tall as the Whistler PEAK 2 PEAK is. Probably lower than many ski lifts too.

Early in the thread I posted FDOT's minimum vertical clearances. Clearances can be as low as 14'-0". Anything taller than 13'-6" is considered oversized and requires a permit from the state that includes a predetermined, filed route of travel.