New Monorail Fleet for WDW

[Master Yoda]

This is going to be hugely unpopular, but I'm wearing my flame-retardant skivvies. Does anyone else thinks the monorail is just a royal pain in the buns? I know the whole point about the "magical" transformation from the parking lot to the front of MK but it just takes so damn long. I'm a local and when I consider going to a WDW park for the day or evening, there are times when I flat-out won't even consider the Magic Kingdom because it's such a hassle to get to and fro, especially if you're leaving at parade/fireworks time. I really look at the monorail access to MK as more of a nuisance than a benefit.

That is more of a logistics problem then a monorail issue. You must use monorail or boat to get to the parking lot. It is a nice romantic notion when arriving at the park, but it is like sitting through 20 minutes of credits with no stinger at the end when you want to leave.

 

[mickeysbrother]

I will check and see if there are any sources in MONTREAL QUEBEC since Bombardier is located in montreal. I do know some people and may have an answer for you guys in the coming weeks. Lets keep our fingers crossed.

 

[Tim_4]

Reason:Too many people

Eh, I kind of feel that way even if it's not crowded. If I go to Epcot, I simply park in the main lot or at the BW and walk in the park. At MK, the lot is so big that depending on where you are you really need to take the tram, wait for the security spiel, unload at the TTC, wait for the next monorail, ride around the beam, hold for further traffic clearance, advance to the unload platform, and on and on. Even if there are no lines, that whole process round trip takes like an hour. It's not a "laziness" issue either because I always walk from my car at DHS, DAK, and Epcot. Just impatience I guess.

 

[Big C 73]

The biggest expense is elevating the track which is absolutely necessary. The second you have cars and rail lines sharing the same elevation you are asking for disaster. Given the number of people the sue Disney because it rained or they stubbed their toe, I would hate to think what would happen if trains and cars started to mix.

My lord, they would have lawsuits up the ying yang. Knowing people these days, they would pull out in front of one just to get a big ole check.

 

[choco choco]

Also, is it entirely necessary that the monorail tracks be as highly elevated as they are? I can understand the height for truck clearance in places where the tracks must pass over roads, but why are such long stretches of monorail tracks between EPCOT and the TTC that don't go over streets elevated so high in the air?

Because if there is anything more expensive than building something that high up in the air, it's bringing something already up in the air back down, and then having to design something that will drag it back up there again. Cost inefficient. Energy inefficient. Waste of time to engineer it. Just leave it up there.

 

[GeneralKnowledge]

Why would they connect all aprks, especially when over 50% of people say they are half day parks.

Since they're only half day parks already, they'd rather give up and make transportation between the two half day parks more efficient and readily available rather than actually flesh out the parks to make them full day parks. Disney is just gonna concede to Universal and let them take that extra day of peoples' vacations.

 

[Admiral01]

It is, but it is still a publicly owned business that has to answer to the shareholders. Transportation produces next to zero returns. If you are creative enough you can show it breaking even on the books, but most of the time it looses money. For that reason Disney, like every other company in the world, is going to spend as little as they have to on it. The only time you will see monorail expansion is if they have no other choice or can get someone else to pay the tab.

I really don't have any argument here. You are correct. For the record, I think you make good, thoughtful, and insightful posts. I'm just talking here...

I guess I miss the days when Disney viewed the entire WDW resort as a whole, instead of a bunch of parts that all need to individually make money. Some things, like the monorail, just don't directly make money. It seems like they add to the experience, though. I know I spend more money on property when I use the monorail. I visit the monorail resorts to buy dinner and drinks when I otherwise would not. Sometimes, when I am staying on property for work, and I end up working late into the evening, instead of getting back to the resort and heading to a park we will just go park and ride the monorail around. We always end up spending money on something that we wouldn't have spent money on had the monorail not been there. It is hard to quantify, and even if I did quantify it, this sort of spending alone doesn't make up for the CapEx of the monorail. I personally think they add to the overall experience, but that is just me personally.

Disney faces the challenges that every major company faces when they are stuck between immediate profit for the shareholders, and innovation.

 

[Monorail Mike]

I am always one to be super skeptical about any rumors I hear, but I happen to have a very reliable source for this new information!

A Monorail CM told me yesterday that he and the rest of the Monorail transport team were informed by their managers that the topic was discussed at length in a recent Transportation board meeting. Supposedly, the entire fleet is to be replaced, as the (now nearing) 30-year-old Mark VIs are becoming completely out-dated with regard to being able to find proper parts to make necessary repairs. Alledgedly, 24 brand new, custom trains will be replacing the current fleet. That's right, 24. Apparently, there was more discussion on connecting the two remaining parks. He also said that Epcot would become the new TTC, as it has the platform capacity space that the current TTC does not.

I was hoping someone might be able to at least confirm if this holds any water at all. As reliable as my source is, I'll still believe it when I see it. . I know very well how rumors can sound real when discussed among CMs.

Ok, I have to chime in on this too.

No doubt the fleet will need to be replaced at some point (usually due to metal fatigue), but have any of you taken a real good look at the beamway lately? After 40+ years of service the concrete is looking pretty rough, even with their top-notch nightly maintenance. I suspect that they are looking to phase in new trains, probably 4 at a time [4x6=24] since that's how many run on each of the 3 routes) after each route receives completely new beams. It will probably be a long term project (5-10 years). They might even add an emergency walkway between the beams as a safety measure and to support the communications antennas for the driverless system. One way or another, some investment will be needed to keep the system running for another 40 years!

 

[olinecoach61]

I was so excited when I saw this thread title...

 

[Bairstow]

The biggest expense is elevating the track which is absolutely necessary. The second you have cars and rail lines sharing the same elevation you are asking for disaster. Given the number of people the sue Disney because it rained or they stubbed their toe, I would hate to think what would happen if trains and cars started to mix.

I wasn't suggesting they put light rail in the roads. Houston's system is unusually poorly-implemented.
I just don't see why WDW couldn't benefit from some sort of cheaper, less-elevated rail system.

 

[Tim_4]

I really don't have any argument here. You are correct. For the record, I think you make good, thoughtful, and insightful posts. I'm just talking here...

I guess I miss the days when Disney viewed the entire WDW resort as a whole, instead of a bunch of parts that all need to individually make money. Some things, like the monorail, just don't directly make money. It seems like they add to the experience, though. I know I spend more money on property when I use the monorail. I visit the monorail resorts to buy dinner and drinks when I otherwise would not. Sometimes, when I am staying on property for work, and I end up working late into the evening, instead of getting back to the resort and heading to a park we will just go park and ride the monorail around. We always end up spending money on something that we wouldn't have spent money on had the monorail not been there. It is hard to quantify, and even if I did quantify it, this sort of spending alone doesn't make up for the CapEx of the monorail. I personally think they add to the overall experience, but that is just me personally.

Disney faces the challenges that every major company faces when they are stuck between immediate profit for the shareholders, and innovation.

The theory is, you WOULD have done all those things and spent all that money without the monorails, just maybe at different places. The monorail does not make you buy dinner and drinks, it merely facilitates WHERE you buy dinner and drinks. Without the monorail, you might boat over to the Wilderness Lodge for and eat at Artist Point rather than monorail to the Contemporary to eat at Cali Grill. The monorail doesn't make you hungry or thirsty, and when you're hungry and thirsty you're going to eat and drink whether the monorail is there or not. You don't think about this when you're actually doing it but it's called "cannibalization" and it's absolutely real. This comes up with merch all the time. People say "Disney should offer more unique merchandise because they'll sell more stuff." Studies show that this just doesn't play out in reality. If someone will buy ONE t-shirt, they'll only buy ONE t-shirt whether it's resort specific or completely generic. It's not like they'd buy the generic shirt PLUS the new unique one.

 

[Monorail Mike]

Because if there is anything more expensive than building something that high up in the air, it's bringing something already up in the air back down, and then having to design something that will drag it back up there again. Cost inefficient. Energy inefficient. Waste of time to engineer it. Just leave it up there.

Bob Gurr, in his book, mentioned a project that was kicked around in the early days of WDW that would have been something like a Monorail body on a bus chassis. It would run along dedicated roads on the property. They called it the TurboTram!

 

[lazyboy97o]

I wasn't suggesting they put light rail in the roads. Houston's system is unusually poorly-implemented.
I just don't see why WDW couldn't benefit from some sort of cheaper, less-elevated rail system.

Particularly here in the US, one of the factors in choosing light rail over bus is perception. In Walt Disney World, people do not need to be convinced to take mass transit. Light rail, like any form of fixed rail, fails in many of the same ways as the monorails in terms of flexibility and shutting down due to the failure of a single train.

 

[Prock3]

Okay the only way this could possible be true is if the CM meant to say they began the design process for new monorails, which in a conversation with a manager one would probably just hear "blah blah blah blah NEW MONORAILS blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah 24, blah blah blah blah 2015"

 

[lazyboy97o]

Okay the only way this could possible be true is if the CM meant to say they began the design process for new monorails, which in a conversation with a manager one would probably just hear "blah blah blah blah NEW MONORAILS blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah 24, blah blah blah blah 2015"

There been public talk about upgrading the trains. I wonder if the upgrade to automation would begin in 2015 and that is being confused?

Also, just a nitpick on the original post, but the first Mark VIs hit the beams in 1989. That's not quite nearing 30 years in my book.

 

[GrumpyFan]

Bob Gurr, in his book, mentioned a project that was kicked around in the early days of WDW that would have been something like a Monorail body on a bus chassis. It would run along dedicated roads on the property. They called it the TurboTram!

Isn't that basically what Bombardier has with their Automated People Movers (APM)? It's basically a heavy duty bus on a closed road bed. DFW airport has one of these.

 

[RunnerEd]

As long as the new trains have a decent paint scheme instead of the boring "Monorail White," I'm good! I just returned from my first trip to Disneyland and I loved the sleek look of their monorails.

 

[PeterAlt]

Wrong. Reedy Creek gives Disney an advantage over CORPORATIONS, not cities and towns. EVERY city and town (including Las Vegas) can float tax-free bonds. The lack of tax on municipal bond income is what keeps the interest rates low.

Source: Internal Revenue Code (Title 26 of the United States Code), Subtitle A, Chapter 1, Subchapter B, Part III, Section 103, Paragraph (a).

Wrong, again. The state of Florida granted Reedy Creek certain government-like powers, such as zoning, bond sales, and even eminent domain. The parking garages going into Disney Springs are being paid for by a Reedy Creek bond sale. The whole improvement of swamp land to buildable land and the creation of the Seven Seas Lagoon before WDW opened in 1971 was financed through Reedy Creek bond sales.

 

[PeterAlt]

I was so excited when I saw this thread title...

Then what happened?

 

[PeterAlt]

The thing that really irks me lately about Disney is that they are now ultra secretive about everything they're working on. I would like it if they would make an announcement already about so many things and we can stop arguing what they will or will not do, but competition has forced them into stealth mode. I don't blame them! Look at what leaks such as Beastly Kingdom have cost and what the competition has gained! The days when you could pick up a book a year before a Disney theme park opens detailing all the opening-day attractions AS WELL AS FUTURE attractions are gone! I'm referring to the EC preview book that came out at least a year before EC did. It should concept art for all the attractions planned for the next ten years, including Horizons, Living Seas, health, space, Israel, Spain, and Equatorial Africa. Only Horizons would get built as showed and Living Seas mostly as showed. Then, the Disney Decade of the 1990's showing what was planned for the next ten years. Only some of these would get built. Now, everything is secret until they build it. Even Avatar is still secret even though this is an exception to the new rule of secrecy. They probably have a lot of cool things in the works and in the plans for the next ten years, but they're choosing not to share anything until each matures enough in the development cycles...