Rumor New Monorails Coming Soon?

[Jonathan Wang]

Very true.

I have talked to a monorail driver that said when looking back on the Epcot line you can see the train bounce along the track. Of course the Epcot beams were built onsite and not as sound as the MK line built off.

i mean its also built on a swamp land. haha

 

[s8film40]

Very true.

I have talked to a monorail driver that said when looking back on the Epcot line you can see the train bounce along the track. Of course the Epcot beams were built onsite and not as sound as the MK line built off.

I think that might have been me. I know I’ve made that comment a few times.

 

[msg7]

I think that might have been me. I know I’ve made that comment a few times.

I believe you said that on that podcast you shared with us a few weeks back...

 

[Jonathan Wang]

I think that might have been me. I know I’ve made that comment a few times.

it was

I believe you said that on that podcast you shared with us a few weeks back...

i need to listen to it again, it was pretty interesting.

 

[Rteetz]

I think that might have been me. I know I’ve made that comment a few times.

It wasn't hear that I got that but certainly backs it up.

 

[Rich Brownn]

Well remember those monorails were designed well past 30 years ago. So I doubt they were built for anything that fast. I’m sure with new age tech we can have comfortable and fast monorails. I mean look at bullet trains.... those things are super comfortable, if you never ridden one go do it when you get a chance

Unless its changed, the top speed on the trains was set at 40mph. Go too fast on a curve (even one thats banked) and you get axel contacts galore...

 

[Rich Brownn]

The driver used to have manual control of the throttle (yes, I know, it has a different proper name.. @s8film40, I need you here lol...) which allowed them to shift into 5 power increments, neutral (coast), and 4 braking increments. They had so much more control over the speed and control of the train which allowed them to gently bring the train to a stop... They could bring the train down from neutral to b1 without much jerkiness while on the other hand, the Thales system probably jolts the train down into b2 or 3 immediately... Plus, when entering and exiting stations, for some reason, the Thales system lets the train speed up to about 10 mph and then shifts into neutral which makes for a very jerky ride.... With automation, I'm assuming that they can program it to give a very smooth ride similar to manual control.. I'm just not sure why they haven't yet....

The hardest thing for new drivers back then was stopping the train. You'd usually over or undershoot until you got used to it.

 

[Jonathan Wang]

Unless its changed, the top speed on the trains was set at 40mph. Go too fast on a curve (even one thats banked) and you get axel contacts galore...

they can go faster but they were software limited to what disney wanted @s8film40 or @Rteetz wanna confirm for me tho?

The hardest thing for new drivers back then was stopping the train. You'd usually over or undershoot until you got used to it.

i remember this from when i was a kid.

 

[Lensman]

Isn't the Epcot line the only one that goes in two directions?

The Express and Resort lines always go the one direction.

What I mean is that due to the ways that trains get transferred between lines, if the cab was only on one side they'd be forced to run the trains in one particular direction on each line or to creating a reversing roundhouse or spur.

BTW, I specifically mentioned only doubling the express line in order to avoid modifying the other stations since neither the resort line nor the Epcot line need additional capacity. That way there's only two stations that need to be modified.

Note that another possibility that we could study is the idea of adding two stations to the express line, a second MK station and an additional TTC station. We'd have to do a traffic simulation, but I suspect that they could also double throughput on the line that way if they had the right signaling. But I also don't know enough about signal requirements and distance/length rules to know whether the two nearly adjacent stations can be operated such that a train is allowed to pull into the "second" station if the "first" station already has a train in it. Having two trains attached head-to-tail solves this problem but also creates other requirements.

 

[Jonathan Wang]

What I mean is that due to the ways that trains get transferred between lines, if the cab was only on one side they'd be forced to run the trains in one particular direction on each line or to creating a reversing roundhouse or spur.

BTW, I specifically mentioned only doubling the express line in order to avoid modifying the other stations since neither the resort line nor the Epcot line need additional capacity. That way there's only two stations that need to be modified.

Note that another possibility that we could study is the idea of adding two stations to the express line, a second MK station and an additional TTC station. We'd have to do a traffic simulation, but I suspect that they could also double throughput on the line that way if they had the right signaling. But I also don't know enough about signal requirements and distance/length rules to know whether the two nearly adjacent stations can be operated such that a train is allowed to pull into the "second" station if the "first" station already has a train in it. Having two trains attached head-to-tail solves this problem but also creates other requirements.

do you mean with a switch? or with a inline station somewhere else.

 

[Lensman]

do you mean with a switch? or with a inline station somewhere else.

Yes No, my crazy idea is a second inline station each at TTC and MK. I think traffic analysis would show that with proper zoned safety switching signaling, you'd get additional throughput of something like 150%-180% of the current stations. The only benefit of this over larger trains is that train size would remain constant across the system - you wouldn't need the doubled linked trains. The the downside is that your throughput is less than the 200% you'd get from that arrangement.

Of course the original expansion options that people have mentioned are more likely - just increasing the length of the monorails by adding a seventh car.

 

[Jonathan Wang]

Yes, my crazy idea is a second inline station each at TTC and MK. I think traffic analysis would show that with proper zoned safety switching, you'd get additional throughput of something like 150%-180% of the current stations. The only benefit of this over larger trains is that train size would remain constant across the system - you wouldn't need the doubled linked trains. The the downside is that your throughput is less than the 200% you'd get from that arrangement.

Of course the original expansion options that people have mentioned are more likely - just increasing the length of the monorails by adding a seventh car.

I think the switches are a bit slow for what your expecting them to do

 

[BalooChicago]

Not without rebuilding the hurricane doors. Again.

I’ve wished they’d replace the glass walls on the concourse with something more, well, contemporary, like a cable-net wall.

 

[Lensman]

I think the switches are a bit slow for what your expecting them to do

I guess I should have said, "No, my crazy idea is a second inline station each at TTC and MK." Or "No to the first question and yes to the second, my crazy idea is a second inline station each at TTC and MK".

Let me see if I can come up with some text art to clarify.

|------MK1--MK2----|
|-----TTC1--TTC2----|

Are you mocking me? lol

 

[Lensman]

I’ve wished they’d replace the glass walls on the concourse with something more, well, contemporary, like a cable-net wall.

What glass walls on the concourse? Do you mean the giant glass walls closing the two ends of the atrium?

Isn't that a bigger project than replacing the doors covering the monorail openings?

That said, cable net walls look very neat and... contemporary.

 

[trainplane3]

What glass walls on the concourse? Do you mean the giant glass walls closing the two ends of the atrium?

Isn't that a bigger project than replacing the doors covering the monorail openings?

That said, cable net walls look very neat and... contemporary.

I'd assume that's what they mean. I think it could work but, why change a massive glass wall for...another glass wall?
And yes, they are quite neat. Especially when you are 25+ stories up and the wall spans 5 floors itself:

Poor panorama but imagine this going a solid 5 floors in a open area (where this was at). Also note the simple little diagram off to the right describing how the wall was put together.

Good luck getting me any closer to that wall. There's something about "only" a piece of glass and some cable keeping it together that won't let me near it, even though it's 110% safe.

 

[Rodan75]

Random question. Instead of lengthening the stations couldn’t they just design the cars so that passengers pass through the first and last cars and just feed thru doors that fit in the station?

 

[Rteetz]

Random question. Instead of lengthening the stations couldn’t they just design the cars so that passengers pass through the first and last cars and just feed thru doors that fit in the station?

Could they? Sure. Will they? Very unlikely. The stations also serve as shelter for the trains and if you have ends sticking out the trains are exposed.

 

[Disone]

I think the switches are a bit slow for what your expecting them to do

Modern switches are much faster. Even quick. In the Las Vegas line the system does not Loop. The train pulls into the End of Line Station, and in the time it takes it to unload and reload the switch has been made and it departs out in the opposite direction it came in, switching to the other beam. It is very quick.

If Walt Disney World still had a slow season it would probably be advantageous for them to shut down the line for a month or so to replace the switches with modern day switch tracks.

 

[Robbiem]

Random question. Instead of lengthening the stations couldn’t they just design the cars so that passengers pass through the first and last cars and just feed thru doors that fit in the station?

Thye have done this in London with some of the new tube trains. If you are in the front or back cars depending on where the train stops you might have to walk through to the next car to get off the train. It works ok but the trains have to stop longer at each station so you have a trade off between how many trains tou can run vs how many people you can fit on each train