Screamscape - Monorail Expansion Rumor

[jayhawkmickey]

OK. I've tried to find the info out there on the web and on this thread but I've got nada. How much does a monorail line cost just for infrastructure aka the precast concrete, three new stations, and control systems? Disney already owns the land which in Vegas and other cities is a huge investment along with moving the infrastructure that's already there. Using the EPCOT station as a transfer to north-south from east-west lines would shave millions for new stations and the DD, HS, and AK stations could drop lower to the ground to save on the costs of a fully elevated station. I know that the hotels will never be served by a new line directly, but the park to park travel would be dramaticly easier and would add just a little more cool factor to the "world". The inflated financial numbers just don't apply to a place where the land for the rails is already owned by the opperator and the build site is wide open over most of the tracks path. Please enlighten me with some firm numbers on material and labor costs for a monorail system. Oh P.S. run the rails down the edges of the highways since they are already compacted to an extent and served by electrical and easily accesed for maint.:shrug:

 

[Master Yoda]

OK. I've tried to find the info out there on the web and on this thread but I've got nada. How much does a monorail line cost just for infrastructure aka the precast concrete, three new stations, and control systems? Disney already owns the land which in Vegas and other cities is a huge investment along with moving the infrastructure that's already there. Using the EPCOT station as a transfer to north-south from east-west lines would shave millions for new stations and the DD, HS, and AK stations could drop lower to the ground to save on the costs of a fully elevated station. I know that the hotels will never be served by a new line directly, but the park to park travel would be dramaticly easier and would add just a little more cool factor to the "world". The inflated financial numbers just don't apply to a place where the land for the rails is already owned by the opperator and the build site is wide open over most of the tracks path. Please enlighten me with some firm numbers on material and labor costs for a monorail system. Oh P.S. run the rails down the edges of the highways since they are already compacted to an extent and served by electrical and easily accesed for maint.:shrug:

They don't exist in the wild. I am sure Disney has a pretty good idea what they are, but they are sitting tight on that info.

 

[Timon]

OK. I've tried to find the info out there on the web and on this thread but I've got nada. How much does a monorail line cost just for infrastructure aka the precast concrete, three new stations, and control systems? Disney already owns the land which in Vegas and other cities is a huge investment along with moving the infrastructure that's already there. Using the EPCOT station as a transfer to north-south from east-west lines would shave millions for new stations and the DD, HS, and AK stations could drop lower to the ground to save on the costs of a fully elevated station. I know that the hotels will never be served by a new line directly, but the park to park travel would be dramaticly easier and would add just a little more cool factor to the "world". The inflated financial numbers just don't apply to a place where the land for the rails is already owned by the opperator and the build site is wide open over most of the tracks path. Please enlighten me with some firm numbers on material and labor costs for a monorail system. Oh P.S. run the rails down the edges of the highways since they are already compacted to an extent and served by electrical and easily accesed for maint.:shrug:

To figure the cost of new Monorail Lines on a Fan Web Site it's important to use the correct equipment.

Below is what most Fans use and Federal Goverment Budget Departments, good luck.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The INNOVIA 300 (Sao Paulo) can't run on WDW tracks, the track isn't wide enough, the trains are couple feet wider which means every station would have to have the train "trench(?)" widened. Most stations can be made longer but wider trains are a problem.

The INNOVIA 200 (Las Vegas) trains are the same size as WDW trains, maybe the cars could be longer because most of the WDW system is gentle curves. The problem lies in the Shop area which uses old fashioned pivot switches and sharper turns to go over them. Newer monorail systems use high speed switches - beam replacement (Epcot Line) and Articulated (Hitachi & Scomi)

If WDW put in an East-West Line from DTD to AK it could be the INNOVIA 300 and have a transfer station at EPCOT, but the Epcot Line trains would have to be separate systems. Maybe not worth the change.

It's kind of funny how one of the long time selling features of monorails, their ability to be twisted into about any place, is now very much a detriment to upgrading a monorail system.

 

[Timon]

It's kind of funny how one of the long time selling features of monorails, their ability to be twisted into about any place, is now very much a detriment to upgrading a monorail system.

This applies to all trains too. NYC Subways have size limits to certain lines. In London some Underground cars are so short the doors are curved over to fit the low roof limits. Cars and trucks also, where trucks just won't fit.

The WDW monorail is considered a Small monorail, the INNOVIA 300 is considered a Standard size and as far as I know only Hitachi makes a Large capacity cars. Depending on your size type of monorail, you have to build all your track and stations to match your size standard.

The only options WDW really has to increase capacity is adding a 7th car. OR making the cars independent, automated and unload to a speed ramp in each station like in an Attraction, sort of a Monorail-OmniMover.

 

[s8film40]

This applied to all trains too. NYC Subways have size limits to certain lines. In London some Underground cars are so short the doors are curved over to fit the low roof limits. Cars and trucks also, where trucks just won't fit.

The WDW monorail is considered a Small monorail, the INNOVIA 300 is considered a Standard size and as far as I know only Hitachi makes a Large capacity cars. Depending on your size type of monorail, you have to build all your track and stations to match your size standard.

The only options WDW really has to increase capacity is adding a 7th car. OR making the cars independent, automated and unload to a speed ramp in each station like in an Attraction, sort of a Monorail-OmniMover.

WDW doesn't really need to increase capacity. The existing trains at one loading platform can take in right around 1000 people every ten minutes. With some adjustments this could easily be increased.

 

[Timon]

WDW doesn't really need to increase capacity. The existing trains at one loading platform can take in right around 1000 people every ten minutes. With some adjustments this could easily be increased.

I assumed since people were talking about longer cars and bigger trains they might be talking about capacity. My apologies.

 

[s8film40]

I assumed since people were talking about longer cars and bigger trains they might be talking about capacity. My apologies.

It started as a discussion of how the existing WDW trains could be redesigned more like the larger walkthrough trains, not so much for capacity but for open aesthetic feel. Somehow evolved into discussion of capacity. While an increased capacity would obviously be great I just wanted to point out that it isn't necessary at WDW. No apologies necessary.

 

[Timon]

The current trains can't have walk-thru because of the size of the wheel and drivetrain.

Removing the middle bench is doable - today. This would increase open floor space and allow more movement around each car. Some seats could be added to the sides if seating is important.

 

[jayhawkmickey]

To figure the cost of new Monorail Lines on a Fan Web Site it's important to use the correct equipment.

Below is what most Fans use and Federal Goverment Budget Departments, good luck.

Yeah my magic 8 ball sucks too!:ROFLOL:

 

[Epcot '92]

Using the EPCOT station as a transfer to north-south from east-west lines would shave millions for new stations and the DD, HS, and AK stations could drop lower to the ground to save on the costs of a fully elevated station.

No way there could be a ground station at DHS. The only thing I could see would be an elevated station over the Bus/Medical Parking area...

 

[flynnibus]

Removing the middle bench is doable - today. This would increase open floor space and allow more movement around each car. Some seats could be added to the sides if seating is important.

Again.. if people look at what people actually complain about in the current system.. why would you remove the center bench?

People complain about having to stand on the buses - even though it increases capacity and quickens cycle time.

 

[coolbeans14]

Again.. if people look at what people actually complain about in the current system.. why would you remove the center bench?

People complain about having to stand on the buses - even though it increases capacity and quickens cycle time.

how would they cope with rush hour on the London underground. that experience makes the disney transportation extremely tolerable.

 

[s8film40]

Again.. if people look at what people actually complain about in the current system.. why would you remove the center bench?

People complain about having to stand on the buses - even though it increases capacity and quickens cycle time.

Removing the center bench and placing seats along the windows would allow the same number of seats while opening up more usable floor space.

 

[flynnibus]

how would they cope with rush hour on the London underground. that experience makes the disney transportation extremely tolerable.

Well they aren't on metro transit, nor do they want to be while on vacation.

Remember.. the root of most of the complaints about the bus system stem from most people not being familiar with mass transit here and the stigma buses have as a 'poor persons' transport in America.

People are dreaming up 'what should be..' without taking notice of what people actually complain about in the current system. Transfers, standing, crowding, total transit time, waits for their bus.

 

[flynnibus]

Removing the center bench and placing seats along the windows would allow the same number of seats while opening up more usable floor space.

You assume the walls have enough space to sit the same number of people as the existing bench.. but from what I can see they do not. I don't think you could even fit one side of the bench along the existing walls, let alone BOTH sides of the existing bench. The existing bench footprint is only big enough to sit people back to back.. and then there is the door.

The existing wall space is limited by the doors. The existing design makes the most use of the space for seats.. and puts 'walk through' problems on the station platform instead of on the train. There isn't any need to walk through the current cars (all stations are uniform) and the drive system prevents you from recovering the space at the front/rear of the cars anyways.

The benches are already the most efficient use of the space that includes seats instead of standing.

 

[s8film40]

You assume the walls have enough space to sit the same number of people as the existing bench.. but from what I can see they do not. I don't think you could even fit one side of the bench along the existing walls, let alone BOTH sides of the existing bench. The existing bench footprint is only big enough to sit people back to back.. and then there is the door.

The existing wall space is limited by the doors. The existing design makes the most use of the space for seats.. and puts 'walk through' problems on the station platform instead of on the train. There isn't any need to walk through the current cars (all stations are uniform) and the drive system prevents you from recovering the space at the front/rear of the cars anyways.

The benches are already the most efficient use of the space that includes seats instead of standing.

I'm not sure you understood exactly what I mean. Here is a diagram of what I am suggesting. Yes it isn't exactly the same number of seats but you would only lose two seats. You would however make up for this loss by making better use of the space. For example many times guests will not spread out evenly on the platform and on many occasions one side of a car may be more crowded than another even to the point of leaving empty seats on one side while others crowd into standing room on the other side.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm not sure you understood exactly what I mean. Here is a diagram of what I am suggesting. Yes it isn't exactly the same number of seats but you would only lose two seats. You would however make up for this loss by making better use of the space

Losing 2 out of 10 seats is quite significant - especially when one of the major complaints about the transportation system is having to stand. This is again, people dreaming without focusing on what the real world complaints about the existing system are.

As I said, the current design puts the 'walk through' problems on the platform instead of the train.. if a cabin space is full, the person walks down the platform instead of 'through' the train. They could only walk to the other side of a cabin anyways.. making such value limited.

And the space gained isn't all that effective because it's space at people's feet on both sides. People are far less efficient space-wise then stationary physical objects. People want personal space, and they 'expand' with their bags, etc. You'd probably only get one line of people down that center in your example.. so maybe 4-5 people. For a total gain of 3 people while making the system worse in other ways.

A bad idea

 

[unkadug]

Losing 2 out of 10 seats is quite significant - especially when one of the major complaints about the transportation system is having to stand. This is again, people dreaming without focusing on what the real world complaints about the existing system are.

As I said, the current design puts the 'walk through' problems on the platform instead of the train.. if a cabin space is full, the person walks down the platform instead of 'through' the train. They could only walk to the other side of a cabin anyways.. making such value limited.

And the space gained isn't all that effective because it's space at people's feet on both sides. People are far less efficient space-wise then stationary physical objects. People want personal space, and they 'expand' with their bags, etc. You'd probably only get one line of people down that center in your example.. so maybe 4-5 people. For a total gain of 3 people while making the system worse in other ways.

A bad idea

What other ways, besides two people losing their seats? Sounds to me like you're against it just because it is change. :shrug:

 

[Gregoryp73]

Remember.. the root of most of the complaints about the bus system stem from most people not being familiar with mass transit here and the stigma buses have as a 'poor persons' transport in America.

You've said this on many of occasion, I've found no studies to back this claim up.

If you look at most major cities with many sources of Mass Transit (i.e. New York, Boston, Chicago)...then you will find that the fare schedule for rail compared to bus is relatively the same...in some cases because of transfers and such rail ends up being less expense. So by mere cost per ride alone, if anything should have a "poor person" stigma, it should be the cheapest form of transportation [which would be bicycle ].

I would think if we took a poll of why people do and don't take the bus the most common answer's would be.

Do: because it's the quickest or only option from my current location
Don't: because it's an uncomfortable way to travel.

When I lived in downtown Chicago, it was either cab, L-train, or walking for us...having to wait for the bus, or sit through the stops, or deal with the crowding just wasn't worth the price of admission.

But if were to look at systems like Vancouver B.C., Madison Wisconsin, or even Davis California...they experience high customer satisfaction, and consistent ridership.

So I think if there is any reason for buses being unsuccessful it is poor management and comfort of the system, rather than class of people who ride.