• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Screamscape - Monorail Expansion Rumor

s8film40

Well-Known Member
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 you again are failing to realize is while you would only lose two seats you would ultimately increase the number of seated passengers which in turn would increase the amount of standing space. The idea of addressing the walkthrough "problem" on the platform is actually the real problem they have right now since they are using what was only designed to be an unload platform for a lower capacity train as the load platform. It only takes a small number of people to stop at a car to block all of the remaining train to all guests, this results in cast members having to continuously yell at guests to move down. You also claim that the complaint is not enough seating, if this were the case Disney would be working to increase seating. In actuality they stopped using the fold down seats years ago and just recently actually removed them completely to make more standing room. That's 8 seats per car they removed.
 

flynnibus

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

It creates more chaotic space... mixing people sitting and standing directly adjacent doesn't work nearly as well as 'all standing'. The standing area has seating facing it on both sides.. making it difficult for people to move without tripping on each other. Now add strollers/etc to the mix and see how nasty things get.

It creates the scenario where people must 'move down' to fill the compartment.. making everyone have to climb over each other because people never move all the way into the cab.

It makes people sit with their backs to the windows - which everyone wants to look out during the ride.

Satisfied?
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
What you again are failing to realize is while you would only lose two seats you would ultimately increase the number of seated passengers which in turn would increase the amount of standing space

Yes, please tell me how reducing seats actually increases the # of people sitting?

If you are holding onto the problem of uneven loaded cabins as the way this works.. I think you are really in a game of diminishing returns.

The best gain from such a design is by increasing the quantizer value of the seating arrangements, you make it less likely for groups to split up or skip a cabin for not wanting to split up.

The idea of addressing the walkthrough "problem" on the platform is actually the real problem they have right now since they are using what was only designed to be an unload platform for a lower capacity train as the load platform. It only takes a small number of people to stop at a car to block all of the remaining train to all guests, this results in cast members having to continuously yell at guests to move down

I don't follow you at all. They load the trains on the station platforms that they always have.. where is the 'real loading' platform that they aren't using in your description?

And your description is exactly why they have holding pens to load the platform before the train arrives.

I know at times they've messed with things because the gates didn't have the controls they want... but that's a solution to fix the gates.. not fix the trains.

You also claim that the complaint is not enough seating, if this were the case Disney would be working to increase seating. In actuality they stopped using the fold down seats years ago and just recently actually removed them completely to make more standing room. That's 8 seats per car they removed.

You're mixing stuff here. The complaints about the buses (which this whole monorail expansion is supposed to fix right???) is the standing. The reasoning for altering the center area in the monorails is because of the stroller problems and the crowding the seats brought.

If you want to improve the bus situation by expanding monorails... make the monorails better than the buses. And by what measure? What are the things people don't like about the buses. If you don't do that.. you're just playing with your toys.
 

flynnibus

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

I don't have hard studies.. I'm not going to invest the time to dig up what is clear in most areas of the country.

Look at most areas of the country that have bus service.. but no major rail or subway service. How many people use it? What types of people use it?

Why do communities have such a hard time convincing commuters to use commuter bus lines vs driving?

What view do people have of Greyhound vs driving themselves? Or flying?

Only communities with a long history of mass transit are buses tolerated. And even there, they are low man on the totem pole. Everywhere else, buses are seen as a inferior alternative.. a 'cheap way out' vs building something larger. They require convincing people to use...

Read the complaints about the bus system here. It can generally summed up as 'ew.. buses?' 'I don't want to get on a bus for my vacation!'

There is a strong stigma associated with buses with the majority of Americans. The majority of America gets by without shared public transportation.. so the idea of shared transit vs personal transit is seen as a downward step to start with. In the majority of the country, people take the bus when they can't drive themselves. And buses are the least glamorous of transportation options because they are the most common. Add onto that they stigmas associated with people 'that have to rely on the bus' instead of people that can afford to drive themselves around.. and you get the stigma that buses have for most Americans.

In areas where mass transit is the norm and driving is the exception... you don't have as strong stigmas against buses... because they are seen as a necessity, not 'a step down from driving yourself'. They are viewed as economical, and flexible.

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 :) ].

While there are a handful of cities in America that do have mass transit as 'the norm'... it is really the exception for most of America. American's have been conditioned to prefer personal transportation over shared.

The wealth comparison comes with those that can't afford to drive themselves. Even in cities like NYC, etc... the richer you are, the less likely you are to take mass transit. They take a taxi or town car.

For the majority of America.. mass transit has the stigma of 'something you take because you can't drive yourself' - something you are forced into instead of something you prefer. And the social ladder of the last 60+ years has reenforced that bus transportation is inferior to car, train, boat, or air.

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.

There are still people that turn up their nose at the sight of a bus.. regardless of it's effectiveness. That comes from somewhere...
 

orky8

Well-Known Member
Curious where you're from Flynnibus, because though you talk a lot about mass transportation, you don't really seem to have much experience with it. Having lived in San Francisco, New York and D.C., I can tell you removing seats and making flow better within the trains is essential to efficiency and guest happiness. The D.C. metro has been redoing its cars after wasting who knows how much on studies that show that more standing room makes it quicker and easier for everyone to get in and out with less crowding and more happy customers.

Yes there is a stigma with busses -- there is nothing magical about busses. They are purely transportation and I agree with you, the lowest form of it (but for coolness reasons, not class warfare reasons). You only take a bus if there is no other choice. On the complete flip side of that coin, is Monorails are dang COOL. PERIOD. $10,000 bet that any family with kids (obviously not the elderly or infirmed) would 100% choose standing on a monorail versus sitting on a bus. And for those elderly, guess what -- there are still seats.

Standing on busses is the issue. Having to take busses is the issue. Not having a more ubiquitous and COOL form of transportation is the issue. It's not entirely about getting from point A to point B in the fastest way possible.

But you seem to like being a downer on this thread.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Curious where you're from Flynnibus, because though you talk a lot about mass transportation, you don't really seem to have much experience with it

You totally misread my posts.

What I am describing is not MY view of buses.. I am just able to view things objectively and accept that how I view things is not necessarily how everyone else does. I don't have a problem with buses - but that doesn't mean everyone else feels the same.

I take mass transit all the time. I take it exclusively often (especially when in Oslo). I've riden and relied upon many of the major systems in this country. SF, ATL, DC, NY, BOS, CHI, etc. I've relied on major systems internationally. But what people overlook here is... the view of bus or mass transit in NYC.. is very different than what it is in Savannah. America is dominated not by mass transit - but by cars. In most areas, buses are for those who can't take other forms of transit. A large portion of our population today lived through the period of Urban decay, where the major flight out of cities lead to massive collapses in the quality and cleaniness of urban mass transit. Those images don't just disappear.. especially if you are a person who doesn't live in an area of urban revival so you don't see how things have changed.. you only have the lingering memories of late 70's TV shows.

Having lived in San Francisco, New York and D.C., I can tell you removing seats and making flow better within the trains is essential to efficiency and guest happiness. The D.C. metro has been redoing its cars after wasting who knows how much on studies that show that more standing room makes it quicker and easier for everyone to get in and out with less crowding and more happy customers.

Yes, but that is because that is for a MASS TRANSIT system - This is a vacation transportation system. What we want for our daily commute is not necessarily the same for our vacation. Isn't that exactly why you all are preaching we need futuristic things that aren't every day?

What I value in my daily commute is not necessarily the same what I value after a long night at the MK.

Yes there is a stigma with busses -- there is nothing magical about busses. They are purely transportation and I agree with you, the lowest form of it (but for coolness reasons, not class warfare reasons). You only take a bus if there is no other choice

See this is the feeling people have.. but they fail to connect with WHY they feel that way. That's what I've been elaborating on because most people are just oblivious to why buses aren't cool. If you are a small kid, the bendy part of a bus, and the fact that it drops down to the curb, that the air doors make cool startrek sounds, that they have automatic TVs showing where you are, etc are all 'cool' things. But an adult will still say 'yeah, but its still a bus' because of the baggage they carry about buses.

On the complete flip side of that coin, is Monorails are dang COOL. PERIOD. $10,000 bet that any family with kids (obviously not the elderly or infirmed) would 100% choose standing on a monorail versus sitting on a bus. And for those elderly, guess what -- there are still seats.

Why are they cool? Do you get the same feeling when riding the LV Monorail as you do the WDW monorail? Do you get jazzed every time you ride airtrain at SFO? Or at MCO? They are effectively what you want built.. all standing, elevated, trains.

When you take the 'Disney' out of the monorail equation.. do they really hold the same cool factor for you?

The things that made the WDW monorail cool to me were..
- the quiet operation
- the sleekness
- the clean, door to door possibilities (it can run indoors)
- the elevated view

Really none of those are exclusive to monorails anymore except the elevated view to a degree. I have no affinity to monorails nor desire to elevate them above all other possibilities just because 'they are COOL. PERIOD'. I am being objective.

Standing on busses is the issue. Having to take busses is the issue. Not having a more ubiquitous and COOL form of transportation is the issue. It's not entirely about getting from point A to point B in the fastest way possible.

So you really believe.. true down.. that WDW guests will sing the praise of a revamped monorail system... regardless of it's effectiveness, it's transit time, how often they must transfer, and it's reliability.. as long as it's 'cool'?

So do you have any thoughts on why people walk or take the bus over the boats to DHS/DTD? Aren't boats cooler than buses? One should be able to deduce from this... 'cool' isn't the end all to be all. Most of the time, people are looking for transportation. 'Cool' is optional most of the time.. and regardless of cool or not.. if the method doesn't meet their expectations.. they will be upset. No one gets off the monorail after being stuck for 30mins and go 'well golly, at least it was the monorail we were stuck on!'

But you seem to like being a downer on this thread.

Not a downer - a realist. Every system needs goals to achieve. You guys just want to cherry pick what you think would be cool and ignore why the thing is there in the first place and what people are asking of it. You want to build toys.. instead of improving upon the transportation system. Improvements can be cool, but they gotta solve the problem too!
 

C.FERNIE

Well-Known Member
I think disney could just expand the monorail, its pretty much like a ride. With disney anything has a cost so that really is not an issue with the monorail. If they want to spend money they will. Sadly a lot of it is down to they can not! In certain areas you cant build a monorail because they have built other things there! I think at some point they will expand it! it be easy to do it to AK and make a new loop! :wave:
 

FoodRocker

New Member
Buses Cool?

So this post has a lot of talk about buses and I can tell you from working with Buses all of last year I can say the only people who have a problem with the buses are the people who don't ride on buses in there life. I never came across a kid who complained about the buses once and trust me they have complained to me about many other things. Its Adults who do not ride buses who have a problem with the buses. The Disney Buses are clean and fast and for a Large Transit System there are not that many problems its very efficient. I love the Monorails but the Buses do a great job in Disney!!
 

orky8

Well-Known Member
Why are they cool? Do you get the same feeling when riding the LV Monorail as you do the WDW monorail? Do you get jazzed every time you ride airtrain at SFO? Or at MCO? They are effectively what you want built.. all standing, elevated, trains.

When you take the 'Disney' out of the monorail equation.. do they really hold the same cool factor for you?

The things that made the WDW monorail cool to me were..
- the quiet operation
- the sleekness
- the clean, door to door possibilities (it can run indoors)
- the elevated view

Really none of those are exclusive to monorails anymore except the elevated view to a degree. I have no affinity to monorails nor desire to elevate them above all other possibilities just because 'they are COOL. PERIOD'. I am being objective.



So you really believe.. true down.. that WDW guests will sing the praise of a revamped monorail system... regardless of it's effectiveness, it's transit time, how often they must transfer, and it's reliability.. as long as it's 'cool'?

So do you have any thoughts on why people walk or take the bus over the boats to DHS/DTD? Aren't boats cooler than buses? One should be able to deduce from this... 'cool' isn't the end all to be all. Most of the time, people are looking for transportation. 'Cool' is optional most of the time.. and regardless of cool or not.. if the method doesn't meet their expectations.. they will be upset. No one gets off the monorail after being stuck for 30mins and go 'well golly, at least it was the monorail we were stuck on!'

Now, I will grant you a broken down system is not "cool." But I think your "realism" in many ways misses the point that the monorails are an attraction. Yes, the LV monorail is also cool (and I do enjoy the airtran at SFO and MCO, but I am a bit, um, different).

Though most people in middle-american only drive at home, when they come to DC, they love to take our subway (not our busses). It's an experience to them (and for us locals as well as they are usually just in our way). Busses are ubiquitous and not an experience. Monorails are. I truly believe it is that simple. Disney didn't put a train in his backyard because it was efficient -- it was cool, FUN. Monorails, if given the proper maintenance, are too. And, as a bonus, they also are a form of mass transportation.

I know I should act my age, but ever since I was a little boy, I loved the monorails. I'm nearly 30, and I still get just as giddy. I do think I am alone in this.
 

TaoBoxer

Active Member
Yes, but that is because that is for a MASS TRANSIT system - This is a vacation transportation system. What we want for our daily commute is not necessarily the same for our vacation. Isn't that exactly why you all are preaching we need futuristic things that aren't every day?

What I value in my daily commute is not necessarily the same what I value after a long night at the MK.

BINGO ! Sums everything up in a nutshell.
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
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:

Well for the vegas system, the land was given to the monorail system for free by the casinos. It could be worth 100 million, but that is a bit high for land that is 25 feet wide and 21,000 feet long. [Source]
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Now, I will grant you a broken down system is not "cool." But I think your "realism" in many ways misses the point that the monorails are an attraction. Yes, the LV monorail is also cool (and I do enjoy the airtran at SFO and MCO, but I am a bit, um, different).

The monorails at DLR are purely an attraction. The monorails in WDW have to serve practical purposes too. If you want it to be the core of a transportation system (futuristic or not), it needs to be able to operate as one. When Aunt Suzie pays more for a hotel because it has monorail access.. she expects the monorail to actually function as her transportation.

Though most people in middle-american only drive at home, when they come to DC, they love to take our subway (not our busses). It's an experience to them (and for us locals as well as they are usually just in our way).

DC's metro is one of the newer subway systems in the country.. and not exactly your flagship to be proud of when talking about efficiencies (look at how long the Green line took to build.. basically 25+ years), and what is happening with the new Silver line. The DC Metro is a poster child of the inflexibility of fixed rail. It all feeds to the center center, while besides Federal Employees, the world has moved to suburb to suburb commutes for which Metro is basically useless for.

But to your point of 'its something different.. and hence cool..' - thats why I brought up SFO, MCO, LV, etc. The monorail isn't all that unique anymore. Sure when Disney pursued it 50+ years ago it was a novel new concept.. but that novelty is pretty much worn off. Electric, quiet, sleek transportation isn't limited to Monorails... and the real world applications of these elevated rail systems have brought it back down to 'normal'.

I would wager much of the 'cool' factor of Metro is the fact it's underground. People are not used to seeing whole caverns like that underground, and the idea of quickly moving through a city underground is still pretty eye opening to people. If you put them out on the red or orange lines far out where it's mostly above ground.. I think you get a different perspective.

(I live near Dulles and grew up in MD.. so you don't need to try to advocate DC Metro to me :) )

Busses are ubiquitous and not an experience. Monorails are. I truly believe it is that simple. Disney didn't put a train in his backyard because it was efficient -- it was cool, FUN. Monorails, if given the proper maintenance, are too. And, as a bonus, they also are a form of mass transportation.

So you want a monorail attraction... and then you'll also build a separate, reliably transit system that meets the needs and expectations of customers? Great.. good luck with that. Why not build a transportation system, and then build a monorail 'attraction' off on the side? Because no one seems to want to care about what the transportation system needs are.. so stop fooling yourself and build a 100% attraction monorail.

And trains were fascinating for the mechanical wonder and throwback aspects - they were awe inspiring due to their scale and complexity. Not much of the reasons one finds electric beamway systems 'cool'.
 

G00fyDad

Well-Known Member
Popcorn-02-Stephen-Colbert.gif
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
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.

I see removing the benches or moving them to the sides and also making the cars longer as an one in the same change. It feels cramped when you divide the cars up in half. Extending the cars and creating a larger open space in the middle of the cars will help. It can help to increase capacity but rather it will have the system adapt to the increase in strollers and wheelcars.

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.

9ijG1l.jpg

And this is what I see for an expanded car

mkexpandedmonocar.jpg
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
I see removing the benches or moving them to the sides and also making the cars longer as an one in the same change.

Well you can't do that. One is just a seating arrangement change, the other is an entirely new monorail design. By lengthening the car by like 40% as you drew, you change the weight of the vehicles (and hence potentially the beams), the capacity of the vehicles (and hence the weight.. and hence the beams) the radius the trains can turn (and hence the beams), new stations, etc.

Swapping the seating arrangement is a tweak.. the other is an entirely new monorail system.
 

flavious27

Well-Known Member
Well you can't do that. One is just a seating arrangement change, the other is an entirely new monorail design. By lengthening the car by like 40% as you drew, you change the weight of the vehicles (and hence potentially the beams), the capacity of the vehicles (and hence the weight.. and hence the beams) the radius the trains can turn (and hence the beams), new stations, etc.

Swapping the seating arrangement is a tweak.. the other is an entirely new monorail system.

Well yeah, that is why I said a couple of replies earlier it would need to be done all at the same time and that it would be with a new mark model. We have been with the mark vi longer than the mark iv, disney is going to need to update the trains to take advantage of new technologies and approaches to the monorail system.
 

flynnibus

Premium Member

there would be no room to actually get to the seats in this config.. (the door mechs and people sitting in the seats project farther out then the seat itself) and there is even less room for standing in this configuration and basically zero room for strollers.
 

s8film40

Well-Known Member
Yes, please tell me how reducing seats actually increases the # of people sitting?

If you are holding onto the problem of uneven loaded cabins as the way this works.. I think you are really in a game of diminishing returns.

The best gain from such a design is by increasing the quantizer value of the seating arrangements, you make it less likely for groups to split up or skip a cabin for not wanting to split up.
Yes it is unevenly loaded cabins this happens a whole lot more than you would think. It also would help to draw people into the center of the car allowing for more standing room. As it is now guest will enter and immediately begin sitting and then standing in front of the rest of their seated party blocking the remaining standing room.


I don't follow you at all. They load the trains on the station platforms that they always have.. where is the 'real loading' platform that they aren't using in your description?

And your description is exactly why they have holding pens to load the platform before the train arrives.

I know at times they've messed with things because the gates didn't have the controls they want... but that's a solution to fix the gates.. not fix the trains.

I was referring to the MK monorail station which is one of the biggest issues of the current system. The platforms they currently use to load were designed as the unload platforms and the center area was designed as the load platform, this is the same exact setup as at TTC. In the mid 70's they had some issues with the line for the monorail blocking the exit to the resort monorail and the "quick fix" was to just load on the exit platforms instead and they have been doing it ever since. The big problem with this is those unload platforms weren't designed with the idea of having enough room to stage people for incoming trains of the time let alone the higher capacity trains being used today. The automatic gates have further reduced space on the platform and which the fold down seats removed from the monorails capacity has been further increased.



You're mixing stuff here. The complaints about the buses (which this whole monorail expansion is supposed to fix right???) is the standing. The reasoning for altering the center area in the monorails is because of the stroller problems and the crowding the seats brought.

If you want to improve the bus situation by expanding monorails... make the monorails better than the buses. And by what measure? What are the things people don't like about the buses. If you don't do that.. you're just playing with your toys.


The primary complaint about the buses is NOT people having to stand. The complaint is the longer wait and travel times. If someone doesn't want to stand on a bus all they have to do is wait for the next one. People wait for the next monorail all the time to get a seat, although I've never seen anyone wait for the next bus just for a seat.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Top Bottom