Screamscape - Monorail Expansion Rumor

[flavious27]

:brick:

Yeah, something like that.

Well for an expanded car, it can be setup this way.

For the current mark vi, you could easily do the same thing, have the end areas designated for wheelcars and strollers.

 

[Admiral01]

Yeah, something like that.

Well for an expanded car, it can be setup this way.

For the current mark vi, you could easily do the same thing, have the end areas designated for wheelcars and strollers.

The problem with this is that you can't just extend the length of the monorail cars. They won't fit around the curves on the existing track. I'm not sure how much more length they can get out of a monorail car before the sides would hit the edge of the track on the curves.

 

[flynnibus]

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'd wager party sizes have far more an impact on uneven loading. The problem with 'immediate sitting' is exactly why the standing area lined by seats is a problem. There isn't really enough room when you account for people's legs/feet/garbage for people to get to the center and move down. Then you have the problem you have in many buses where because there is really only single file access.. people don't move back and the space doesn't get utilized.

Anyone who has ridden the transportation shuttles at IAD for international flights will be familiar with this because this is the setup they have in the older transports and it's a problem every single time. Opposing seats with a narrow aisle inbetween for standing. It's a nightmare.

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.

Ok, makes sense. But if it's truely a problem, it would be much easier to just fix the station.

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.

Standing is a huge complaint - its it virtually every transportation thread. At the end of a night when the buses are the most crowded.. people hate having to stand when they are tired and just want to go home.

Daily commuters understand the desire for efficiency and 'higher capacity = less wait'. But vacationers want to be coddled... not just told 'this is better for you.. I promise'

 

[s8film40]

I'd wager party sizes have far more an impact on uneven loading. The problem with 'immediate sitting' is exactly why the standing area lined by seats is a problem. There isn't really enough room when you account for people's legs/feet/garbage for people to get to the center and move down. Then you have the problem you have in many buses where because there is really only single file access.. people don't move back and the space doesn't get utilized.

Anyone who has ridden the transportation shuttles at IAD for international flights will be familiar with this because this is the setup they have in the older transports and it's a problem every single time. Opposing seats with a narrow aisle inbetween for standing. It's a nightmare.

The entire width of the train minus two seats is not a narrow aisle.

Ok, makes sense. But if it's truely a problem, it would be much easier to just fix the station.

It would cost money.

Standing is a huge complaint - its it virtually every transportation thread. At the end of a night when the buses are the most crowded.. people hate having to stand when they are tired and just want to go home.

Daily commuters understand the desire for efficiency and 'higher capacity = less wait'. But vacationers want to be coddled... not just told 'this is better for you.. I promise'

If standing is the primary complaint than Disney certainly isn't listening to their guests. Mark VI trains have half the seating of the older Mark IV's. Newer buses have less seating than the older RTS buses. I think seating is something people like but wait and travel times are the by and far primary complaint.

 

[flynnibus]

The entire width of the train minus two seats is not a narrow aisle.

everything looks bigger when EMPTY. Put some people in those seats.. and then try to get people to move down the aisle to the space and seats further down. The monorail just isn't that large to do that without making the whole thing more cramped and less pleasant.

It would cost money.

Certainly less than rebuilding the train fleet!

If standing is the primary complaint than Disney certainly isn't listening to their guests. Mark VI trains have half the seating of the older Mark IV's. Newer buses have less seating than the older RTS buses. I think seating is something people like but wait and travel times are the by and far primary complaint.

I didn't say 'primary' - I said it's a major complaint. Disney obviously has to balance capacity with comfort but ripping out seats for marginal gains isn't the right way. Removing seats is a balancing act of accommodating large objects, increased capacity, and faster cycle times for the trade-off of comfort.

If you only want to focus on capacity why doesn't Disney just make the entire train standing except for the end-caps for handicap people? That's what's common in alot of transportation shuttles

or

 

[s8film40]

everything looks bigger when EMPTY. Put some people in those seats.. and then try to get people to move down the aisle to the space and seats further down. The monorail just isn't that large to do that without making the whole thing more cramped and less pleasant.

Even in this photo with these people relaxing with their feet stretched out you can see that there is clearly plenty of space.

My point is the configuration I suggested is MORE open than the current design, allows movement between the two sections and only eliminates two seats. I think it's a win win.

Certainly less than rebuilding the train fleet!

Changing a seating configuration and completely rebuilding a station are not even close to comparison.

I didn't say 'primary' - I said it's a major complaint. Disney obviously has to balance capacity with comfort but ripping out seats for marginal gains isn't the right way. Removing seats is a balancing act of accommodating large objects, increased capacity, and faster cycle times for the trade-off of comfort.

If you only want to focus on capacity why doesn't Disney just make the entire train standing except for the end-caps for handicap people? That's what's common in alot of transportation shuttles

or

Yes my point is that eliminating only two seats isn't a huge concern if it's making the seating arrangement more efficient and using the space better.

 

[flavious27]

The problem with this is that you can't just extend the length of the monorail cars. They won't fit around the curves on the existing track. I'm not sure how much more length they can get out of a monorail car before the sides would hit the edge of the track on the curves.

That is the one thing I am wondering about, how much longer can the trains be and be able to run on the tracks. If anyone knows what the turning radius is on the mark vi's, that would help figure this out along with what the tightest curve is.

 

[s8film40]

That is the one thing I am wondering about, how much longer can the trains be and be able to run on the tracks. If anyone knows what the turning radius is on the mark vi's, that would help figure this out along with what the tightest curve is.

I don't have the exact numbers but it's very likely that the trains were already built to the maximum car length. It's always cheaper to extend cars than to add another car, for this reason I'm sure they built them to the extent they felt was safe.

 

[flynnibus]

Even in this photo with these people relaxing with their feet stretched out you can see that there is clearly plenty of space.

...with no one trying to stand there or people trying to move through there. Put some people standing there and see how easily you get around them... or people trip.. or step on each other..

There are things that look good on paper, and then there is the practicality of it when you put real humans in it.

 

[s8film40]

...with no one trying to stand there or people trying to move through there. Put some people standing there and see how easily you get around them... or people trip.. or step on each other..

There are things that look good on paper, and then there is the practicality of it when you put real humans in it.

Your getting away from the original point in opening up MORE room than what there is now by moving the seats to the sides. I didn't say it was going to be huge wide open spaces. I said it would be more open and allow movement between the two sections with a very minimal loss of only 2 seats per car.

 

[flynnibus]

Your getting away from the original point in opening up MORE room than what there is now by moving the seats to the sides. I didn't say it was going to be huge wide open spaces. I said it would be more open and allow movement between the two sections with a very minimal loss of only 2 seats per car.

And you gloss over what I'm telling you about the effectiveness of space when you put sitting people facing into a 'walkway' without sufficient space.

You've opened up floor space, but its the type of space that frustrates customers as they bump, squeeze, trip, stare at someone's butt/crotch, etc. It's not pleasant at all. And then you have the very problems you mention about people bunching up and not moving down.. but instead of happening on a platform where there is lots of room, and CMs available to help crowd movement.. you are doing it in the confines of a train, with less space, and no CM guidance.

I'd rather just sacrifice a middle seat a pass-through than flip the seats to the outside walls if the walkthrough is what you seek so badly.

The seats along the wall are fine when the train is lightly loaded.. but when it gets crowded it makes the crowding even worse.

 

[G00fyDad]

 

[nace888]

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.

I'd like to see how you think so when the DisneyLand Monorail (WHICH IS MUCH SMALLER THAN THE WDW ONE) can use this layout fine!! The WDW Monorails are taller thus also offering the standing room as well.

I personally think you just think too negative, too pesimistic.

 

[flynnibus]

I'd like to see how you think so when the DisneyLand Monorail (WHICH IS MUCH SMALLER THAN THE WDW ONE) can use this layout fine!! The WDW Monorails are taller thus also offering the standing room as well.

I personally think you just think too negative, too pesimistic.

State a problem - and solve it well. Then you'll get praise. When you just want to do something because it seems 'cool' while Rome is burning.. you'll get brought back to reality. It's not that hard to understand really. If you want to complain about how bad transportation is at WDW.. try actually solving it.. not just begging for cool toys that don't actually improve the situation.

Why can DL monorails use that layout? Simple.. the DL monorails aren't a transportation system and don't have nearly the capacity requirements (or capabilities) of the WDW monorails. I mean, the DL monorails can't even afford AC and can't run in moderately high temps for crying out loud... And should I pull up the complaint threads about the DL seating arrangement about not being along the windows like the previous design was?? The seating arrangement 'works' for DL simply because the monorails are used for different things over there.

My car has a perfectly fine 2+2 seating configuration.. doesn't mean it's suitable as a people mover..

 

[orky8]

State a problem - and solve it well. Then you'll get praise. When you just want to do something because it seems 'cool' while Rome is burning.. you'll get brought back to reality. It's not that hard to understand really. If you want to complain about how bad transportation is at WDW.. try actually solving it.. not just begging for cool toys that don't actually improve the situation.

While I respect your "criticing" you are overly negative and dismissive the way you refer to people's ideas as playing with toys. The truth is you see the issues one way and disregard other people's view of the issues. For example, you thinking standing is the biggest complaint, but disregard when people point out that standing on BUSSES is the complaint. My biggest transportation issue is that DTD, DHS, and AK aren't served by transportation options worthy of Disney. And "coolness" is part of Disney World. I mean, what's the point of a boat ride around dolls dressed as children singing a repetitive song or ridding a vehicle on steal tubes around a dark room -- there is none. Monorails can and should be part of the transportation solution as well.

Besides, what's your solution? What do you propose? You're good at tearing down -- try building up, it's much harder. You never acknowledge any upsides but only point out negatives. And while there are negatives, there are positives you completely ignore.

 

[Tom]

Ditto. Sorry I even subscribed to this thread.

 

[G00fyDad]

Ditto. Sorry I even subscribed to this thread.

Oh, I'm not. I may poke fun at the constant back and forth armchair engineering going on here (not that I could do better.) but this has been the most amusing thread I have seen in a long time. It's like watching a slap fight.

 

[flynnibus]

While I respect your "criticing" you are overly negative and dismissive the way you refer to people's ideas as playing with toys. The truth is you see the issues one way and disregard other people's view of the issues. For example, you thinking standing is the biggest complaint, but disregard when people point out that standing on BUSSES is the complaint. My biggest transportation issue is that DTD, DHS, and AK aren't served by transportation options worthy of Disney. And "coolness" is part of Disney World. I mean, what's the point of a boat ride around dolls dressed as children singing a repetitive song or ridding a vehicle on steal tubes around a dark room -- there is none. Monorails can and should be part of the transportation solution as well.

Besides, what's your solution? What do you propose? You're good at tearing down -- try building up, it's much harder. You never acknowledge any upsides but only point out negatives. And while there are negatives, there are positives you completely ignore.

Already said it... Go back in the thread

 

[s8film40]

And you gloss over what I'm telling you about the effectiveness of space when you put sitting people facing into a 'walkway' without sufficient space.

You've opened up floor space, but its the type of space that frustrates customers as they bump, squeeze, trip, stare at someone's butt/crotch, etc. It's not pleasant at all. And then you have the very problems you mention about people bunching up and not moving down.. but instead of happening on a platform where there is lots of room, and CMs available to help crowd movement.. you are doing it in the confines of a train, with less space, and no CM guidance.

I'd rather just sacrifice a middle seat a pass-through than flip the seats to the outside walls if the walkthrough is what you seek so badly.

The seats along the wall are fine when the train is lightly loaded.. but when it gets crowded it makes the crowding even worse.

I'm beginning to wonder if you've even been on the MarkVI trains. The space between two benches along the walls is only slightly narrower than the space between the existing benches. The problem you speak of, of people standing next to seated passengers most certainly exists with the current trains as they are now. Also you seem to have this idea that I'm suggesting opening the car up so that people won't have to walk down the platform, this is completely ludicrous. Of course people will need to disperse along the platform, but in the situations where they haven't dispersed perfectly evenly and one side of the train fills up but the other doesn't than they will have an option. This happens all the time with the current trains.

 

[flavious27]

I don't have the exact numbers but it's very likely that the trains were already built to the maximum car length. It's always cheaper to extend cars than to add another car, for this reason I'm sure they built them to the extent they felt was safe.

Well it would make sense that disney made the trains to be at their capacity limit so that they can get the most out of the monorail. I am sure that if we made this a new mark thread, there will be some interesting concepts people will want to see and that the engineering can be taken at less than face value.