Will the monorail ever be expanded?

[mobocracy]

We just got back from 5 days in WDW. We stayed in the Contemporary and it was SO convenient to get around with the monorail basically underneath us (quite literally; I wanted a higher room but we were on 6 -- you can just barely feel the monorail as it comes through, the room was much quieter than I would have expected).

There is a loop to Epcot from Ticketing & Transportation and it makes me wonder why there isn't a separate loop from Epcot through the Epcot resorts and on to Hollywood Studios and then Animal Kingdom. The Epcot station appears to have the space to add a T&T-style change monorails setup.

Sure, you'd have to change monorails twice to get to Hollywood/AK from Contemporary/Polynesian/Grand Floridian but the benefit seems huge because you'd be able to much more easily and quickly switch parks mid-day as well as adding a huge benefit to Epcot-area resort guests.

Obviously its expensive to extend the lines, but it seems like it would allow them to cut a large number of buses and simplify a lot of inter-WDW transportation.

Connecting Wilderness Lodge to the Contemporary/Polynesian/Floridian loop makes even more sense, but I can see where that might be problematic to do without a long disruption in monorail service to those resorts.

Have any of these expansions ever been contemplated? Or have they decided that it's just cheaper to lease buses regardless of the utility and icon status of monorails?

[skier_pete]

Yes, its been considered.

No, it'll never happen - as it is WAYYY too expensive. There wouldn't be a ton of operational costs savings, as the staff you would remove from the bus system would just have to be transferred to the monorail. The cost of the another monorail spur would probably run Disney in the HUNDREDS of millions of dollars.

[Disco]

Yeah,
It's not going to happen. Everybody would love to see the expansion of the Monorail but the busses are a lot cheaper and more versatile.
The only rail addition I could see them doing is maybe to the Hollywood Studios as it is right next to the Epcot leg. There is no chance you'll ever see them completing an entire loop to the AK.
It's a shame as the original plans for the Monorail were to link it to the Ontario airport. Boy did that project fall short.
The monorails are definately a part of the experiience that you have to ride evertime you go to DW. Too bad we don't feel the same about a bus.:guilty:

[WebmasterCricket]

Too bad we don't feel the same about a bus.:guilty:

I've had many magical bus rides in the past.

[mobocracy]

Yes, its been considered.

No, it'll never happen - as it is WAYYY too expensive. There wouldn't be a ton of operational costs savings, as the staff you would remove from the bus system would just have to be transferred to the monorail. The cost of the another monorail spur would probably run Disney in the HUNDREDS of millions of dollars.

I'm sure the upfront costs for the monorail are huge, but the operational cost of the monorail has to be a lot cheaper. I'd bet they run through $100 worth of fuel per day on each bus, plus the cost of ongoing maintenance, insurance, licensing and so on. And those buses aren't cheap, I'd bet they run $150,000 per bus.

And you would only need about 1/3 of the number of monorail operators as you would bus drivers, since the monorail can carry far more passengers and you probably couldn't have more than 3 monorails running on an Epcot/Hollywood/AK loop anyway.

I'm sure the short-term savings are probably solidly in the buses favor, but it seems like long-term the monorail would be a qualitatively better investment, especially given its icon status at Disney.

[doconeill]

Bus has many advantages as well though...Run As Directed diversions, ability to reroute around stalled traffic, etc.

Can't do those things on a monorail beam...

Expansion would also require more trainsets, expanded maintenance facilities, etc.

[lovemickeyshouse]

I've had many magical bus rides in the past.
You must have had Stanley the funny bus driver he is a really funny driver and gave everyone on our bus a free pirates towel like thing

.

[Orange&BlueMonorail]

To coincide with everyone else on this one. The answer for expansion of the monorail is no.

Now the interesting thing is that much of the land needed to house monorail infrastructure is already in place. Example...If you take a look at the documents you sign when purchasing a Disney Vacation Club interest in Saratoga Springs you will notice that there is a monorail easement on that property that Disney has set aside to build on one day. But this is more of a false warning for a future never to come.

One of the biggest reason that you will never see a monorail expansion is that it is not a revenue generating attraction. It is not something that is going to pack the butts into the seats, so to speak, it just moves the butts from here to there.

I too greatly believe in the monorail. Stayed at Poly back in April 2009 absolutely LOVED it. Staying a week with out 3 year old, we never had to get in the car...ever (and we never rode the bus).

I would love to see the expansion, but it is never going to happen. Start up costs are too high for any finance person to approve. It's a shame, but's here's to hoping for a bus-less future at the House of Mouse.

[truck1]

Chances are youll never see the monorail extended for any number of reasons.If I had to guess the primary reason would be cost to build.Last I had heard and this was several years ago when I worked there, is that it would cost over 1 million dollars per mile to build the track, and 750 per hour per day per train per station to operate.Thats what the Contemp, the Poly and the Grand Flo was paying at the time.Id bet the price has gone up since then.Vs 70 per hour per bus.
Then and this is after talking to the monrail mechanics,and higher ups, theyd have to up date and most likely build a new monorail roundhouse, and then up date all of the trains. The exisiting 12, plus however many they buy new.I want to say that each train,last time they were built is 12 or 25 million a copy.
From what I understand, alot of the supports for the pillars are already inplace for the beams themselves.Id have to go back and look, but theres a few rooms at the WDW Swan and Dolphin that are supposed(read rumored) to be removed for the trains to pass thru, on the way to or from the DHS and Epcot.The EPCOT platform was made wide and bigger specifically to serve as a transfer station going to other points.

Alot also (this my opinion)has to do with the people in Cali that control the money.If who ever is in charge is against the monrail, they dont stand a chance.If that person is park friendly, the parks get a lot of money and freedom.It was rumored though I dont know how true it is, that Eisner hated the monorail and thats 1 reason they were never exapnded.

[doconeill]

The "$1 million per mile" thing is false. That would positively be CHEAP if it were only that much...

[jheigl]

I am probably in the vast minority, and I KNOW this would NEVER happen, but I would rather see the monorail extended to all of the parks (don't care much about the hotels) rather than big expansions of theme parks....like the Fantasyland Expansion and such....but maybe that's because I'm not a huge fan of thrill rides and stuff like that...I would rather see the scene and feel the ambience of stuff rather than ride coasters or spinny things or what not...I don't know, but I always feel that the "plan" is not complete because the monorail doesn't go to all the parks.

[marius97]

The "$1 million per mile" thing is false. That would positively be CHEAP if it were only that much...

I was living in Detroit when they built their People Mover...a "subway" like train that is on a raised track just like the monorail. This was probably late 80's. If my memory services me correctly, each section of track cost $1,000,000. Each section was just a matter of a hundred or two hundred feet. Granted the costs of going through a downtown are probably higher than going through a swamp, but that was also 20+ years ago.

[CanadianGuy]

I was living in Detroit when they built their People Mover...a "subway" like train that is on a raised track just like the monorail. This was probably late 80's. If my memory services me correctly, each section of track cost $1,000,000. Each section was just a matter of a hundred or two hundred feet. Granted the costs of going through a downtown are probably higher than going through a swamp, but that was also 20+ years ago.

Congratulations.. you have hit on the exact cost problem at Disney.

The swampy nature of just about all the land.

Monorail track pedestals have to be secured to a solid foundation (usually bedrock). Getting to bedrock in Florida isn't easy. And therefore it's expensive.

The other big issue is the amount of land Disney owns which they have set aside for 'nature reserve' or 'protected land'. Of course Disney could write itself a variance if the monorail had to pass thru that area. But there are some areas which Disney and Reedy Creek no longer have the final environmental say.. and that also complicates matters pretty significantly.

Any expansion of the monorail is - while technically very possible.. also financially quite prohibitive.

[troynkasey]

Here is a link with answers to your many questions...

http://www.yesterland.com/monoraillegends.html

Looks like the Dolphin/Swan talk is false and the cost of the monorail would be substantially higher han $1 million per mile...

[Oglet]

Probably the biggest obstacle in my opinion is the age of the current fleet of Monorails.

At sometime in the not to distant future the current fleet of trains are going to need to be replaced unless the team from extreme makeover monorail edition come and magically give them a complete overhaul. So figure in the original reported cost of each train 3.575 million x 12 and your looking at about 42 million 1989 dollars.

Throw in the possible cost of any station, shop or line modifications and that just tacks more onto the expense.

Just throwing an idea out there, what possibly could happen is this...

The current Fleet of 11 - 12 trains could be dropped down to 8 trains at some point and operate purely on the express/resort system only. Since parts are the biggest issue for the current fleet the 4 oldest trains could be canibalized and used to keep 8 good trains running for many more years.

The EPCOT loop would get new trains to go along with a new loop/s to other parks.

I don't think anyone many people would disagree with the proposal that EPCOT would be the new bug hub as the station was obviously built by someone high as a kite or with deliberate planing that it would eventually be expanded for this purpose due to its size. ( I like the think the later of the 2)

So somewhere close to EPCOT you would need to build a new monorail shop to house between 6 - 10 trains since its somewhat common to park trains at stations overnight which eliminates the need to house all the trains at shop overnight. (extras could later be parked at the MK Monorail shop)

Start with 4 or 5 trains that could run on the EPCOT/TTC loop and slowly add them to the system as new loops DHS and DAK open up.

Once you have the "New" system running the frankenmonorails that have been operating on the Resort/Express lines would have about come to the end of their operating life so replacing them and making all the changes needed to get the new trains running could be done.

These are just my crazy ideas

[zulemara]

from what I've read, it's not even the cost of adding, but the fact that the current trains can't even be upgraded without redoing the entire monorail system due to power requirements of the new trains being manufactured. We'll be lucky if they eventually upgrade instead of letting the current trains fall apart like they are doing right now.

[Lewisc]

This is the rumor board.

Prior to 9-11 there was a credible rumor (whatever that means) that Disney had a plan to extend the monorail for most resorts. But not really a monorail but light rail for most of route. Most of the track would be on the ground. Reduced bookings after 9-11 killed whatever (small) shot this plan had.

Another (sort of credible) rumor suggested Disney was considering following Unviersal's example. Build garages near DTD. Basically create a TTC near DTD. Light rail would take guests to/from the parks. Guests would have to walk through DTD to get from the garage to the transportation hub.

It's a shame Disney decided not to offer different transportation between AKL and AK. The lodge could have been built in a location that permitted a walking trail. It could have been built in a location that permitted building a canal and offering boat transportation.

Buses work better. Reasons already discussed in this thread.

[chartle]

Here's something else, people want the monorail to go to all the parks. Ok, but where are they going to come from.

If you extend the existing lines to DHS and AK it only benefits maybe 20%(:confused3) of the onsite guests and people hopping during the day.

How is everyone else going to get to the parks?

Do you expect them to take some sort of other transportation, like maybe a BUS, to some super TTC and transfer? What about the water parks and DTD and ESPN WWS?

People are suggesting that they scrap a flexible mostly point to point transportation system to an inflexable hybrid hub and spoke/point to point system where you may have to change vehicles 3 times to get where you want to go just for the extra magic.

Its like the thread where someone staying onsite wanted to take the ferry to the MK the first day to show their cousin the magic. Well the only way to do it was to take a bus to Epcot, monorail to TTC and then the ferry to the MK. Thats the kind of system bring proposed in the "Monorail to everywhere because thats what Walt wanted" camp.

[ShinjiMickey]

Kinda of weird this would be my first post, but as a long time follower of the boards, Disney, and of engineering I could not resist. I too have felt the same way about expanding the monorail, but as just about everyone has replied it is most likely cost related. The $1mil a mile price tag is very correct; I believe it was around $1.7mil a mile... BUT remember this is late 70's into the 80's money were talking about. In todays money yes, it would be hundreds of millions with new stations, trains, and crew. But I think they should at least finish a loop through boardwalk and DHS. It would be around a 5mile loop if even that... wishful thinking gotta love it!

[Oglet]

EPCOT Studios loop makes the most sense of anything with a stop/s at the Boardwalk hotel area. There would be a tremendous amount of guests who would be serviced by that route.

I would also Imagine the ease of getting on a Monorail and being able to get off and do some shopping, dining or whatever along the boardwalk area would be good for businesses around there and also potential exposure for future DVC purchases.

I talk to quite a few people each day at work and so many of them are amazed and surprised that they can actually get off at any resort and look around, shop etc. Alot of people things that these services are for resort only guests. Granted this lack of guest knowledge could be addressed in a cheaper way.

[teampont]

Unlike Disney buses which service resort guests. The Monorail does not generate any revinue for Disney. Because of that, it is my opinion that they will never add on to the monrail.

[OldsDr]

Even though I love the Monorail. I think that in 20 years you may see it and the stations in the abandoned and rotting thread that is in the theme parks board right now.

Part of the reason Monorail resorts are so expensive is that it is the money collected at those resorts that pays for the resort loop of the monrail (at least a portion of it) Get rid of the monrail, make everyone take busses, leave the cost of the room the same and they would instantly be making a ton more money at those three resorts

[marius97]

Even though I love the Monorail. I think that in 20 years you may see it and the stations in the abandoned and rotting thread that is in the theme parks board right now.

Part of the reason Monorail resorts are so expensive is that it is the money collected at those resorts that pays for the resort loop of the monrail (at least a portion of it) Get rid of the monrail, make everyone take busses, leave the cost of the room the same and they would instantly be making a ton more money at those three resorts

Problem is though that they charge a huge premium on the monorail resorts because of the convenience to the parks. If they got rid of the monorail, then they would have a hard time justifying the increased price of the resorts. I go the opposite way with making it not as expensive to make a loop around Boardwalk area. (Though I don't think it would ever happen.) If they expanded the monorail to service DHS and Boardwalk area, then they could jack up the rates of any resort that it stops at and even some that it just goes close to. This would by no means cover the cost of an expansion, but it would help.

[truck1]

from what I've read, it's not even the cost of adding, but the fact that the current trains can't even be upgraded without redoing the entire monorail system due to power requirements of the new trains being manufactured. We'll be lucky if they eventually upgrade instead of letting the current trains fall apart like they are doing right now.

If they follow past precedents, probably within the next 2 or 3 years we should see a new generation of monrails appearing or at least announced.I want to say that the inital Mark Vs were 15 years old or so,when they were replaced with the current Mark VIIs

[ChrisFL]

Monorails would have been fine....back in 1989 when MGM Studios opened and they didn't have nearly 30 different resorts, etc. randomly dotting the property.

Now, they wouldn't be convenient, cost effective or having the "wow" factor like they used to....

However, IMO, Personal Rapid Transport is the way that Disney should go. It's "brand new" in the sense that it's not really around in many places, it provides a much smaller need in building of the tracks, they can be built in many more places, have a better "grid" network above the roads, and maintenance and storage would be a lot simpler I think.

Again this isn't technology that's out there in many places yet, but the monorail didn't exist hardly at all either when Disney decided to CREATE their own.

Here's some versions that other companies are working on:

http://img.youtube.com/vi/7PyUQuWmt2M/0.jpg
http://regmedia.co.uk/2009/09/03/skytran.jpg

[ConcKahuna]

It's a shame as the original plans for the Monorail were to link it to the Ontario airport. Boy did that project fall short.

I know you meant to type this as Orlando, but it made me giggle :P

The proposed WDW stop for the Florida light-rail system is rumored to be the Epcot resort area. Where exactly, I'm not sure.

[Orange&BlueMonorail]

If you look at the original concept of how the monorail was supposed to serve 'The Florida Project' it is doing just that...to a much lesser extent. Check out the Walt Disney Treasures - TomorrowLand DVD to see what the monorail was truly meant to be.

But, I agree with ChrisFL. There are now just too many resorts dotted all over property to effectively serve everyone. There is no way that the monorail could ever be the end-all of transportation. Not now. If they were a little more forward thinking when putting resorts and parks around property throughout the Disney Decade then maybe.

And the examples that ChrisFL gave could be very viable options to replacing both the monorail and the buses. Personal Rapid Transit is coming along nicely as a option...it just needs someone to take that first leap. If he were alive, PRT is something that would have been right up Walt's alley.

Until that happens, I will wait for the Mark VIIIs to come out, and enjoying staying on the loop when I visit Disney

[CanadianGuy]

Even though I love the Monorail. I think that in 20 years you may see it and the stations in the abandoned and rotting thread that is in the theme parks board right now.

Part of the reason Monorail resorts are so expensive is that it is the money collected at those resorts that pays for the resort loop of the monrail (at least a portion of it) Get rid of the monrail, make everyone take busses, leave the cost of the room the same and they would instantly be making a ton more money at those three resorts

I don't share your dark view.. the upgrades to the much shorter Monorail at DL give me hope that Disney bean counters and execs see the monorail as 'untouchable' for the most part and a valuable investment in the 'magic'.. Will they expand it - I doubt it.. But I think they are just as unlikely to shelve it.

Sides a new monorail refurb (it was actually a refurb) has debuted at DL (the Mark VII) -- I have hope that a train refurb based on the Mark VI platform is possible at WDW as well taking it I guess to the Mark VIII nameplate.

And for the poster who would love to see the 5 mile loop for DHS, just keep in mind that you'd be talking about somewhere in the vicinity of $300 to 500 million dollars for that.

That's a LOT of ticket price increases. :)

[EcbLovesMickey]

I believe I remember reading a few years ago when Seattle tried to expand its monorail system that there is only 1 company in the world that currently makes and helps maintain monorail systems. So even to purchase a new train must be ridiculously expensive.

[North7]

Unlike Disney buses which service resort guests. The Monorail does not generate any revinue for Disney. Because of that, it is my opinion that they will never add on to the monrail.
Just curious... how exactly do Disney buses generate revenue for Disney :confused3

[ShinjiMickey]

Again I agree that the monorail will probably never see an expansion. My problem is innovation, where is it? I really wish Walt were still around, he stressed innovation so much... Like ChrisFL posted there are many different options other than buses and cars... Maybe its just me but when I' m at Disney I hate having to plan for bus routes.

[Disco]

I know you meant to type this as Orlando, but it made me giggle :P

The proposed WDW stop for the Florida light-rail system is rumored to be the Epcot resort area. Where exactly, I'm not sure.

:rotfl:
I didn't even notice until you pointed it out. A monorail stretching all the way to Canada (or California) would be impressive.

On the flip side, a light rail system just doesn't snap "Disney Magic" to me. It has to be elevated and on pillars if it is any good.

[KYMickey]

And the examples that ChrisFL gave could be very viable options to replacing both the monorail and the buses. Personal Rapid Transit is coming along nicely as a option...it just needs someone to take that first leap. If he were alive, PRT is something that would have been right up Walt's alley.

Until that happens, I will wait for the Mark VIIIs to come out, and enjoying staying on the loop when I visit Disney
Here's an interesting article about PRT in Morgantown West Virginia. It's an 8.5 mile system was 71 vehicles that serves 16,000 people per day. UWV personal transportation system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgantown_Personal_Rapid_Transit)

[KYMickey]

For those of you really interested in monorails here's a link to the monorail society's website: monorail Society (http://www.monorails.org/index.html) It's very surprising how many monorail systems are in service or under construction worldwide.

[Dznefreek]

never . . . . is a very long time . . . . .No one can be sure it will NEVER happen. . . .

[mobocracy]

Again I agree that the monorail will probably never see an expansion. My problem is innovation, where is it? I really wish Walt were still around, he stressed innovation so much... Like ChrisFL posted there are many different options other than buses and cars... Maybe its just me but when I' m at Disney I hate having to plan for bus routes.

This is really my overall gripe about Disney; I think there is a little too much emphasis on commerce and little too little emphasis on innovation.

Much of what I found (and still find) "magical" about DW are the more Walt-influenced areas, such as the MK and Epcot's Future World. We had fun on some of the rides at Hollywood Studios but I found too much of the park seemed to be just stores selling merchandise, which I thought was kind of a waste of the well-done streetscapes.

I really find Walt's emphasis on tomorrow -- even if it eventually turns out to be an impossible, Jetsons flying-car kind of future -- quite inspiring, along with his willingness to innovate to make it happen (like the monorail or the Contemporary hotel).

I recognize that selling stuff helps keep the doors open, but I'd like a little more of the Main Street of tomorrow and a little less of the Wall Street of today.

[ConcKahuna]

Just curious... how exactly do Disney buses generate revenue for Disney :confused3

Easy, they generate revenue by resort bookings. Do you think people would pay 3x the hotel price of other hotels in the area (but off-property) if it werent for the fact that Disney busses you everywhere so you dont have to deal with a car? I dont.

[mobocracy]

Here's something else, people want the monorail to go to all the parks. Ok, but where are they going to come from.

If you extend the existing lines to DHS and AK it only benefits maybe 20%(:confused3) of the onsite guests and people hopping during the day.

How is everyone else going to get to the parks?

Do you expect them to take some sort of other transportation, like maybe a BUS, to some super TTC and transfer? What about the water parks and DTD and ESPN WWS?

In my original post I suggested an expansion involving a loop from Epcot, through the Swan/Dolphin Epcot resort area and then on to DHS and AK. Those resort areas have thousands of hotel rooms, making the monorail possibly capable of moving 10,000 plus guests on the Epcot/DHS/AK loop alone.

Disney development has been too chaotic for anyone to believe that a monorail could connect everything. Had some visionaries been involved, they might actually have planned a larger monorail route and then built the park around the monorails.

Plus it seems appropriate that the monorail is a "theme park" transportation system/attraction, not just a generic mode of inter-park mass transit.

People are suggesting that they scrap a flexible mostly point to point transportation system to an inflexable hybrid hub and spoke/point to point system where you may have to change vehicles 3 times to get where you want to go just for the extra magic.

I don't know about your bus experience, but my bus from the Contemporary to DHS and AK was hardly "point to point". It was point, to point, to point, point, including a stop at a water park on the way back from AK. I'm pretty sure this made the overall trip much longer than the 2 minute walk between monorails added when going from Contemporary to Epcot.

[mobocracy]

Easy, they generate revenue by resort bookings. Do you think people would pay 3x the hotel price of other hotels in the area (but off-property) if it werent for the fact that Disney busses you everywhere so you dont have to deal with a car? I dont.

The "Unofficial Guide to WDW" went into a lot of detail on inter-park transportation and wasn't very kind to the Disney bus system. They did a number of comparisons and found it actually a lot faster to get around by car than by Disney transportation (which would have been primarily bus, since the monorail only services a very small number of hotels).

For the theme parks specifically it was fine, but for getting around generally it would have been a headache.

I think the Disney bus system is more about luring you into *not* having a car and convincing you to do more Disney dining/attractions during a visit versus going off-property.

I really wanted the Contemporary this time around for sentimental reasons, but next time around I won't be afraid to shop outside for housing. There are some nice properties and with a car you get the option of doing some non-Disney things without really compromising the ability to do Disney parks.

[North7]

Easy, they generate revenue by resort bookings. Do you think people would pay 3x the hotel price of other hotels in the area (but off-property) if it werent for the fact that Disney busses you everywhere so you dont have to deal with a car? I dont.
But teampont originally stated "Unlike Disney buses which service resort guests. The Monorail does not generate any revenue for Disney. Because of that, it is my opinion that they will never add on to the monrail." If the buses generate revenue, then I would argue that the monorail generates revenue for the same reasons. Would people pay the prices they do to stay at a monorail resort if there was no monorail? I wouldn't.

Rather than breaking it down into the "mode" of transportation, I guess it would be a fair statement to say that Disney transportation generates revenue. Probably more so since the introduction of Magical Express.

[zulemara]

The other thing that has to be kept in mind, though, is that diversification is key. I do think a lot could be improved by having monorail loops to each park and all dropping at once central location like the TTC, thus meaning all buses are only running point to point and back. The problem with more reliance on monorails is that they break, ppl are slow to load and unload, ppl puke on them, have medical emergencies, etc etc. Having the balance between boats, busses, and monorails means if one goes down, one picks up the slack. When it is too windy for Ferry boats, monorails pick up the slack. When the rails go down on the resort loop, watercraft picks up the slack. When they are both down, which is very rare, then buses come in and pick up the slack.

Just last week I was headed to EPCOT. There were 3 trains on the loop as usual. One was at EPCOT unloading, I was in the one waiting by EEE, and my friend told me the 3rd one was holding behind me. That means people at the TTC did not even see an EPCOT monorail for at least 15 minutes. Then people make assumptions about budget cuts or something stupid like that. Anyway, my point is since you can only get from TTC to EPCOT via monorail, it's a good example of the bad side of things if they were to implement the same policy across the parks.

Now let me be clear, I think at the very least they need to upgrade our monorails. They are old, they break down all the time, and are in desperate need of an overhaul. While an expansion would be awesome, it has to be done right in order to account for operational delays that exist in a given days, and I didn't even throw in the time required when they change loops and such.

[Snowgod]

Here is how the Monorail would generate more income. Park visitors would be able to switch parks in a fraction of the time making park Hopper tickets even more necessary than they are now. Adding just the 4 or 5 miles needed to connect DHS to the Epcot loop would allow them to build a station somewhere near the boardwalk bridge behind Atlantic Dance. Many more people would go to the Boardwalk at night increasing the need for the restaurants and clubs. DVC would find increased sales and demand for the Boardwalk area increasing perceived values as would the other resorts. And finally, no-body wants to take the bus if they can go by Monorail. The Monorail is like Customer Service, it is hard to quantify the value of investing in it.:thumbsup2

[doconeill]

Since we're for wild ideas...here's another way to make it income-generating (if they don't at least ascribe MK parking fees - at least partially - to the system).

Greatly increase parking at DTD. Keep it free. But have a monorail station where to board you must have a KTTW card or pay for a ticket. Keep it lower cost than park parking though. Have stops at the intermediate resorts, and just as a safety measure at SSR have the same requirements to prevent people walking around to bypass the fee.

[tjkraz]

In my original post I suggested an expansion involving a loop from Epcot, through the Swan/Dolphin Epcot resort area and then on to DHS and AK. Those resort areas have thousands of hotel rooms, making the monorail possibly capable of moving 10,000 plus guests on the Epcot/DHS/AK loop alone.


Problem is the only transportation Disney currently provides to those areas is limited boat transportation. Most guests staying at YC/BC/Dolphin/Swan/BoardWalk walk to Epcot and DHS. There are no buses operating between those hotels and theme parks.

So you're not replacing "A" with "B"...you're spending hundreds-of-millions in construction and then added overhead to operate & maintain the trains.

Here is how the Monorail would generate more income. Park visitors would be able to switch parks in a fraction of the time making park Hopper tickets even more necessary than they are now.

I doubt that would add to Disney's bottom line. Park hopper tickets are something of a necessary evil. Disney doesn't really want to make it easy for you to pay a few extra dollars so that you can ride Space Mountain, Soarin and Toy Story Mania in a single day. They would much rather see guests buy longer multi-day passes and spend whole days in a single park. That encourages more restaurant spending and can increase shopping revenue during down times.

Park hoppers encourage guests to visit the parks almost exclusively for the attractions and to ultimately take shorter trips.

Adding just the 4 or 5 miles needed to connect DHS to the Epcot loop would allow them to build a station somewhere near the boardwalk bridge behind Atlantic Dance.

Not really sure I see the appeal in running a monorail track (and station) through the Atlantic seaside theming of the BW area. Besides, by the time BW-area guests walk to a centralized monorail station, half the time they would have been better off just walking to their final destination.

DVC would find increased sales and demand for the Boardwalk area increasing perceived values as would the other resorts.

The DVC villas at the BoardWalk and Beach Club have been sold out for years. Disney doesn't have anything substantial to gain in that regard for another 32 years when ownership of those villas will revert back to them.

And finally, no-body wants to take the bus if they can go by Monorail.

Depends.

Let's say they do build your central station near Atlantic Dance Hall. I'm staying at the Beach Club and want to go to the Magic Kingdom.

First I walk from my room to the station--a good 8-10 minutes from the BC. At the station I board a monorail which next stops at Hollywood Studios. Then it proceeds to the Epcot station. From there we're off to the Transportation and Ticket Center.

At the TTC I need to get off and switch trains. Wait in line for an undetermined amount of time (could be 2 minutes--could be 20 minutes) and finally I'm on the MK Express monorail.

So my journey includes a walk to the load platform, 2 station waits, 3 train stops (non of which are my destination) and a train change.

I'm not sure that's much of an improvement on bus service which goes right from the BC/YC to the MK entrance.

[CanadianGuy]

Just curious... how exactly do Disney buses generate revenue for Disney :confused3

Well.. it's interesting you see.. once upon a time things were setup kinda differently. Park tickets generated revenue for transportation.

Because once upon a time.. all transportation was grouped into a unique division of Disney and for every park ticket sold .. a piece of that ticket's price was peeled off and went to pay the expenses for the transportation division and it actually even said something to that effect on your park ticket.

The piece went to the transportation whether the guest actually used any transportation or not.

That whole setup has long been done away with.. but it was an interesting approach to say the least... if I remembering it all right. I might have goofed up some details.

K

[the who #3]

i, for one, wish they would run the monorail to ak and akl. i think the akl would have a lot more business that way, and also ak park.:woohoo: all other areas would be terrific also.

if they required a fast pass to ride the monorail it might be considered more important. after all it is just about the grandest ride in wdw:goodvibes. it is almost like another park. if you think about it, it is pretty exciting.;)

[skiingfast]

I think the monorail may need to be resigned whollly to expand. I'm guessing that while the bus fleet turns over it is gaining fuel savings. On my last trip I rode on a bus that is just like my local public transit. Our's now has hybrids and while at disney I did notice their newer buses are quiet and the cabin is the same I didn't notice if they have batteries where ares do.

The Monorails on the other hand still use the same power system, and while probably the energy to move the train sets may not have made many gains since 1970.

I think running it to the boardwalk resorts and DHS wouldn't be hard. A new circiut incorporating them is not much bigger than the current loop around the seven seas lagoon. Theaming wouldn't be a problem either since a monorail at the GF of Poly hasn't been a major dilemma.

Running to AK from Epcot is about the same distance from Epcot to the TTC.

Making all the delux resorts monorail resorts would become a much better way to differentiate them as premium.

As they add gates and resorts alterante transportation will be welcome. The longest walk all day is the walk from the gate to your resorts bus.

[GrumpyFan]

As would most everybody here, I would love to see the monorails expanded. However, I know that in reality, Disney will probably never spend the money to do so, mostly due to the cost. Regardless, I would love to see them expand the transit system by build a Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) style system with small pods/cars that would connect the entire resort, or at the least the Deluxe hotels and the parks. I think a PRT type system would be a lot more efficient and inexpensive in comparison to the monorail.
On a related note, I'm really hoping that when the Florida High Speed rail line and station are built that maybe they will expand the transportation system in some way.

[doconeill]

Another thought given no budget constraints - if they wanted to build something leading edge again, and weren't concerned with interoperability between the lines - maglev. It's got very similar design issues to monorail (complex switching, etc.) but it still futuristic at this point.

[ShinjiMickey]

Another thought given no budget constraints - if they wanted to build something leading edge again, and weren't concerned with interoperability between the lines - maglev. It's got very similar design issues to monorail (complex switching, etc.) but it still futuristic at this point.

OMG Maglev would be soooooooo awsome.... Great technology IMO and a GREAT alternative to the monorail. Since were throwing crazy ideas out there, heres one from me. How bout a grand central station type hub somewhere around the yachtmans club resort parking lot or the Dolphin? For buses you would have a stop for every resort, theme park, and major destinations i.e. DTD, and the ESPN sports complex... You would place a monorail station here to serve boardwalk and complete the loop to DHS. There would also be Taxis, and a large parking deck or lot around the station. Now that I think about it theres not many parking decks around disney. You could even go as far as putting some retail and may-b a QS dining option. Earl of Sandwich would be a great idea, seems to be popular... AGAIN very hypothetical me dreaming...

[skiingfast]

MAGLEV

Disney almost did, this in the TTA.

I went on a MAGLEV monorail in 1986 or 7, it was just for demostration it was ok but what I understood about it is that it was very inefficient and a like system was never produced.

Now the one in Shangai is supposed to be great but there are a few problems with it, when applied to WDW. The distances between stations are very short while in China it goes a couple hundreds of miles per hour this would mean stop and start with no sharp turns in the world. The other is we don't know if it is an energy efficient manner or transport. China's word is not reliable and the technology isn't being sold to the rest of the world. Maybe China spent 1T on it with cheap labor and materials to boot, because that third world country wants to show how superior it is. I mean this is a country when compaired to the US where we have steam trains around an amusment park they have them still powered by coal used by industry.

[skiingfast]

On a related note, I'm really hoping that when the Florida High Speed rail line and station are built that maybe they will expand the transportation system in some way.

I think that FL won't get this built between Orlando and Tampa. I can see the need, but is will be an island of track. This just dampens reality.

It would be great if it went to the tampa and orlando airports and has a stop at WDW. If not for ME that would insure a few thousands resort guests riding each day. But then WDW would really need a true TTC. Not the one built before they had 4/6 gates and 20 resorts. I could definitly see a monorail streching to DTD in this case.

But if ever built the high speed line isn't likely to travel near WDW. Most likely will follow current rail lines, which is a little south of the southern tip of WDW. Good news is it isn't far off the airport.

[skiingfast]

I think that FL won't get this built between Orlando and Tampa. I can see the need, but is will be an island of track. This just dampens reality.

It would be great if it went to the tampa and orlando airports and has a stop at WDW. If not for ME that would insure a few thousands resort guests riding each day. But then WDW would really need a true TTC. Not the one built before they had 4/6 gates and 20 resorts. I could definitly see a monorail streching to DTD in this case.

But if ever built the high speed line isn't likely to travel near WDW. Most likely will follow current rail lines, which is a little south of the southern tip of WDW. Good news is it isn't far off the airport.

Well wouldn't you thunk it two days later I read an article about this.

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2453952

[skiingfast]

I was thinking about how people say it's so cost prohibitive Disney did build a monorail about 10 years ago with 5 stations and it is roughly the same length nessecary to add onto the WDW sytem a loop around the Epcot resorts and down to DHS.

Think hard where it is.

No, not the Las Vegas Monorail, though another good example. The Disneyland resort in Tokyo. It even has special windows.

[CanadianGuy]

I was thinking about how people say it's so cost prohibitive Disney did build a monorail about 10 years ago with 5 stations and it is roughly the same length nessecary to add onto the WDW sytem a loop around the Epcot resorts and down to DHS.

Think hard where it is.

No, not the Las Vegas Monorail, though another good example. The Disneyland resort in Tokyo. It even has special windows.

Except Disney didn't PAY for it.. rather they were paid FOR it.. by the Oriental Land Company who actually owns DL Tokyo. That company owns the parks in Japan and licenses the names, characters and brands from Disney thru hefty annual fees and by paying Disney's imagineering arm to do the work required to build and create the parks...

Construction and engineering costs were the responsibility of the OLC ... including the monorail. Disney made all kinds of money on that deal and didn't risk "Disney" money to do so.

From wikipedia:

The company was originally focused on improving leisure opportunities in Japan, such as building swimming pools and gyms. It approached The Walt Disney Company in 1980 to finance the first international Disney park. After Tokyo Disneyland was opened in 1983, the Oriental Land Company decided not to sell the park back to Disney. Walt Disney Attractions Japan pays Disney for character and likeness licenses, and Disney has leased their Imagineers to the company to design and build Tokyo Disneyland, as well as a second theme park, Tokyo DisneySea, which opened in 2001.

[ChrisFL]

Not to mention that Tokyo's Monorail is not free to ride

[Lewisc]

The Las Vegas Monorail filed for bankruptcy. You're right. It is a good example, but not the way you intended.




No, not the Las Vegas Monorail, though another good example. The Disneyland resort in Tokyo. It even has special windows.

[skiingfast]

Except Disney didn't PAY for it.. rather they were paid FOR it.. by the Oriental Land Company who actually owns DL Tokyo. That company owns the parks in Japan and licenses the names, characters and brands from Disney thru hefty annual fees and by paying Disney's imagineering arm to do the work required to build and create the parks...

Construction and engineering costs were the responsibility of the OLC ... including the monorail. Disney made all kinds of money on that deal and didn't risk "Disney" money to do so.

From wikipedia:

I never said that Disney was paying for the building of a monorail. I'm am just suggesting that people are willing to pay for monorails. Thus proof that there is possibility that WDW could get more monorails lines.

Disney didn't make all the money it wants on the Tokyo deal. For two large reasons. It made a deal to build the park without risking the capital. The same plan it used to build Disneland in Anaheim. Of course the OLC didn't opt to sell Disney a share in the park after completion. Second Japan used restriction on foreign investment. Disney couldn't of ever been The owner of the Toko Disney Resort.

Also I know that it has come up on this discussion. The monorail at WDW isn't truly free, it is subsidized by guests who pay more for tickets and hotel rates on the Monorail line. Japan has a different culture, and consumers and businesses do not operate in the same manner as in the US.

[CanadianGuy]

Not to mention that Tokyo's Monorail is not free to ride

No way.. how much do they charge?

--

All I was speaking to with the OLC was that Disney hasn't had the appetite for that kind of *real* risk in a while now..

Too bad really.. You can add me to the list of those who would dearly love to see the Monorail expanded.. but I don't expect it soon.

Of course, I never really expected the Treehouse Villas to open again either.. And Disney surprised me on that one.

[tjkraz]

You can try to rationalize a monorail extension but I just don't see it happening.

WDW guests don't want to be asked to pay extra for transportation. And you can't exactly bundle it up in hotel rate increases when Disney is already being forced to discount 30% just to rent its rooms. Disney is trying its darndest just to wean people off of those discounts without adding hundreds-of-millions in monorail construction and operating costs.

In terms of development, whatever monies would be spent on a longer monorail line would be much better served going into the parks themselves.

[skiingfast]

No way.. how much do they charge?

--


Of course, I never really expected the Treehouse Villas to open again either.. And Disney surprised me on that one.

Last trip to WDW the operator of the Sassalouga river boat asked me if I knew of the Treehouses and I told him I stayed there when I was a kid he didn't quite know what to say. Apparently he didn't know there were old treehouses.

Tokyo monorail 6 or 7 bucks. The oddest thing is a lot of the parking is at the back of the Disneyland park and you take the monorail around to the front or you park. I think parking is 20.

[skiingfast]

You can try to rationalize a monorail extension but I just don't see it happening.

WDW guests don't want to be asked to pay extra for transportation. And you can't exactly bundle it up in hotel rate increases when Disney is already being forced to discount 30% just to rent its rooms. Disney is trying its darndest just to wean people off of those discounts without adding hundreds-of-millions in monorail construction and operating costs.



I think disney's guest are already paying more for tranportation. The Delux resorts on the monorail line are more than WL and AKL.

[ChrisFL]

Part of the reason that Tokyo charges for their Monorail is because anything with more than 1 stop is under the city of Tokyo's transportation department or something, where they have to charge a fee.

This is why the train in Tokyo DL only has 1 stop.

[Markstudy]

The new monorail ??

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff180/markstudy/newmonorail.jpg

http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff180/markstudy/monorail2.jpg

[CanadianGuy]

Those are the new DL trains.. Certainly the ones at DW could be made to look like that after a refurb.

Pretty huh?

[Dznefreek]

Everyone keeps saying how an expansion would costs hundreds of millions of dollars; I disagree.
The biggest piece; the land, is already WDW property. I am sure any construction, road projects, and infrastructure repair and placement over the years has always been planned and executed with any type of expansion in mind like the pylons built under Epcot for example.
The beam construction, and fabrication would probably be next in terms of cost followed utilities, and then the trains. . . . . . just my opinion. . . .

[Lewisc]

Everyone keeps saying how an expansion would costs hundreds of millions of dollars; I disagree.
..... just my opinion. . . .

The Las Vegas monorail was constructed 2001-2004. The construction cost was approximately 385 million for 3.8 miles. This number doesn't include the cost for securing the right of way. Construction costs have increased since 2004. Disney is on soft land, "swamp land". That means higher costs for pilings.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/cgi-bin/printable.cgi?/lvrj_home/2000/Nov-29-Wed-2000/news/14920441.html

Opinions should be based on facts. Do you have any facts?

[skiingfast]

The Las Vegas monorail was constructed 2001-2004. The construction cost was approximately 385 million for 3.8 miles. This number doesn't include the cost for securing the right of way. Construction costs have increased since 2004. Disney is on soft land, "swamp land". That means higher costs for pilings.

Opinions should be based on facts. Do you have any facts?

Is it fact that swamp land in WDW is more expensive to build a foundation on than the LV strip? Please show support statements and or refereneces.

Knowing the relationship of price/demand. Are construction costs in 2004 in Americas fastest growing city less than 2010 in central Fl? Please show support statements and or references.

[Maistre Gracey]

Is it fact that swamp land in WDW is more expensive to build a foundation on than the LV strip? Please show support statements and or refereneces.

Knowing the relationship of price/demand. Are construction costs in 2004 in Americas fastest growing city less than 2010 in central Fl? Please show support statements and or references.
How about this one..

Site deleted... didn't know that was an actual website!

MG

[tjkraz]

Is it fact that swamp land in WDW is more expensive to build a foundation on than the LV strip? Please show support statements and or refereneces.

Knowing the relationship of price/demand. Are construction costs in 2004 in Americas fastest growing city less than 2010 in central Fl? Please show support statements and or references.

Really?!?!

Are you honestly holding out some hope that it is cheaper to float tons of concrete on Florida swampland than on Las Vegas desert floor?

As for the price, there are certainly variations. But given that it cost nearly $400 million for a monorail project 6 years ago, I think we can safely assume that the price tag on a WDW monorail expansion will be somewhere north of $19.95.

[Maistre Gracey]

Yeah... build it on swap land. Disney needs another E-Ticket thrill ride.

MG

[Lewisc]

The monorail at Newark Airport was completed in 1998. Construction costs were said to be 350 million dollars. 1.9 miles.

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/30/nyregion/long-delayed-monorail-to-open-at-newark-airport.html?pagewanted=1

I'll concede NY are construction costs may be high.

Light rail costs would be significantly less, maybe as low as 20 million /mile.

[doconeill]

Keep in mind...giving costs as "$ per mile" and using it as a comparison isn't really valid. There are all sorts of costs that have nothing to do with the length of the beam...the trainsets, the maintenance facilities, the staff, etc.

Think in terms of a MYW ticket. It's front-loaded. The first few "miles" cost the most, but the longer you stretch in the less per mile it costs.

Now, the longer you run it, the more trainsets you need, but the more trainsets you order the less per trainset you usually pay, etc.

Disney HAS a maintenance facility, but they would need to greatly expand, or more likely build a whole new facility. So it is not immune to those costs.

[skiingfast]

[QUOTE=tjkraz;36464566]Really?!?!

Are you honestly holding out some hope that it is cheaper to float tons of concrete on Florida swampland than on Las Vegas desert floor?

QUOTE]

Is WDW swamp land?

A swamp is an area that is permanently or periodically flooded. Prior to the area being purchases by Disney there was a lot of ranch land, and cows won't graze in swamps if there is dry land available. When disney bought it they drained everything they wanted to and fill everything they wanted to.

[DC7800]

Keep in mind...giving costs as "$ per mile" and using it as a comparison isn't really valid. There are all sorts of costs that have nothing to do with the length of the beam...the trainsets, the maintenance facilities, the staff, etc.

Think in terms of a MYW ticket. It's front-loaded. The first few "miles" cost the most, but the longer you stretch in the less per mile it costs.

Now, the longer you run it, the more trainsets you need, but the more trainsets you order the less per trainset you usually pay, etc.

Disney HAS a maintenance facility, but they would need to greatly expand, or more likely build a whole new facility. So it is not immune to those costs.

Exactly correct. I've even seen projects quoted with a 'total cost' which included the cost of operating the system for X years, or perhaps included the cost of buying replacement trainsets after 20 years, etc. Those numbers can tell you something, but as a "cost per mile' it becomes completely meaningless.

The key to keeping costs from getting out of hand is to do things incrementally. Don't try to link all parks and resorts in one massive expansion. Start with the low-hanging fruit, perhaps by just linking one to two destinations, not far off the existing loops, where you get the greatest benefits (Wilderness Lodge, perhaps, as its little more than stones throw from the beam already).

Monorail expansion would be very expensive, but its not $100 million per mile expensive. That figure includes other costs. It is also not going to happen. Wasn't one of the latest monorail rumors was that expansion was dead even if the Four Seasons paid for it.

Light rail costs would be significantly less, maybe as low as 20 million /mile

Light rail shouldn't cost anwhere near $20 million per mile, unless as stated above, we are including other costs involved in the total project. The cost to lay a mile of track is a fraction of that.

[skiingfast]

[QUOTE=DC7800;36466086]Monorail expansion would be very expensive, but its not $100 million per mile expensive. That figure includes other costs. It is also not going to happen. Wasn't one of the latest monorail rumors was that expansion was dead even if the Four Seasons paid for it.

QUOTE]

I think the four seasons causes rumors to fly more than anything else. I know when they built one at my home ski area. It was going get it's own gondola into the building itself. Also after completion a chairlift's lower terminal was moved to degongest the base area but a rumor was floating around that it as being moved because of 4Seasons guest complaints about noise.

[Lewisc]

The 100 million/mile figure for Vegas didn't include the "extras"

That calculates to a capital cost of approximately $141 million per mile (2002 dollars) for an elevated alignment built almost entirely on donated right-of-way, through casino property and parking lots, and apparently without expenses for rolling stock, maintenance facilities, and other items. The switch for the spur is already provided in the ongoing privately financed project.


The total price for the project was over 650 million. The figure quoted was 385 million for 3.8 miles for just the construction costs.

Light rail cost between 15-100 million per mile. Variable is how much of the track has to be elevated or run underground.


Exactly correct. I've even seen projects quoted with a 'total cost' which included the cost of operating the system for X years, or perhaps included the cost of buying replacement trainsets after 20 years, etc. Those numbers can tell you something, but as a "cost per mile' it becomes completely meaningless.

The key to keeping costs from getting out of hand is to do things incrementally. Don't try to link all parks and resorts in one massive expansion. Start with the low-hanging fruit, perhaps by just linking one to two destinations, not far off the existing loops, where you get the greatest benefits (Wilderness Lodge, perhaps, as its little more than stones throw from the beam already).

Monorail expansion would be very expensive, but its not $100 million per mile expensive. That figure includes other costs. It is also not going to happen. Wasn't one of the latest monorail rumors was that expansion was dead even if the Four Seasons paid for it.



Light rail shouldn't cost anwhere near $20 million per mile, unless as stated above, we are including other costs involved in the total project. The cost to lay a mile of track is a fraction of that.

[Dznefreek]

Opinions should be based on facts. Do you have any facts?Since when does one's opinion need to be fact based . . . . . .that is like saying a rumor needs to be based on fact. It is like saying in my opinion _____________ does/does not exist or is not real. It is my opinion.
Definitions of opinion:
a personal belief or judgment that is not founded on proof or certainty; "my opinion differs from yours";
a message expressing a belief about something; the expression of a belief that is held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof;
Comparing Vegas to Disney is apples to oranges. There isn't one . . . .

[skiingfast]

Comparing Vegas to Disney is apples to oranges. There isn't one . . . .

I think comparing Disney and Vegas is like Red Delicious to Granny Smith. I mean they are both monorails.

[Lewisc]

A rumor isn't based on facts. Sometimes a rumor starts with a partial truth. Sometimes a rumor is generated based on an untruth, but one that people believe. The black sections at the S/D aren't "temporary" rooms that can be popped out when the monorail is ready to go.

An opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. It's based on facts, but the facts aren't sufficient provide absolute certainty.

Does anyone think the building codes are more lenient in Orlando then Vegas? Does anyone think the cost of concrete and steel is significantly less in Orlando then it was in Vegas 5 years ago?
Pixie dust only works in the theme parks. Does anyone think pilings will cost less to construct in Orlando's ground? The monorails built in Newark and JFK airports were even more expensive.The fact that some posters want the construction costs of a monorail to be significantly cheaper then Vegas doesn't give them a basis to form an opinion. An opinion, without any facts, is either speculation or nonsense.


What's learned by the Vegas example is any new "monorail" at WDW is more likely to be light rail. Significantly cheaper. Disney has the space. Disney could elevate enough sections to provide "magic".

It's possible Disney may build some kind of light rail connecting WDW/Celebration station (if/when the train linking Orlando and Tampa is built) to one or more parts of WDW. This is nothing more then my speculation. It's logical but I don't have any facts to support.

[lockedoutlogic]

The expansion of the monorail system is kinda like the "Lost Ark" of Disney rumors....we know it doesn't exist...yet everybody keeps looking for it. Actually more like atlantis or El Dorado

The only way the monorail could've been effectively expanded and made all encompassing is if it was done concurrently with the expansion of the property....the early 80's near breakup and the invasion by Michael the Conquerer pretty much sealed that.

We've done work with Michael Graves and I asked one of the guys about the Swan/Dolphin rumor...the consensus was that it was a discussed/ moderately planned step...if not necessarily the "pass through" that is widely speculated on.

The monorail died right there...in the early 90's...when the downtown area was expanded and packed with rooms and the "Cresent Lake" expansion that had MGM, Swan Dolphin, and Boardwalk/ yacht and beach all planned/ constructed/ opened at nearly the same time.

That was the end of the monorail...they wouldn't do it then - not coincidentally when Disney's money and corporate position was less than juggernaut as it is now - and the door shut after it.

The fact that no spur was extended to Wilderness Lodge...which is about a 3 wood from the existing track...was the nail in the coffin.


Now, that's not to say that another opportunity can't happen...as they could try to push the federal government to go into a "development" project of a new energy efficient type system to be prototyped at WDW for future urban use....not out of the realm of possibility given our precarious energy situation...environmental conditions...and rapidly decreasing employment opportunities in the industrial sector....

But you never know. My hope is for some sort of light rail. It's far cheaper, higher capacity, and could be implemented because they own every square inch they would need to build it already. It doesn't lack the aesthetic lure of the monorail....but it could and i suspect - eventually - will be done.

[lockedoutlogic]

A rumor isn't based on facts. Sometimes a rumor starts with a partial truth. Sometimes a rumor is generated based on an untruth, but one that people believe. The black sections at the S/D aren't "temporary" rooms that can be popped out when the monorail is ready to go.

An opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. It's based on facts, but the facts aren't sufficient provide absolute certainty.

Does anyone think the building codes are more lenient in Orlando then Vegas? Does anyone think the cost of concrete and steel is significantly less in Orlando then it was in Vegas 5 years ago?
Pixie dust only works in the theme parks. Does anyone think pilings will cost less to construct in Orlando's ground? The monorails built in Newark and JFK airports were even more expensive.The fact that some posters want the construction costs of a monorail to be significantly cheaper then Vegas doesn't give them a basis to form an opinion. An opinion, without any facts, is either speculation or nonsense.


What's learned by the Vegas example is any new "monorail" at WDW is more likely to be light rail. Significantly cheaper. Disney has the space. Disney could elevate enough sections to provide "magic".

It's possible Disney may build some kind of light rail connecting WDW/Celebration station (if/when the train linking Orlando and Tampa is built) to one or more parts of WDW. This is nothing more then my speculation. It's logical but I don't have any facts to support.

This is an excellent assessment of the truth of construction at WDW...

In fact...Disney probably gets taken a little more for their capital projects - given their location and general supply of cheaper labor - than you would think.

The construction outfits, engineers, and architects that are used in large scale construction at WDW are NOT cheap. I know this from having done work with some of them in the past. And disney's contracts are almost always heavily laden with timetable bonuses and incentives - as you would almost have to in a 365 operation of a worldwide destination for recreation and leisure, further driving up the costs.

Long story short: monorail expansion at WDW would come in above similar type endeavours elsewhere...even in higher priced areas and government projects. The cost could be significantly higher.

so no....no monorail mauve will be pulling into the Pop Century station anytime too.

Which brings me to my final point: IF there ever were to be an expansion...it would be on the Resort "Caste" System that has been in place since the late 80's....i.e. the monorails would only be extended to revenue centers (parks...or any place with cash registers)...and the high end hotels, and perhaps DVC.

I'm not gonna mince words...this is a sensitive take on this i know...but it is the honest truth. What disney provides its hotel patrons is a direct reflection of the price of their room and their facilities...we all know this to be true. It is no coincidence that the 3 monorail hotels are the highest priced...because they are...even with the contemporary "garden wing" throwing the numbers off a bit.

[Lewisc]

I'm glad a poster with some knowledge was able to answer those posters who think Disney could build a monorail at a fraction of the cost of the Las Vegas system.

This is the rumor board. CMs are a good source of rumors. Years ago my guide during a backstage tour talked about a transportation plan. It was mainly light rail. He thought it was close to being implemented but it was killed after the decline of business after 9-11. I'm sure through the years Disney commissioned a lot of different plans.

What was interesting is the analysis was the opposite of what we'd expect. It's easier to justify a light rail station at the value resorts then the deluxe. You have a lot of guests within walking distance of one stop. You either need more stations per passenger at the deluxe resorts, guests would be required to walk further or you'd need some kind of shuttle to get passengers from their resort to the station.

Disney can't sell out rooms without discounts. Given a choice do you think guests would prefer free dining or a monorail? Do you think guests would be happy with a $10/night resort/transportation charge that included rail service to the parks? Per room? Per guest? Probably neither.

The EPCOT resorts were built around boat transportation to two different parks.













Which brings me to my final point: IF there ever were to be an expansion...it would be on the Resort "Caste" System that has been in place since the late 80's....i.e. the monorails would only be extended to revenue centers (parks...or any place with cash registers)...and the high end hotels, and perhaps DVC.

I'm not gonna mince words...this is a sensitive take on this i know...but it is the honest truth. What disney provides its hotel patrons is a direct reflection of the price of their room and their facilities...we all know this to be true. It is no coincidence that the 3 monorail hotels are the highest priced...because they are...even with the contemporary "garden wing" throwing the numbers off a bit.

[GrumpyFan]

The only way the monorail could've been effectively expanded and made all encompassing is if it was done concurrently with the expansion of the property....the early 80's near breakup and the invasion by Michael the Conquerer pretty much sealed that.

It just shows how extremely short-sighted "Michael the Conqueror" was in building all the hotels on-property, without excpanding the transit options to include monorail or some other form of transportation that would've been cleaner, possibly more efficient and friendlier to the environment than busses.


That was the end of the monorail...they wouldn't do it then - not coincidentally when Disney's money and corporate position was less than juggernaut as it is now - and the door shut after it.


Indeed. That would have made the most sense on many levels.


The fact that no spur was extended to Wilderness Lodge...which is about a 3 wood from the existing track...was the nail in the coffin.


I must disagree here though. I don't know that the monorail going to Wilderness would work that well. I think doing so would really wreck the elaborate theming that goes a long way to make you feel like you're at a true resort in the paciffic north west. Sure, having the monorail here would be convenient, but not at the expense of ruining the theme.


Now, that's not to say that another opportunity can't happen...as they could try to push the federal government to go into a "development" project of a new energy efficient type system to be prototyped at WDW for future urban use....not out of the realm of possibility given our precarious energy situation...environmental conditions...and rapidly decreasing employment opportunities in the industrial sector....

But you never know. My hope is for some sort of light rail. It's far cheaper, higher capacity, and could be implemented because they own every square inch they would need to build it already. It doesn't lack the aesthetic lure of the monorail....but it could and i suspect - eventually - will be done.

Pushing the federal government, really? I wouldn't want to see that. If the federal government is involved then there's also a lot of heavy requirements that go along with it, that I really don't want to see at WDW.

If there's any possible opportunity for something to happen, I think it will be in conjunction with the Florida High Speed Rail project. The way I see it is they almost have to build something to connect to the new station that will be on-property. Well, they don't have to, but they really should. I mean, do they really want to transfer guests from the high speed rail to a bus? Sure, it will work, but it's really kind of an ugly situation.

Light rail could work, but there's numerous other options as well. I like PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) personally, and there are literally dozens of designs out there. Another option would be a smaller format monorail system. Hitachi Monorail, which is who built the Tokyo Disney line, has several different sized monorails they've built. Their small line of monorails, require smaller, less expensive beams, that can make tighter turns and require less space. The trains are listed at carrying up to 79 passengers per car, usually in just 2 cars but up to 4, and they claim the cost of their system is 50% less than a tradiontal large-type monorail. Probably not the best solution, but like I said, there are numerous designs out there that should be looked at.

[skiingfast]

[QUOTE=Lewisc;36472549]
An opinion is a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. It's based on facts, but the facts aren't sufficient provide absolute certainty.

Does anyone think the building codes are more lenient in Orlando then Vegas? Does anyone think the cost of concrete and steel is significantly less in Orlando then it was in Vegas 5 years ago?
Pixie dust only works in the theme parks. Does anyone think pilings will cost less to construct in Orlando's ground? The monorails built in Newark and JFK airports were even more expensive.The fact that some posters want the construction costs of a monorail to be significantly cheaper then Vegas doesn't give them a basis to form an opinion. An opinion, without any facts, is either speculation or nonsense.


What's learned by the Vegas example is any new "monorail" at WDW is more likely to be light rail. Significantly cheaper. Disney has the space. Disney could elevate enough sections to provide "magic".

QUOTE]

It sound like what you are saying is that without facts nothing is possible. Kind of like when people thought the world was round but had nothing to back it up.

Also a light rail at WDW may not be significantly cheaper. Based on this fact, it is more expensive to build track when tunnels or bridges need to be used. With all the existing infrastructure in place throughout WDW a light rial would need to effectiently and safely cross many roads and have close access to the resort lobbys. A monorail by it's nature does not have similar problems.

"It's kind of fun to do the impossible" -Walt Disney

[Dznefreek]

Keep in mind...giving costs as "$ per mile" and using it as a comparison isn't really valid.exactly . . . . .

[DC7800]

Light rail cost between 15-100 million per mile.

Source please? There's no way one mile of light-rail track costs even $15 million, unless you are including other costs (ROW acquisition, building in developed areas, relocation of utilities, etc.) or the price of something besides just the track (cab signals, catenary system, etc.). I don't doubt that you've heard or read that somewhere, but there's something wrong with those numbers.

We're not talking about an elevated railway or a subway - those would indeed cost truly incredible sums of money - or even lines with long bridges or highway underpasses. We are just talking about one mile of standard guage, at-grade, wood or cement tie ballasted railroad. It's not cheap, and there are other costs involved in any such project, but one mile of track isn't that expensive.

CMs are a good source of rumors

CM's, no offense intended, are notoriously poor sources of rumors. They often know no more than we do here on the boards, since they aren't necessairily privvy to executive decisions any more than we are. Now let me state with certainty that doesn't apply to everyone - there are some very knowledgable CM's - including many who post right here on the DIS. CM's also may hear or learn of things within their area. But how many bus drivers have spread the "black spots on the Swan & Dolphin removal for the monorail" line (and not a shred of truth to it, of course).

It's easier to justify a light rail station at the value resorts then the deluxe.For an efficient transportation system, this is certainly correct. You have more passengers at the value resort complexes.

Given a choice do you think guests would prefer free dining or a monorail?

Monorail. I'd take about anything over free dining, actually. It needs to go away. Badly.

[Lewisc]

I found the range of costs from a google search. I'm not going to take the time to find, and post it. The variable is what percentage of the track has to be elevated (or tunneled) to avoid grade crossings. My point is light rail would be a fraction of the cost of a monorail. I don't know how much of the cost is going to relocate utilities, grade crossings etc. Those are certainly part of the cost of construction. I can't see Disney building light rail without eliminating almost all grade crossings. They may need to elevate the track near some of the resorts.

I probably should of used one of those smilie things. CMs are a good source of rumors in that most of us have had at least one bus driver willing to share his opinions. By "good source" I meant they are a source for a large quantity of rumors. I certainly didn't mean they are a source of rumors that accurately predict future Disney plans. That was my point. Speculation by posters on DIS are likely to be more accurate then many of the CM rumors.

JMO but Disney wanted to change their restaurants to make them more popular. Fill them. Restaurants like Olive Garden and Outback are more popular with famlies then restaurants like Il Mulino of NY and Shula's. The dining plan was a result of the Disney's desire to make the restaurants more popular, not the cause.





Source please? There's no way one mile of light-rail track costs even $15 million, unless you are including other costs (ROW acquisition, building in developed areas, relocation of utilities, etc.) or the price of something besides just the track (cab signals, catenary system, etc.). I don't doubt that you've heard or read that somewhere, but there's something wrong with those numbers.

We're not talking about an elevated railway or a subway - those would indeed cost truly incredible sums of money - or even lines with long bridges or highway underpasses. We are just talking about one mile of standard guage, at-grade, wood or cement tie ballasted railroad. It's not cheap, and there are other costs involved in any such project, but one mile of track isn't that expensive.



CM's, no offense intended, are notoriously poor sources of rumors. They often know no more than we do here on the boards, since they aren't necessairily privvy to executive decisions any more than we are. Now let me state with certainty that doesn't apply to everyone - there are some very knowledgable CM's - including many who post right here on the DIS. CM's also may hear or learn of things within their area. But how many bus drivers have spread the "black spots on the Swan & Dolphin removal for the monorail" line (and not a shred of truth to it, of course).

For an efficient transportation system, this is certainly correct. You have more passengers at the value resort complexes.



Monorail. I'd take about anything over free dining, actually. It needs to go away. Badly.

[skiingfast]

Has anyone ever been there during a time where the buses wear really busy? Did it appear they needed to add to the transportation system?

[Lewisc]

Has anyone ever been there during a time where the buses wear really busy? Did it appear they needed to add to the transportation system?

I took a non-Disney bus at park closing. I don't remember the name of the company. The driver said Disney has contracts with local bus companies to supply buses (and drivers) when needed. My memory is they were also using DCL buses. Maybe the contract is just with Mears.

The point is it's possible to add extra buses but the ability to add extra trains is very limited. The lines for the monorail at park closing are sometimes longer then the lines for the buses.

[skiingfast]

I took a non-Disney bus at park closing. I don't remember the name of the company. The driver said Disney has contracts with local bus companies to supply buses (and drivers) when needed. My memory is they were also using DCL buses. Maybe the contract is just with Mears.

The point is it's possible to add extra buses but the ability to add extra trains is very limited. The lines for the monorail at park closing are sometimes longer then the lines for the buses.


So I see they do need extra transit. And if it was cheaper to rent all of it they wouldn't have there own at all.

Despite the lines you've seen the monorails have a higher capacity than the buses. The current trainset holds 300 passnegers, you may pack in 70 on the older buses the newer low floor buses about 60. Which line moves the fastest?

[doconeill]

Despite the lines you've seen the monorails have a higher capacity than the buses. The current trainset holds 300 passnegers, you may pack in 70 on the older buses the newer low floor buses about 60. Which line moves the fastest?

Capacity does not equal throughput... :) It depends on how many buses, which will define the frequency, the time in transit which defines the average speed, etc. etc.

As we say in the IT industry, "You may have a fat pipe, but never underestimate the throughput of a station wagon full of tapes..."

[Lewisc]

Despite the lines you've seen the monorails have a higher capacity than the buses. The current trainset holds 300 passnegers, you may pack in 70 on the older buses the newer low floor buses about 60. Which line moves the fastest?

How many monorail trains can the system handle per hour? How many monorail trains per hour can Disney run with their current fleet? Can Disney rent extra trains for park closing? Obviously not.

How many buses per hour can the bus stops handle? Remember Disney can change the signs and have more then one stop for a resort.

The MK can load 2 monorails at the same time 300 X 2 = 600
The MK can load ??? buses at the same time 60 X ? = a lot more then 600

How long does it take to ge the next train to the station, loaded and dispatched?
How long does it take for a bus to pull in, load and depart?

[skiingfast]

How many monorail trains can the system handle per hour? How many monorail trains per hour can Disney run with their current fleet? Can Disney rent extra trains for park closing? Obviously not.

How many buses per hour can the bus stops handle? Remember Disney can change the signs and have more then one stop for a resort.

The MK can load 2 monorails at the same time 300 X 2 = 600
The MK can load ??? buses at the same time 60 X ? = a lot more then 600

How long does it take to ge the next train to the station, loaded and dispatched?
How long does it take for a bus to pull in, load and depart?

Why don't you refine your model and then tell everyone the answers?

When shipping in bulk you use trains not trucks.

[doconeill]

When shipping in bulk you use trains not trucks.

When shipping in bulk, you aren't trying to get it there fast. But when it gets there, you get a lot of it at once (the "station wagon full of tapes" analogy I made earlier).

So, using that analogy, say I had a monorail or other bulk mover, that took an hour to get from AKL to MK. I can move 1000 guests an hour. But each and every guest has to wait an hour, and they arrive all at once creating congestion at the gates, etc.

Say I had 5 buses with a capacity of 100 guests, but they could get to MK in 30 minutes. That's 500 guests in 30 minutes, so its the same 1000 guests in 60 minutes. But half of them actually get there sooner, and none of them spend more than 30 minutes in any one spot (30 minutes here and 30 minutes somewhere else feels a lot different than 60 minutes in one place).

Of course, I'm making these numbers up. But it all depends on how you want to move people - speed, rate, comfort, and flexibility.

Another problem is in failures. If a trainset fails on a monorail, the system is seriously crippled if not altogether down until the problem is addressed, and you could have a trainset or more full of passengers stranded on the beam during that time. If the trainset is shot you need to take it out of service and you've lost a fair percentage of your capacity. Even if it is not a trainset problem but a beam problem, your system is severely crippled. And you have to have buses in reserve to deal with it. Overall it may be more reliable, but when it fails it REALLY fails.

If a bus fails, you've got far less guests stranded, they can easily be transferred to a working bus quickly, and you can easily reroute around road problems. You lose a very small percentage of your capacity.

It's the same reason that in the U.S. there isn't much expansion to rail systems when buses can be used.

[Lewisc]

Despite the lines you've seen the monorails have a higher capacity than the buses. The current trainset holds 300 passnegers, you may pack in 70 on the older buses the newer low floor buses about 60. Which line moves the fastest?

Why don't you refine your model and then tell everyone the answers?



I didn't see the need to embarass you by documenting how wrong your point was. I provided enough information to show why you're incorrect. You can do the math if you want to see how wrong you are.

[skiingfast]

I didn't see the need to embarass you by documenting how wrong your point was. I provided enough information to show why you're incorrect. You can do the math if you want to see how wrong you are.

How wrong was it?

[skiingfast]

When shipping in bulk, you aren't trying to get it there fast. But when it gets there, you get a lot of it at once (the "station wagon full of tapes" analogy I made earlier).

So, using that analogy, say I had a monorail or other bulk mover, that took an hour to get from AKL to MK. I can move 1000 guests an hour. But each and every guest has to wait an hour, and they arrive all at once creating congestion at the gates, etc.

Say I had 5 buses with a capacity of 100 guests, but they could get to MK in 30 minutes. That's 500 guests in 30 minutes, so its the same 1000 guests in 60 minutes. But half of them actually get there sooner, and none of them spend more than 30 minutes in any one spot (30 minutes here and 30 minutes somewhere else feels a lot different than 60 minutes in one place).

Of course, I'm making these numbers up. But it all depends on how you want to move people - speed, rate, comfort, and flexibility.



Here a real world application of bulk transport that compares two different modes. About 10 years ago I met a man who was in charge of maintaining a rail sytem on an ore dock on Lake Michigan. The iron ore was being moved from mines in Northen Michigan to Steel mills in northern Indiana. I asked why if trains are faster and it's already loaded on them why put them on a ship?

He said the trains move 15 mph when loaded and the ship goes about 6 so it is true that the trains can go faster. But the ship can carry 4 train loads.

Four times as much ore in a little less than 3 times the amount of time.

[doconeill]

Four times as much ore in a little less than 3 times the amount of time.

Right. But ore doesn't complain about how long it took. :)

[skiingfast]

Another problem is in failures. If a trainset fails on a monorail, the system is seriously crippled if not altogether down until the problem is addressed, and you could have a trainset or more full of passengers stranded on the beam during that time. If the trainset is shot you need to take it out of service and you've lost a fair percentage of your capacity. Even if it is not a trainset problem but a beam problem, your system is severely crippled. And you have to have buses in reserve to deal with it. Overall it may be more reliable, but when it fails it REALLY fails.

If a bus fails, you've got far less guests stranded, they can easily be transferred to a working bus quickly, and you can easily reroute around road problems. You lose a very small percentage of your capacity.

It's the same reason that in the U.S. there isn't much expansion to rail systems when buses can be used.

I agree if a train is idle on the tracks it does hold up the whole line. It isn't a terrible problem though. I imagine that there is a maximum time, by FL state law, that guests can be stranded. They do have a vehicle to pull the monorails to the maintnance shop. Also roads can be closed because of vehicle or roadway problems. It seems like disney had to close the bus sytem down earlier this year.

[doconeill]

I agree if a train is idle on the tracks it does hold up the whole line. It isn't a terrible problem though. I imagine that there is a maximum time, by FL state law, that guests can be stranded. They do have a vehicle to pull the monorails to the maintnance shop. Also roads can be closed because of vehicle or roadway problems. It seems like disney had to close the bus sytem down earlier this year.


Road closures do not stop the buses from running...they just need to take a different route because there are multiple paths.

The bus system closed down temporarily for inspections due to a bomb scare, which would shut down any system.

[Maistre Gracey]

My goodness... Obviously Disney has crunched the numbers on this issue and decided, at least for now, that it is not cost effective to build more monorail lines.
If it were to Disney's advantage, you can bet the project would be in the works.

Of course we all want more monorail lines, but that doesn't make it a good business decision.
Personally , I would rather see the clubs on PI re-opened.

MG

[skiingfast]

We don't know if disney is planning or crunching the numbers. That's why it was introduced to the rumor and news board.

I also have the feeling that some people don't like the monorail. I suspicious that they belong to the union that the bus operators do.

It's funny you would like PI to reopen the clubs. I think it had the biggest effect on the CM's that were there during the closings. Perhaps you were one?

[Maistre Gracey]

We don't know if disney is planning or crunching the numbers. That's why it was introduced to the rumor and news board.

I also have the feeling that some people don't like the monorail. I suspicious that they belong to the union that the bus operators do.

It's funny you would like PI to reopen the clubs. I think it had the biggest effect on the CM's that were there during the closings. Perhaps you were one?
No, I have never been a CM.

Of course Disney has crunched the numbers over the years. That's what they do best. I mean... What do you think?? Do you think they just forgot about adding more monorail??

MG

[Lewisc]

I've linked an old post from Chip N Dale Express. He does a good job describing reasons why a monorail expansion won't be an improvement.

http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=3137192&postcount=45

We got on a bus and get off that bus when we reach our destination. Assume Disney builds a monorail/light rail. One stop at CBR. That suggests a resort shuttle to get to the monorail. Assume the rail goes as far as some central transfer point (TTC?) that means a connecting train. A guest has to go on 3 different forms of transportation instead of one. Confusing to some guests. Probably negates any potential time savings.

Posters who refute the nonsense and gibberish posted by a couple of people aren't shills for Disney or CMs.

Most of the cost issues with a monorail would be solved with a light rail solution. Only elevate sections of the track.

That doesn't address other issues. Disney uses buses because buses work. They're flexible. The impact of a train being removed from service would be greater then a train removed from service.

[Oglet]

You can have all the flexibility in the world, its how its implemented that matters. Take this for example.

Grad night last night. MK closed at 7 for guests, of course all the resort dining locations are open well past that. At 9pm someone who is staying at a Disney resort such as POP, All Star or any other resort not serviced by the monorail has 2 main disney options with slight variations of each available.

1 They can wait for a bus at the resort they are eating at and catch a bus to DTD and then catch another bus to their hotel or,

2. You can catch the monorail to TTC, switch to the Epcot Monorail, take it to EPCOT, get off and walk to a bus and catch it to your resort.

Neither is a really good option for a guest however as much of a supporter of the monorail as I am Monorail-Monorail-Bus is far more confusing than a Bus - Bus option.

When MK closes at 7pm for a special event many are already annoyed, throw in the fact they have easily just spent a couple hundred dollars dining and an option that requires them to ride 2 monorails and wait for a bus at the end of it to get to their hotel makes for an extremely unhappy guest experience.

Is it any wonder they are always discounting rooms and offering free dining?

[skiingfast]

Road closures do not stop the buses from running...they just need to take a different route because there are multiple paths.

The bus system closed down temporarily for inspections due to a bomb scare, which would shut down any system.

I'm am sure your can think of a case where a road has been closed and traffic had majors problems because of it.

The case is the same for rail lines. Orlando does not have one road into it, it doesn't have one track into it either. There is an option.

Even if a monorail is stuck on the way to the MK. There is a paralell track that can still be used.

Being a train doesn't mean if one stops they all do.

[skiingfast]

No, I have never been a CM.

Of course Disney has crunched the numbers over the years. That's what they do best. I mean... What do you think?? Do you think they just forgot about adding more monorail??

MG

All business make decisions for spending capital. Personaly I think it is quite argueable that Disney isn't great at it.

Was it worth closing down PI? Not that we would really know, but being a fan do you think it was loosing money and better to now opporate?

I'm sure if they have transit problems or plans to expand then they take another look at the cost/benefit. Just not something they would discuss at every meeting.

[doconeill]

I'm am sure your can think of a case where a road has been closed and traffic had majors problems because of it.

If you've only got one major road and a lot of smaller ones, yes.

The roads at WDW are fairly equal. The only problem is if you've got a unique feeder road (say, something happens at the entrance roadway to a resort).


The case is the same for rail lines. Orlando does not have one road into it, it doesn't have one track into it either. There is an option.

Not all rail lines are equal, and most lines have only two tracks. The big advantage of regular rail is that switching between tracks is relatively easy and comparatively cheap - however, all sorts of blocking and signaling needs to take place - it may require manual protection and blocking, which severely limits throughout. On an occasional commuter or inter-city route its not a big deal. On a metropolitan Rapid Transit system, it causes major delays.

Switching on monorail is a lot more expensive, which is why there aren't inter-beam switches periodically. Aside from the switching into the individual bays of the maintenance facility, I can think of 4 - two that are used to shunt from the MK to Epcot loops, once from the Maintenance to the Express beam, and one from the Express to the Resort beam.


Even if a monorail is stuck on the way to the MK. There is a paralell track that can still be used.

Being a train doesn't mean if one stops they all do.

In the case of the MK loops yes - there is a redundant path. And the Express loop I believe CAN be used for resort stops in an emergency. But your throughput is cut completely in half.

In the case of the Epcot loop, however, there is not a redundant beam and therefore you are either completely shut down or need to run a "shuttle" back and forth on the same beam. Given that the Epcot loop runs with 3 trainsets, your throughput is at best 1/3.

[skiingfast]

I've linked an old post from Chip N Dale Express. He does a good job describing reasons why a monorail expansion won't be an improvement.

http://www.disboards.com/showpost.php?p=3137192&postcount=45

We got on a bus and get off that bus when we reach our destination. Assume Disney builds a monorail/light rail. One stop at CBR. That suggests a resort shuttle to get to the monorail. Assume the rail goes as far as some central transfer point (TTC?) that means a connecting train. A guest has to go on 3 different forms of transportation instead of one. Confusing to some guests. Probably negates any potential time savings.

Posters who refute the nonsense and gibberish posted by a couple of people aren't shills for Disney or CMs.

Most of the cost issues with a monorail would be solved with a light rail solution. Only elevate sections of the track.

That doesn't address other issues. Disney uses buses because buses work. They're flexible. The impact of a train being removed from service would be greater then a train removed from service.

I read the post by chip n dale, he admits that he has experience with the Disney transport system, but is not an expert in the field.

Also some of the claims he made have been refuted on these boards time and time again regarding transit times.

Unlike Chip N Dale I find it likely the monorail could be expanded. He merely uses an example which is already a difficulty for the buses and uses it to say why a monorail won't work. I would not say a monorial or light rail would be the most effecient use of such a system.

I agree that transfers are not desired and fast service is the guest's number one priority. This can be built into a rail system just as well as a bus system. I have in many areas used or seen busses and trains that pick up in the same station but have different routes.

I also want to point out that while it is well documented that city rail systems that flourised one hundred years ago where forced out of business by the underhanded works of oil and auto companies, in the last 30 years many cities have reinstalled rail transit systems.

[DC7800]

In the case of the Epcot loop, however, there is not a redundant beam and therefore you are either completely shut down or need to run a "shuttle" back and forth on the same beam. Given that the Epcot loop runs with 3 trainsets, your throughput is at best 1/3.

If there are three trains on the Epcot beam, and one of them is disabled, you can run in 'shuttle' mode with both of the remaining trains, not just one.

In the case of the MK loops yes - there is a redundant path. And the Express loop I believe CAN be used for resort stops in an emergency. But your throughput is cut completely in half.

The Grand Floridian and Polynesian access to the Express beam is on the wrong side of the station platform (Contemporary doesn't matter, in fact I've boarded the express beam from here). I believe there are stairs leading down from these otherwsie unused platforms, but is there any provision for bridge plates or something similar to permit direct access from a monorail on the 'wrong' beam? Anyone know?

The big advantage of regular rail is that switching between tracks is relatively easy and comparatively cheap - however, all sorts of blocking and signaling needs to take place - it may require manual protection and blocking, which severely limits throughout. On an occasional commuter or inter-city route its not a big deal.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but switching from one track to another is routine (tens of thousands of times a day...) and no "sorts of blocking and signaling" is required. Nor does it (ordinarily) cause delay. Even if its a hand thrown switch somewhere (most are controlled by a dispatcher, often hundreds of miles distant) its still a simple matter of throwing the switch, pulling the train through, and then realigning the turnout.

I've linked an old post from Chip N Dale Express. He does a good job describing reasons why a monorail expansion won't be an improvement.

He knowledgeable about the Disney bus system, and probably a champion of bus transportation in general. Which is fine. Buses will always be an important part of the WDW transportation picture, and I like the efficiency of bus transportation also. That said, Chip N Dale Express makes assumptions about how an expanded monorail would work at WDW which make it appear that buses are the better solution and that make monrail look bad in comparison. A fixed-guideway is not a problem - Its the railways greatest asset!

Finally, if the monorail ever were to be expanded (again, its not going to happen folks!) - why, why, why would you design it so guests have to transfer to reach their destination!. I don't know why people keep making that assumption; A monorail can offer a 'one-seat ride' from resort to theme park just as readily as a bus. Just because it isn't done from Epcot to the Magic Kingdom is no basis to declare that monorails require transfers. Indeed, regarding this example, remember that buses didn't used to go directly to the MK either - the gateway to the park was the TTC, and everyone took the ferryboat or another monorail over.

[Oglet]

The platforms on the other side of the Poly and GF can be used in emergency cases and have direct access to stairs. Only thing with the Poly is the platform was never raised up to fit the new trains and has quite a drop from door to platform.

[doconeill]

I did have a longer response, but managed to close the tab accidentally :(

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, but switching from one track to another is routine (tens of thousands of times a day...) and no "sorts of blocking and signaling" is required. Nor does it (ordinarily) cause delay. Even if its a hand thrown switch somewhere (most are controlled by a dispatcher, often hundreds of miles distant) its still a simple matter of throwing the switch, pulling the train through, and then realigning the turnout.

Maybe we are misunderstanding each other (you are obviously a railfan)...blocking and signaling is always required as a means of protection. Even with remote thrown switches, something needs to be done to protect the block such that multiple trains, especially heading in opposite directions, from entering the same block when it is single track. Longer distance systems tend not to have switches as frequently, so the blocks are longer, and you have a bottleneck in your system, but also as I said those systems tend to have a lower frequency so its not as big a deal.

But I also said that rail systems DO have switching, and they can switch much cheaper than a monorail beam switch, so they are less prone but not immune to such issues.

I would LOVE for them to expand the monorail. But Disney faces the same decisions about doing that that major cities faces when looking to expand their metro services - cost (at least initially) vs. flexibility. That's why cities like Boston end up with abominations like the Silver Line, and (at least one reason) street-running rail is an endangered species...

[skiingfast]

The fact that no spur was extended to Wilderness Lodge...which is about a 3 wood from the existing track...was the nail in the coffin.


I was thinking about this. While the WL is close to the line and you can see one from the other if you work out it would probably take a third of a mile of track to loop it out to the WL.

But I think the track area in that area is already set to run through another unbuilt resort.

I saw a video with maybe ?Dave Smith? and he was talking about plans for the resort in 1970 that they never built. You see, he said that they needed postcards, posters and other materials ready for the opening of WDW.

He showed a couple of these post cards from 1970 and it shows a resort on the Seven Seas Lagoon about half way between the TTC and Contemporary. In this picture is also the Contemporary which was being built at the time. The postcard wasn't an actual picture just a drawing of what would be.

This resort would be on the current line where a WL line would need to depart from the current path. Before you decide that this is nonsense let me tell you about the other postcard he showed. It was of the other two monorail resorts. The Poly and GF. Of course the GF didn't open until 1988.

[Lewisc]

It's not nonsense. There are several sites that still have the artist rendering of a resort between the TTC and the Contemporary. Some have it being Venetian themed.

One rumor said the ground is soft. Disney had issues with the monorail pylons in that area. Disney decided it wouldn't be cost effective to build at that location.

Other rumors said it was money. That's why it wasn't built shortly after WDW opened. When Disney finally decided to add more hotel rooms they first added moderate resorts. Disney then added the deluxe hotels between EPCOT and DHS.

[chartle]

Here is a link to the Wikipedia article about the venetian themed resort that was never built.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disney's_Venetian_Resort

also

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_World#Never-built_Disney_resorts

They also blame the 73 oil embargo for cancelling the project.

[doconeill]

Definitely not nonsense...Disney's Venetian Resort was in the original plans and would have been just north of the TTC, in that big flat empty area, along with the Asian Resort (where the GF is now) and the Persian Resort (to the east of MK, where there is now just a dirt maintenance area).

I don't remember the soft ground being among the reasons the Venetian wasn't originally built - more the cutbacks due to the oil embargo, etc. as these resorts weren't scheduled to open on day 1, so they never got started, although the Venetian itself may have been planned for earlier and shelved for other reasons, including the land stability.

Later on, after the success of the GF, Disney resurrected the idea of a resort at the same location, this time calling it the Mediterranean Resort. However, when they did piling tests, the ground was too swampy and they'd have to go REAL deep to give it a solid foundation, so again the plans were scrapped.

Interestingly, that land was cleared again a couple of weeks or so ago, but the official reason was for "site lines". Hmmm...

[Lewisc]

Interestingly, that land was cleared again a couple of weeks or so ago, but the official reason was for "site lines". Hmmm...

This is the rumor board. I'll let you speculate.
1) Monorail related. Maybe an evacuation point.
2) Parking for the Contemporary so they can build a second DVC tower. It's close enough for valet.
3) A DVC monorail resort. DVC fans will pay whatever premium is needed to build on soft ground.
4) None of the above. Land is being cleared for CM parking. Staging area for some kind of construction. Place to park buses.

[doconeill]

This is the rumor board. I'll let you speculate.
1) Monorail related. Maybe an evacuation point.
2) Parking for the Contemporary so they can build a second DVC tower. It's close enough for valet.
3) A DVC monorail resort. DVC fans will pay whatever premium is needed to build on soft ground.
4) None of the above. Land is being cleared for CM parking. Staging area for some kind of construction. Place to park buses.

Actually, I think it is 5) - it is what they said, they just cleared it to improve the view. They didn't do much to the ground, just cleared brush, etc.

1) More land was cleared than just around the beam. It also isn't far to either TTC or Contemporary.
2) Only if they build bridge to get to it, or they have to deal with getting back and forth via World Drive. They could park more cars there than all of what the CR can now hold...solves the problem about valet parking and then going to the park :)
3) The alternate rumor to tacking DVC on to either Poly of GF is a separate resort, and this would be the likely location. Whether the location is buildable at all is unknown.
4) Better for that to be backstage instead of prime real estate.

[Lewisc]

I misunderstood you post. I thought you meant they were clearing so they could check sight lines, in advance of doing something. (Balloon might be next step).

Clearing to improve sight lines is more likely.

[doconeill]

I misunderstood you post. I thought you meant they were clearing so they could check sight lines, in advance of doing something. (Balloon might be next step).

Clearing to improve sight lines is more likely.

Yes, my mistake, I wasn't clear...only the Monorail really gets a view from there, so there could be something more to it...but I have also heard that it helps improve the view further up the beam for the pilots...

[Elizabeth&ColinsDad]

Like many others I believe that it enhances the Magic.

So here is my thought:
Run Monorail to AK and DHS. Maybe one from TTC and one from Epcot.
Add cars to Monorail.

Runs all buses to Monorail during Value Season and Most Buses to parks during Peak Season.

This way if you want the Monorail experience you can have it and if you don't you can go to the park directly.

I believe the costs provided are on the high side. They probably include acquiring the land which is already owned. I would figure 75-85 million per mile

If you add $2.00 to each park ticket per day or maybe less you will make up the difference in approx. 3-4 years and this is based on numbers from a down years attendance.

So for every family of 4 staying 7 days your looking at $56.00 per stay and Monorail can be extended.

[peter11435]

I believe the costs provided are on the high side. They probably include acquiring the land which is already owned. I would figure 75-85 million per mile

If you add $2.00 to each park ticket per day or maybe less you will make up the difference in approx. 3-4 years and this is based on numbers from a down years attendance.

So for every family of 4 staying 7 days your looking at $56.00 per stay and Monorail can be extended.

You seem to be assuming that they would only need a couple miles of track which is far from the truth. There are currently almost 15 miles of track and that only connects 2 parks and 3 hotels. Using your low estimate of 75 million those 15 miles would cost well over 1 billion today. How many years would it take to pay for that investment at just $2.00 per ticket.

[skiingfast]

You seem to be assuming that they would only need a couple miles of track which is far from the truth. There are currently almost 15 miles of track and that only connects 2 parks and 3 hotels. Using your low estimate of 75 million those 15 miles would cost well over 1 billion today. How many years would it take to pay for that investment at just $2.00 per ticket.

15 miles for 1B, 2 dollars per ticket, about 50M guests a year? Under 10 years assuming visitation continues to rise. Not too bad. How long did it take for profit to cover the cost of building WDW in the 70s?

[Peter Pirate 2]

If they truly cared about guest experience and being a leader in innovation this would have already been done. I'm sure the monorail is no more expensive today than when it was first built, relatively speaking, but today the tail wags the dog rather than in their most innovative years when the dog still retained his motor functions.

[chartle]

If they truly cared about guest experience and being a leader in innovation this would have already been done. I'm sure the monorail is no more expensive today than when it was first built, relatively speaking, but today the tail wags the dog rather than in their most innovative years when the dog still retained his motor functions.

Nothing is wagging anything and today building a monorail to service what WDW has become would be cost prohibitive compared to what they did years ago.

During Walt's time the monorail was the way to go and very efficient.

At the time you had the MK, the TTC and the two hotels all arranged nicely around a small lake. A very simple loop that was easily serviced by a train like vehicle. When they added Epcot it was also easy to add a small spur line and connect the park to the other park and the hotels. We are now at 5 transportation nodes with one station switch.

After that all hell breaks loose building wise. We are now at four theme parks, two water parks, 24 on-site themed hotels, and other entertainment and recreational venues throughout the entire 47 square mile resort complex(per Wikipedia).

A fixed track inflexible transportation system like the monorail doesn't work. Buses do work. I'm not saying there are issues that can happen with a particular bus but if it happens the system can adjust. For the whole bus system to breakdown it would require some thing like a bomb scare that can happen on any system.

Sometime this week there was a post about the Epcot line being down at closing due to a power failure, how did they fix it, they called the buses. The more spread out and flexible the system the harder it is to break. One bad $3 circuit breaker on a monorail can bring down the entire system.

I see more things like hybrid or full electric buses on the horizon, maybe driver-less :scared1: . Though its probably a little harder for WDW to justify the added cost when the diesel ones still work.

My local mass transit system has them but I bet the the initial added cost to purchase them was subsidized by state or federal grant money that Disney would not have access to as a private company.

[chartle]

Like many others I believe that it enhances the Magic.

So here is my thought:
Run Monorail to AK and DHS. Maybe one from TTC and one from Epcot.
Add cars to Monorail.

Runs all buses to Monorail during Value Season and Most Buses to parks during Peak Season.

This way if you want the Monorail experience you can have it and if you don't you can go to the park directly.

I believe the costs provided are on the high side. They probably include acquiring the land which is already owned. I would figure 75-85 million per mile

If you add $2.00 to each park ticket per day or maybe less you will make up the difference in approx. 3-4 years and this is based on numbers from a down years attendance.

So for every family of 4 staying 7 days your looking at $56.00 per stay and Monorail can be extended.

Not everyone wants an enhanced Monorail experience. Most people would want the quickest way to the park experience.

You are saying that there are now two bus systems one that connects you to a monorail station for an enhanced transportation experience and one that takes you directly to where you want to go.

Disney could do a little experiment to see how this would go over.

They could take a bus from the AKL going to the MK. The bus on the way stops at the TTC, the bus driver then asks if anyone wants to get off the bus, walk a couple hundred yards to a ramp, walk up the ramp, wait for the next monorail and then ride the monorail to the MK or you can stay on the bus and get there in about 10 minutes. How many people are going to get off? I would say zero and if its August and 90 degrees its going to be even less.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Nothing is wagging anything and today building a monorail to service what WDW has become would be cost prohibitive compared to what they did years ago.

During Walt's time the monorail was the way to go and very efficient.

At the time you had the MK, the TTC and the two hotels all arranged nicely around a small lake. A very simple loop that was easily serviced by a train like vehicle. When they added Epcot it was also easy to add a small spur line and connect the park to the other park and the hotels. We are now at 5 transportation nodes with one station switch.

After that all hell breaks loose building wise. We are now at four theme parks, two water parks, 24 on-site themed hotels, and other entertainment and recreational venues throughout the entire 47 square mile resort complex(per Wikipedia).

A fixed track inflexible transportation system like the monorail doesn't work. Buses do work. I'm not saying there are issues that can happen with a particular bus but if it happens the system can adjust. For the whole bus system to breakdown it would require some thing like a bomb scare that can happen on any system.

Sometime this week there was a post about the Epcot line being down at closing due to a power failure, how did they fix it, they called the buses. The more spread out and flexible the system the harder it is to break. One bad $3 circuit breaker on a monorail can bring down the entire system.

I see more things like hybrid or full electric buses on the horizon, maybe driver-less :scared1: . Though its probably a little harder for WDW to justify the added cost when the diesel ones still work.

My local mass transit system has them but I bet the the initial added cost to purchase them was subsidized by state or federal grant money that Disney would not have access to as a private company.

Thanks for the very informative post. Now, I hope you don't mind if I say I disagree.

Prohibitive how exactly? Cost effective??? It was a colossal waste of money according to the bean counters then and was way, way out of proportion compared to the rest of the original budget. The monorail wasn't meant to be WDW's main mode of transportation, it was an imaginative, over the top way of outdoing what had already been done at DL. The MK didn't need to have the monorail or the ferry boat, alternatives easily could have been developed but thankfully Disney still believed in doing GREAT things no one else would even dream of.

The same holds true today. If WDW wanted to just bury any thought of serious competition from anyone the monorail would be expanded within the realm of showing the world just how public transportation can be done, Disney style. Just like Walt would do.

Money cannot be the impediment to innovation, if it is you no longer have an innovative company, you just have a company.

[chartle]

15 miles for 1B, 2 dollars per ticket, about 50M guests a year? Under 10 years assuming visitation continues to rise. Not too bad. How long did it take for profit to cover the cost of building WDW in the 70s?

I think they would rather spend 1b on a new 5 th park that would make them money, not a system that would require them to raise ticket prices just to try to cover the costs.

People already think Disney costs too much, how are you gong to sell this increase to pay for something they don't need. :confused3

[ChrisFL]

Money cannot be the impediment to innovation, if it is you no longer have an innovative company, you just have a company.

Wow, I think I'm going to quote that! (I mean in other places, not just here, lol)

[DC7800]

A fixed track inflexible transportation system like the monorail doesn't work.

First, exactly how is a "fixed track transportation system" inflexible? On the contrary, the fixed, dedicated right-of-way is often a railroads (or monorail, light rail, etc.) greatest asset, not a drawback.

Second, rail (track) based systems work very efficiently (and more cost effective than alternatives) in places like Washington, Philadelphia, Miami, Jacksonville, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and other points around the nation. So, how is it then that such transportation systems work so well in these other locations but won't work in Walt Disney World?

A monorail can make a direct trip from resort to threme park just as easily as a bus; Just because the system is not set up that way presently is no basis to conclude it cannot be done, nor that it would not be completely "cost prohibitive".

Money cannot be the impediment to innovation, if it is you no longer have an innovative company, you just have a company.

I so miss Disney being more than "just a company".

[skiingfast]

I think they would rather spend 1b on a new 5 th park that would make them money, not a system that would require them to raise ticket prices just to try to cover the costs.

People already think Disney costs too much, how are you gong to sell this increase to pay for something they don't need. :confused3

This is a poorly posed question. Disney tickets prices have had an upward trend. They built plenty of things I don't need with that extra money. Sometimes they build things and then take them out. I guess Disney didn't need them either.

[chartle]

First, exactly how is a "fixed track transportation system" inflexible? On the contrary, the fixed, dedicated right-of-way is often a railroads (or monorail, light rail, etc.) greatest asset, not a drawback.

Easy, a power failure on a train shuts down the entire line.

Requiring ...... wait for it ...... Buses as a backup.

Inflexibility of trains is a flaw inherent in the system. The tracks are nailed to the ground.

Second, rail (track) based systems work very efficiently (and more cost effective than alternatives) in places like Washington, Philadelphia, Miami, Jacksonville, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, and other points around the nation. So, how is it then that such transportation systems work so well in these other locations but won't work in Walt Disney World?

Completely different scenario, I would say none of those people people go directly to the train station from their home. I would say all of them either drive to the station or take a local bus.

If the hotels that Disney served where out as far as people come from in DC or Los Angeles it makes sense.

A monorail can make a direct trip from resort to threme park just as easily as a bus; Just because the system is not set up that way presently is no basis to conclude it cannot be done, nor that it would not be completely "cost prohibitive".

Ok I didn't want to pull out the math but you made me. :goodvibes

If you connect every hotel, park and other areas of WDW with direct connections the amount of of lines would be ....

(n*(n-1))/2 where n=the number of places that need connected. Had to ask sons what the formula would be.

So lets say if certain resort areas could share we could maybe come up with 10 areas???? So that makes 45 direct lines at maybe an average of 4 miles per line makes 180 miles of monorail track. At $10m per miles comes to 1.8 b.

Oh and the station at the MK would spill out into the lake.

I'm not anti monorail really i'm not I'm anti people with doe eyed looks that come with odd ways to pay for something that is going to cost a boat load of money.

The best: Disney could make a hit movie and use the proceeds to pay for the expansion. It the old movie plot, a bunch of kids siting around trying to come with ways to save fill in the blank. One of them stands up and says "I know lets put on a show". :goodvibes

[chartle]

This is a poorly posed question. Disney tickets prices have had an upward trend. They built plenty of things I don't need with that extra money. Sometimes they build things and then take them out. I guess Disney didn't need them either.

Nothing anywhere near this large though that impacts every single guest to the parks.

[chartle]

Money cannot be the impediment to innovation, if it is you no longer have an innovative company, you just have a company.

Ok last one and I'm thinking of unsubbing this thread.

I don't think Disney is or wants to be a transportation innovator. Its not in their business plan.

[skiingfast]

Nothing anywhere near this large though that impacts every single guest to the parks.

Are you sure? Would that also be the case with extending the monorails? Tha nobody would want it?

[Peter Pirate 2]

Ok last one and I'm thinking of unsubbing this thread.

I don't think Disney is or wants to be a transportation innovator. Its not in their business plan.

Oh, I agree. But being an innovator has no (or should have no) boundaries. Walt didn't plan to go where he went but look where success and his imagination took him. Now, before people say but that was Walt, that was a long time ago, business is different today. To which I say Pixar. They took Disney's model and modernized way better than Disney had itself. Succeeded by being innovative, not by being MBA's, and then sold Disney a Company that was, in essence based on Disney. What irony that was.

[Peter Pirate 2]

Wow, I think I'm going to quote that! (I mean in other places, not just here, lol)

Thanks. :)

[DC7800]

Easy, a power failure on a train shuts down the entire line.

Requiring ...... wait for it ...... Buses as a backup.

Inflexibility of trains is a flaw inherent in the system. The tracks are nailed to the ground.


A failure for any reason of one train on a line doesn't take the entire line out of service. In a fully implemented monorail network, with a few strategically placed switches you merely run around the stalled train. Even on the Epcot beam as it exists today, if one monorail becomes disabled the other three trains on the line can run in shuttle mode between the TTC and Epcot stations until the work tractor can get there. A power failure on the entire beam would shut it down, but the solution to that is redundancy in the system, something WDW doesn't really have today, but which would be a natural consequence of an expanded monorail system.

Buses will always properly be a part of the WDW transportation picture, just as they were prior to the Epcot monorail expansion, and available to backup the monorial, ferryboats, or whatever. But the whole potentially disabled monorail argument is mistaken; Railroads solved these very problems something like 150 years ago, and it literally isn't rocket science.

Oh, and railroad tracks aren't nailed to the ground.

Ok I didn't want to pull out the math but you made me.

If you connect every hotel, park and other areas of WDW with direct connections the amount of of lines would be ....

(n*(n-1))/2 where n=the number of places that need connected. Had to ask sons what the formula would be.

So lets say if certain resort areas could share we could maybe come up with 10 areas???? So that makes 45 direct lines at maybe an average of 4 miles per line makes 180 miles of monorail track. At $10m per miles comes to 1.8 b.

Oh and the station at the MK would spill out into the lake.

Uh...What???

When you connect any of Disney's existing resorts to the theme parks, do you build a different road for each resort? Of course not, they all use World Drive.

The three current monorail connected resorts, to the MK, also do not each have a separate monorail line - they share a loop, of course. So, why would you assume that additional monorail resorts - to provide direct theme park access - would each need a private monorail beam?

Think of the TTC-Epcot beam as the mainline, probably extended to the Studios and then to Animal Kingdom. You build branches to other destinations (Blizzard Beach), sidings for resort stations, etc. (or monorails may passs through resorts without stopping - express theme park service). Again, this isn't rocket science, and its not that difficult!

The best: Disney could make a hit movie and use the proceeds to pay for the expansion. It the old movie plot, a bunch of kids siting around trying to come with ways to save fill in the blank. One of them stands up and says "I know lets put on a show".

If Disney would only stop utterly wasting money on brilliant business moves like Go.com, airplane leases for bankrupt airlines, overpaying for the Fox Family Chanel, and the like, you would have enough money to pay for a monorail expansion of your dreams - and maybe a fifth theme park to go with it. :)

Again, despite everything we say here, its not going to happen anyway. Disney can certainly afford it, even at inflated cost estimates, but buses are cheaper. There is no will at Disney to do anything like this, and few people who appear to be able to see past this quarters financial numbers. The show and guest experience aren't what matters anymore.

[Markstudy]

Again, despite everything we say here, its not going to happen anyway. Disney can certainly afford it, even at inflated cost estimates, but buses are cheaper. There is no will at Disney to do anything like this, and few people who appear to be able to see past this quarters financial numbers. The show and guest experience aren't what matters anymore.

When Walt died, it was the end to trying cool new things at Disney. He was the ultimate risk taker. The MBA's and CPA's that run Disney now have lost the ability to dream, and turn dreams into dollars.:3dglasses

[tjkraz]

When Walt died, it was the end to trying cool new things at Disney. He was the ultimate risk taker. The MBA's and CPA's that run Disney now have lost the ability to dream, and turn dreams into dollars.:3dglasses

Yeah, there's been a real dearth of innovation coming out of Imagineering in the 40+ years since Walt's passing. :rolleyes1

[richmar]

How about an elevated roadway just for disney buses to bypass local traffic.

[nuts]

How about this:
http://taxi2000.com/

[joelkfla]

How about this:
http://taxi2000.com/

That's called PRT, for Personal Rapid Transit. Unfortunately, people like Taxi 2000 have been touting it for years, but have been unable to find anyone willing to put up the bucks for anything more than a demo system with in-line stations.

I think it would be great for feeders between a monorail main line and individual resorts. For example, a loop could easily connect POR, SSR, and OKW with Epcot, as they are all physically quite close.

But I don't think it could cope with the volume at park close time as the primary transit system.

[richmar]

Make it a "perk". A transportation version of the dining plan!

[pallred@lhcn.org]

I would be willing to pay 5 to 10 dollars more a ticket for inovation! GO MONORAIL!

[Adrienne]

Capacity does not equal throughput... :) It depends on how many buses, which will define the frequency, the time in transit which defines the average speed, etc. etc.

As we say in the IT industry, "You may have a fat pipe, but never underestimate the throughput of a station wagon full of tapes..."

i'm a IT geek too... so very true.. lol:rotfl2:

[yekcoh_99]

I would be willing to pay 5 to 10 dollars more a ticket for inovation! GO MONORAIL!

Or even $100 for a lifetime pass...

[Markstudy]

Yeah, there's been a real dearth of innovation coming out of Imagineering in the 40+ years since Walt's passing. :rolleyes1

Its been on a long slow decline.

Disney was about big ideas like Monorails and dark rides.

In the last 40 years we've gone from completing a lot of Walt's unfinished plans and ideas, to slowly moving to where we find our self today... with more and more rides as roller coasters just like any other theme park. I like Tower of Terror, Rock-N-Roll, and Mt Everest, and the new Toy Story ride is a lot of fun also, but I'm not seeing bold new ideas. I'd argue that replacing 20,000 Leagues with Soarin is another example of how rides have become more about loading guest and logistics.

Soarin, Star Tours, and Spaceship Earth's (new updated ending) continue to use more TV screens and less animatronics.... as another trend towards less originality and more multimedia.

The loss of Epcot's premier E-ticket ride - Journey into Imagination (1983-1998)
to replace it with a cheaper version to save on the electric bill and maintenance cost... is just a perfect example of the loss of the big picture... and the transition to management by CPA and MBA. This is why plans for new monorails, are now replaced by simply adding more city buses.

Maybe Walt Disney was in the right place at the right time but he was developing ideas that were 20 years ahead of his time. Now I watch Imagineering take good ideas that are on par with Universal Studios instead of ground breaking or futuristic.

40 years ago the Monorail was a perfect example of what Walt was all about. The fact that we haven't been able to add another mile of track since... well that's just sad.

[yekcoh_99]

40 years ago the Monorail was a perfect example of what Walt was all about. The fact that we haven't been able to add another mile of track since... well that's just sad.


I whole heartedly agree...

[CanadianGuy]

Its been on a long slow decline.

Disney was about big ideas like Monorails and dark rides.

In the last 40 years we've gone from completing a lot of Walt's unfinished plans and ideas, to slowly moving to where we find our self today... with more and more rides as roller coasters just like any other theme park. I like Tower of Terror, Rock-N-Roll, and Mt Everest, and the new Toy Story ride is a lot of fun also, but I'm not seeing bold new ideas. I'd argue that replacing 20,000 Leagues with Soarin is another example of how rides have become more about loading guest and logistics.

Soarin, Star Tours, and Spaceship Earth's (new updated ending) continue to use more TV screens and less animatronics.... as another trend towards less originality and more multimedia.

The loss of Epcot's premier E-ticket ride - Journey into Imagination (1983-1998)
to replace it with a cheaper version to save on the electric bill and maintenance cost... is just a perfect example of the loss of the big picture... and the transition to management by CPA and MBA. This is why plans for new monorails, are now replaced by simply adding more city buses.

Maybe Walt Disney was in the right place at the right time but he was developing ideas that were 20 years ahead of his time. Now I watch Imagineering take good ideas that are on par with Universal Studios instead of ground breaking or futuristic.

40 years ago the Monorail was a perfect example of what Walt was all about. The fact that we haven't been able to add another mile of track since... well that's just sad.

While I agree with some elements of your arguments .. I have to disagree strongly with others.

I agree the time from 84 to 99 was not a good 15 years in general for the parks and we're still living with the repercussions of a lot of bad decisions made during that time.. (Journey into Imagination is an EXCELLENT example here..) For our DL friends, "LightMagic" is a STELLAR example of bad, bad, bad show.

I have been very disappointed that the AudioAnimatronic development hasn't moved along as I would have expected. I think that the new AA's in the Hall of Presidents appear pretty good.. but why not start replacing the 60's models throughout the other attractions with more lifelike and technologically superior current models? I know they've done this some but the 'lifelike' part is missing for me on a lot of those..

However, I'm not sure that 20,000 Leages was ever replaced by Soarin in any park.. Last I heard in MK in FLA, 20,000 Leagues was replaced by what will be a new expanded Fantasyland.. A fair trade in my book.

At DL it was replaced by a similar NEMO themed attraction...

That makes sense when the 20,000 leagues movie is almost 50 years old and hasn't been 'huge' in popular culture since the 60's.. Queues remain an issue with that revamped attraction tho. Queues, logistics and crowd management DO matter. You can have the best rides in the world but if an average guest can't reasonably have a chance to experience it -- what was the point?

Perhaps you were speaking generally/metaphorically?

Either way I think Soarin IS a good replacement for the slow loading 20,000 Leagues ride thru plastic fish.

As for adding miles of track in 40 years.. they added 7 to 10 during the 80's with the opening of Epcot. That was 27 or 28 years ago?

But I'm arguing semantics. The truth of the matter is .. Disney parks have grown way beyond what they were when they opened or even just 15 years ago..

As a result, load times, wait times and the logistics of moving people thru a tentative attraction or park or resort wide DO matter.. they matter a great deal. And Disney DOES have to be concerned with those things for every new attraction, park or addition to the property. To say that's what it's 'all' about is folly. It is part of the decision making process, as it should be, that's without question.

At the end of the day, Disney faces the same problem any number of 'heritage' companies face.. which is living up to the original credo when the business grows in leaps and bounds beyond the original dreamer's ideas.

Have they done that perfectly? Oh no way. But they've done it better than most and have retained a great number of the things that have always made "Disney" ... Disney for a large number of guests.

I just returned from 9 days at WDW and spent as much time outside the parks ferrying around the resort property as I did inside the parks on this trip.

My initial thought after a few days of my trip was "WOW.. the transportation is really pretty good when you think about the sheer volume of potential guests, potential destinations and the peak travel period volumes around park openings and closings etc."

I know that's a favorite for people to complain about on the DIS but I left the MK headed for the Dolphin and despite the second showing of MSEP just finishing at exiting crowds being absolutely ridiculous.. we still did not wait for a bus and we were back at our resort in under 25 minutes.

I wish my local 'city bus' transportation was that good.

Toy Story Mania is a groundbreaking attraction in my book. Worthy of the history of great ideas that have occasionally come out of the Imagineering group. And ultimately it can be freshened up or updated with new games at relatively low cost... and the underlying concepts could be ported to other themes/brands and even other WDW Parks world wide and still feel like a completely new or different attraction.

And personal tastes aside, attractions like Soarin, TSM and even Spaceranger Spin .. give guests a UNIQUE experience that can't be had easily elswhere ... together as a family. Exactly as Walt intended when he was putting together his first park - Disneyland.

Whether or not Disney chooses to spend a few billion dollars expanding the monorail will ultimately not make that great a difference in a lot of the guest experience. Yes, monorails are cooler than buses. But in the end, Guest "A" and their family will still end up waiting for one.. or waiting to board one.. and still be upset that the handicapped get to board first etc etc.

So...

I'd far rather they embarked on a one billion dollar program to properly train CM's and fix the many other things that HAVE slipped like :


Dining menus throughout the property
General cleanliness, maintenance and attention to detail
GOOD, updated and detailed crowd management plans for when the parks do near capacity (whatever they're doing now ain't workin for many guests)
Fixing Pleasure Island / DTD and investing properly propertywide
Reducing the overall amount of outsourcing for EVERY thing


ALL things that have far more impact on the guest experience than whether a monorail or a bus gets me to my destination at the start and end of each day.

My personal gripes are in details that have slipped a huge amount. Burnt out light bulbs that go on for days - maybe weeks? (on the marquee the theatre on MS-USA even!) .. signs on Pop Century walk ways with gramatical errors that have persisted since the resort opened 7 years ago ... despite at least one person (me) bringing it to their attention over 2 year ago.. and completely absent customer service ... when it used to be stellar because proper training was included in the CM hiring process.

Disney used to do better at all those things. And now a days it seems if they have a shot at making you go away by throwing you a couple of Fastpasses or One_Day tickets.. that's the answer to everything.

I don't take issues with the latest rides or attractions.. and I definitely don't take issue with not spending a billion to expand the monorail.. when they already have an investment in buses that work out to be better financially and probably in terms of the overall guest experience.

Why would I say that about the guest experience? I've yet to see a property wide monorail plan / concept / idea that (ignoring cost for a moment) avoids the 'no go' swamplands, avoids the nature conservation lands without chewing up miles of pristine potentially developable land AND avoids taking guests on a long convoluted journey way out of their way... and one that would meet the transporation needs now and into the future.

That's probably the biggest hurdle to expanding the monorail etc.. Far more so than the actual dollars and cents.

K

[skier_pete]

Knox (CanadianGuy)

Very well thought out and articulated...though you put a LOT of stuff in your post, the one thing that struck me....why in the world would Disney expand the monorail. It couldn't possible IMPROVE the guest experience to have miles and miles of monorail interlinked. Would I be happier as a guest if instead of taking a bus from POP to the MK, I got on at my monorail stop at the resort - then travelled to DHS, changed monorails to the DHS/Epcot line, changed AGAIN to the TTC, and finally changed a fourth time to MK. THAT in reality is how a monorail system would have to work...multiple loops....not unlike a major city's subway system. I'd rather take a direct bus, thanks. Yes, a monorail might be more comfortable and quieter, but it is just not practical on the scale of WDW.

[CanadianGuy]

Knox (CanadianGuy)

Very well thought out and articulated...though you put a LOT of stuff in your post, the one thing that struck me....why in the world would Disney expand the monorail. It couldn't possible IMPROVE the guest experience to have miles and miles of monorail interlinked. Would I be happier as a guest if instead of taking a bus from POP to the MK, I got on at my monorail stop at the resort - then travelled to DHS, changed monorails to the DHS/Epcot line, changed AGAIN to the TTC, and finally changed a fourth time to MK. THAT in reality is how a monorail system would have to work...multiple loops....not unlike a major city's subway system. I'd rather take a direct bus, thanks. Yes, a monorail might be more comfortable and quieter, but it is just not practical on the scale of WDW.

I do tend to go on sometimes.. often at more length on any topic immediately following a trip and I just got home a few days ago.. LOL :lmao:

And you've nailed it in far fewer words.. (Really I could have cut all but the last paragraph in retrospect) ... it's either some kind of hub and spoke system ... (which it would pretty much have to be) or you create a couple of REALLY HUGE loops that STILL will require transfers for the MK loop for example but that goes against my last thought -- avoiding taking guests miles and miles out of their way.. and I don't know HOW you do that within the parameters of the maze of available land, no go zones and protected areas.

And everyone seems to think that monorails run on air or something. They use high voltage electricity. Could it be cheaper than diesel fuel? Dunno.. I have no clue how much juice they need to maintain on all the lines currently and of course, adding trainers, adding length to the loops, adding more loops... then even more juice must be required to power it all up.

[skier_pete]

And everyone seems to think that monorails run on air or something. They use high voltage electricity. Could it be cheaper than diesel fuel? Dunno.. I have no clue how much juice they need to maintain on all the lines currently and of course, adding trainers, adding length to the loops, adding more loops... then even more juice must be required to power it all up.

That's a good question - I did a quick search and could find nothing conclusive. What's interesting is the argument that they are "non-polluting" because they run on electricity. Well, the assumption there is that a bus, which has a motor, has exhaust and emissions. But apparently the electricity is made by little fairies under the Magic Kingdom. Otherwise, the electricity comes from a power plant which - generally - runs on fossil fuels and causes the same type of emissions your bus does....though the proper argument is that a power plant is much more fuel efficient than the bus and therefore the emissions are less with the monorail.

[doconeill]

That's a good question - I did a quick search and could find nothing conclusive. What's interesting is the argument that they are "non-polluting" because they run on electricity. Well, the assumption there is that a bus, which has a motor, has exhaust and emissions. But apparently the electricity is made by little fairies under the Magic Kingdom. Otherwise, the electricity comes from a power plant which - generally - runs on fossil fuels and causes the same type of emissions your bus does....though the proper argument is that a power plant is much more fuel efficient than the bus and therefore the emissions are less with the monorail.

Plus, the electricity generation can be supplemented through renewable, non-polluting sources (wind, hydro, solar and in some sense nuclear).

I do remember something about the power supply to the existing system being a problem for the Mark VI trainsets when they came on line...something about them being over-spec for power draw and it was draining the system...

[CanadianGuy]

That's a good question - I did a quick search and could find nothing conclusive. What's interesting is the argument that they are "non-polluting" because they run on electricity. Well, the assumption there is that a bus, which has a motor, has exhaust and emissions. But apparently the electricity is made by little fairies under the Magic Kingdom. Otherwise, the electricity comes from a power plant which - generally - runs on fossil fuels and causes the same type of emissions your bus does....though the proper argument is that a power plant is much more fuel efficient than the bus and therefore the emissions are less with the monorail.

How about this:

The trains are driven by eight 113 HP motors which are powered by a 600-volt electrical system running through a busbar mounted on each side of the concrete beam.[6] Each train also has seven inverters on board that convert the 600 VDC to 230 VAC for use by the air conditioners and air compressor, and additionally has a battery-backed 35 VDC low-voltage supply that provides power for the train's electronics.

No word on the amperage there.. but I'm guessing with 8 motors per train plus AC and electronics.. and multiple trains in service (most times) that the amperage draw has to be high.

The 600 V is a VERY high voltage line for anything but heavy industrial use.

I know that Reedy Creek (Disney's quasi governmental division that runs the 28000 acres of WDW from an infrastructure standpoint) has an energy division and details of their operations can be found in this handy powerpoint..

http://ewh.ieee.org/soc/pes/switchgear/Presentations/RCESoverviewMay08.pdf

According to that document Disney buys about 75% of their total energy needs (peak load about 200 MW) and generates about 25% or 53 MW on their own... it's a fascinating look just at the pictures of all the switching plants for the electricity that are contained in the PowerPoint.

Regardless the 25% that's generated on site is done with a natural gas powered co-generation plant. That co-generation plant is so named because it generates electricity and also heat for things like hot water and.. well.. duh - heating of certain buildings or operations.

That is relatively clean ... but of course there are environmental costs (including greenhouse gas creation) in the refining of the ill named "natural gas" -- which is of course processed prior to delivery (probably via pipeline) to the co-generation plant... which definitely should burn cleaner than diesel in comparable volumes. The question is how much natural gas is burned to create the 50 MW.

As for the other 150 MW they need to buy on the open market .. odds are excellent that's coming from dirty-coal (vs. clean coal) powered plants.

Knox

[skiingfast]

How about this:

No word on the amperage there.. but I'm guessing with 8 motors per train plus AC and electronics.. and multiple trains in service (most times) that the amperage draw has to be high.

The 600 V is a VERY high voltage line for anything but heavy industrial use.
coming from dirty-coal (vs. clean coal) powered plants.


In an electric motor the power draw varies considerebly through a cycle off to on. You are only assuming that is it high.

Regardless of what the amperage number is, as a general rule trains are more effecient than trucks. This is a fact that can be applied to a monorail-bus comparison.

Wether the power is coming from clean or dirty coal make very little difference. Coal either way is not great. But most of the power bought does likely not come from coal anyway. Florida is far from any coal mines.

I have never been to the reedy creek facility to investigate but I do see it as possible that Disney is producing it's own natural gas. All I have to go on is some weak photographic evidence and knowlege of the production of natural gas. Either way they can use gas to produce electricity or power some of the buses if they would like to.

[seashoreCM]

Doesn't the Disney monorail train have rubber tires on a concrete beam?

This would put the rolling efficiency comparable to a bus.

Are there any routes (namely not passing through low ceilinged tunnels or low underpasses) that could be run with double decker buses? To allow fewer drivers to move more guests.

[skiingfast]

Doesn't the Disney monorail train have rubber tires on a concrete beam?

This would put the rolling efficiency comparable to a bus.

Are there any routes (namely not passing through low ceilinged tunnels or low underpasses) that could be run with double decker buses? To allow fewer drivers to move more guests.

Saying that rolling efficiency is compareable or useful at demonstrating system efficiency is pretty poor. Science wouldn't agree anyway.


Thier are lots of routes that stay under the sun the whole time. Double decker buses would solve one big complaint. On a two door sytem, rolling guest could go in the bottom while walking guests could load, all at the same time. The buses would run less often with the extra seats. It would cause one of the biggest guests complaints about buses to intensify. This would also decrease their effiency quite a bit.

[CanadianGuy]

I suspect that it's a fairly efficient system overall..

I just wonder if there could possibly be any LONG term savings to retiring the bus fleet and expanding the monorail.

Amortizing the construction and train costs over say .. 20 years -- and then factoring in train operating and maintenance (vs bus) I suspect it's pretty much a wash (or the buses come out way cheaper) ... primarily because of the construction costs.

[skier_pete]

The other factor is that most major corporations are capital expenditure adverse. The reason being that expenses come over years and years, and capital hits the books immediately - even though it is written down over years. But company's don't want to do things that are economical in the long run - they only do things that make money NOW or SOON, because that's all stockholders care about. So, a monorail might even be cheaper over the next 20 years than a bus fleet, but because of how the money looks, they STILL wouldn't do it.

[Markstudy]

I'm just looking for a few miles of new beam * :confused3

I think you could do so much for the monorail system just by linking-up the Boardwalk and Disney Studios. (Didn't the Swan Dolphin have a structure already built to be part of a new station?).

I'm trying to look at what can be accomplished for the smallest investment (best bang for the buck) and this seems like the most logical expansion if there ever was one?

*(and I understand all the other issues... new trains, new staff, new mechanics, new maintenance shed..... on and on)

[CanadianGuy]

I think you could do so much for the monorail system just by linking-up the Boardwalk and Disney Studios. (Didn't the Swan Dolphin have a structure already built to be part of a new station?).
and this seems like the most logical expansion if there ever was one?

*(and I understand all the other issues... new trains, new staff, new mechanics, new maintenance shed..... on and on)

The Swan/Dolphin thing is a debunked rumor. I don't have the post handy but it was pretty well desconstructed on here a while back.

[doconeill]

The Swan/Dolphin thing is a debunked rumor. I don't have the post handy but it was pretty well desconstructed on here a while back.

The part about the black squares being removable so the monorail could run through the buildings was false - good explanation here:

http://www.yesterland.com/monoraillegends.html

Whether there is any sort of accommodation or easement for a monorail I'm not sure...never heard of it. As far as i know, the only location that has an easement for monorail is Saratoga Springs - not that it is ever expected to happen. It was part of the original plans for the Village and it was written in to the real estate documents for DVC.

[CanadianGuy]

I actually thought they put that boilerplate on easements into each DVC property ... sort of as a matter of course.. (more so than any real plans.. )

Just Saratoga tho eh? Interesting.

[seashoreCM]

... have never been to the reedy creek facility to investigate but I do see it as possible that Disney is producing it's own natural gas. All I have to go on is some weak photographic evidence and knowlege of the production of natural gas. Either way they can use gas to produce electricity or power some of the buses if they would like to.
You mean wells and well drilling equipment as opposed to a pipeline terminal and storage tanks?
... Disney buys about 75% of their total energy needs (peak load about 200 MW) and generates about 25% or 53 MW on their own... it's a fascinating look just at the pictures of all the switching plants for the electricity that are contained in the PowerPoint.

Regardless the 25% that's generated on site is done with a natural gas powered co-generation plant. That co-generation plant is so named because it generates electricity and also heat for things like hot water and.. well.. duh - heating of certain buildings or operations.x
Still, Disney finds it more economical to buy most of the power rather than generate it. Most entities that operate cogeneration plants use them as a more efficient way to provide heat and hot water compared with individual building furnaces, with electricity as an added bonus.

Blending the generated power with purchased power to meet the changing demands each hour requires skilled persons operating substation equipment as sophisticated as power utilities use to monitor power flow over the power grid.
... 40 years ago the Monorail was a perfect example of what Walt was all about. The fact that we haven't been able to add another mile of track since... well that's just sad.
Maybe we should be asking the question of city planners worldwide, not asking Disney. Walt had monorails, Tomorrowland Transit Authority, etc. built as demonstrations and models for others to emulate.

[skiingfast]

You mean wells and well drilling equipment as opposed to a pipeline terminal and storage tanks?

No I don't mean mining gas, I said producing it.

[DCTooTall]

You wanna know what Transportation option I REALLY miss? I miss getting to ride the parking lot tram at high speed from the MK to the TTC at park close.

I don't know why, But I remember enjoying that ride back to the TTC much more than the monorail or Ferry back in the day. Maybe it was the feeling of the wind in my hair.... or because I just enjoying being able to ride "under water" since it was the only reason I ever had to go under the water bridge.


LOL.... Down with the Busses! Bring Parking Lot trams as a full-on transportation method! The capacity of a train, with the flexibility of a bus!

:rotfl2:

[Tekneek]

I wish Disney wanted to expand the monorail. I wish they also built out the peoplemovers as Walt discussed in the EPCOT planning he had completed before his death.

They don't seem interested in any of that. Yet, they go around the globe building new copies of Disneyland, new DVC resorts, and new cruise ships. Today's Disney is short on visionary and leadership positions and heavy on MBA management types, it seems.

[ChrisFL]

I wish Disney wanted to expand the monorail. I wish they also built out the peoplemovers as Walt discussed in the EPCOT planning he had completed before his death.

They don't seem interested in any of that. Yet, they go around the globe building new copies of Disneyland, new DVC resorts, and new cruise ships. Today's Disney is short on visionary and leadership positions and heavy on MBA management types, it seems.

It's difficult to be creative looking only at numbers and graphs

[tjkraz]

I wish Disney wanted to expand the monorail. I wish they also built out the peoplemovers as Walt discussed in the EPCOT planning he had completed before his death.

They don't seem interested in any of that.

I think the fact that nobody has followed-up on Walt's vague 45 year old concepts--either within TWDC or otherwise--says at lot about its viability. Urban planning has evolved a great deal over that time and recent history has shown that the public is unwilling to embrace the type of reliance on mass transportation that Walt proposed.

Frankly I think Walt's EPCOT could have been the failure that tarnished his entire legacy. We all know how much Walt loved futuristic stylings. Financial concerns aside, we have also seen how poorly those futuristic designs hold up. Witness all of the updates that have been necessary to Tomorrowland and the Contemporary over the years.

If Walt had lived to follow through with his plans, it could have financially destroyed the company. And 40 years later we could be left with an outdated, decaying mass of concrete, steel and plexiglass in the middle of central Florida.

The only certainty is that Walt would not have built four theme parks, two waterparks and two dozen hotels on the Florida land.

Yes, Disney does take a more measured approach to theme park development these days. Kinda makes you nostalgic for Michael Eisner, doesn't it? He's the one who championed Resort-wide growth in the 80s and 90s.

[ChrisFL]

I think the fact that nobody has followed-up on Walt's vague 45 year old concepts--either within TWDC or otherwise--says at lot about its viability. Urban planning has evolved a great deal over that time and recent history has shown that the public is unwilling to embrace the type of reliance on mass transportation that Walt proposed.

So goes the pessimistic view.

Walt's EPCOT plans were actually quite viable, and are still viable today, and we're finally seeing the possible uses of his ideas in plans like Masdar.

I recall hearing that a lot of people said Disneyland would be a complete failure and no one would go for it either, but guess what happened.

The problem with Walt's plans is that they were still all being worked out, then he passed away and they didn't have the vision anymore. He had the pull, however to get sponsors and companies working with him, that was going to help fund the project.

I think too many people draw conclusions about the city plan without really taking in the details, or just assuming it would be a disaster. Other than the cost of it, I don't see why.

Currently, there are several residences being used by Disney's CM's, plus all of the hotels, etc. and they're using buses, ferry boats and monorails. So those work ok, but the EPCOT city plan wouldn't? Other than a very smart radial design with better transportation options, what would have been the big disaster?

Frankly I think Walt's EPCOT could have been the failure that tarnished his entire legacy. We all know how much Walt loved futuristic stylings. Financial concerns aside, we have also seen how poorly those futuristic designs hold up. Witness all of the updates that have been necessary to Tomorrowland and the Contemporary over the years.

Frankly I think quite the opposite. I think the idea was just like Disneyland, to consistently update and add new technologies as it became available...an entire separate part of the city was to be devoted to the top companies in America as a test bed.

Walt had all of the right pieces, he had the monorail, he had the peoplemover and he had tested all of them with live tourists!!

If Walt had lived to follow through with his plans, it could have financially destroyed the company. And 40 years later we could be left with an outdated, decaying mass of concrete, steel and plexiglass in the middle of central Florida.

Or we could have had the city design that revolutionized every other urban planning design since then...and wouldn't be worrying about huge gulf oil spills