Is Disney fully on board with plans for high-speed rail?

[CR Resort Fan 4 Life]

http://thedailydisney.com/blog/2010/05/is-disney-fully-on-board-with-plans-for-high-speed-rail/

[skiingfast]

I think the biggest interest that guests would have is going to port canaveral. It's not a cheap trip, and being able to go MCO to there every hour would be just fine. Going from Disney to there maybe less important.

More so I think Disney's interest would be getting visitors taking day trips from Tampa and Miami. Those are big population centers and it would let WDW have some of the guest advantages that DL does.

[Lewisc]

It sounds like Disney will give them the land for a station but the train will have to compete with DME for passengers from MCO.

[skiingfast]

This makes me think that as said the train would have to compete with DME that either DME would go and the train would be free. Or DME will add a fee.

[rwdavis2]

This project is a boondggle of the worst kind. High speed rail over that short of a distance is a huge waste of money.
BD

[doconeill]

Disney could possibly save money by dropping DME. The train would still bring them to Disney, and wherever the station is they can shuttle guests to their resorts and they would still be locked on property for the most part. Fewer buses would be needed to shuttle.

However, if Disney feels that they could somehow lose an advantage that DME gives, then it would remain, and Disney's "support" of the train would be limited.

[Micca]

Seems like Disney would love to have someone else responsible for the operation of a system designed to bring guests directly to them. Why would Disney want to continue the expense of owning, operating, maintaining those buses, hiring and training the drivers, and the insurance/legal exposure involved? As long as a direct stop at Universal Studios or Sea World isn't involved, what's not to like? Also, if the rail system is a success, won't we see it put into place in other cities as well? Atlanta anyone?

I realize it's probably not that simple, but a better informed person will be along shortly to set me straight.:earsboy:

[doconeill]

Disney already avoids most of that by outsourcing the operation to Mears...now, Mears is probably very much against the rail project :)

[skiingfast]

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

Similar thread.

Doconeill, I don't just think Mears is against it. But possibly some regional airlines and greyhound.

[Lewisc]

DME dispatches buses every 15-20 minutes. A high speed train might run every hour. Disney would still need buses to take passengers from the train station to the resorts. I don't know how much time (if any) the train would save guests.

I read the article linked by the OP and articles referenced. It sounds like some knowledgeable people are convinced Disney will give the land but continue to run DME in competition with the train.

This is only specuilation but it's entirely possible the "wholesale" fare Disney is paying Mears to transport guests is less then retail fare for the train. The proposed station on I Drive near the convention center may have a lot more potential.

[skiingfast]

I don't know that the trains will be infrequent. The idea of upgrading the rail system is to make more usable and profitable runs. The only place the Us has this is the northeast. While the Acela Express which is by all indications what they aim to duplicate in other areas including florida.

The Acela though only has a handful of stops. It runs hourly. But it is supplemented by two more trains per hour making regional stops. Plus the standard long trip Amtraks.

If this does come to reality in California and Florida there appears to be two views of what will happen. One is the national view of people outside the actual areas. Where the trains will have long fast runs, rivaling airplanes. The local view is the trains will stop everywhere convienient and serve many small towns taking people into the cities.

It's a problem for Amtrak that it runs off the later model. It's not because of what people want it's a hold over from the time of steam locomotives. They needed more water and had to stop frequently. These little towns each got a station.

Look at the route of the Empire builder that runs from Chicago to Seatle. Between the two is only one city that supports a major league team, minneapolis. It travels across North Dakota and Montana, how many cites other than Helena and Fargo can you name in these states? Is it surprising that it stops in 6 other places in North Dakota and 12 times in Montana, and doesn't go through any of Montana's largest cities. Two states being served that have a combined population of less than greater orlando.

What stops in florida will consistently generate large passenger numbers?
Do they require a commuter train of high speed rail?

[Lewisc]

The Acela works because you have a lot of people who want to travel between BOS,NYC, PHL,Baltimore and Washington. A lot of business travelers. The time is competitive with flying when you consider the time it takes to get to the airport and go through security. Traffic in the NE is legendary.

I have no idea how many people go between Tampa and Orlando. I don't know how many people would rather take a train over driving. You need strong demand to support frequent (hourly) service. It won't work if the trains don't run when the passengers want to go.

It won't work if the number crunchers thinks 2 million DME passengers will be paying $30-$40 R/T for rail transportation from MCO to a station in WDW. Mears charges around $30 R/T and I wouldn't be surprised if a "bean counter" thinks customers will pay a premium price for rail. It won't work if Disney decides DME buses from MCO is a more efficient, and cheaper, way to go.

The R/T Acela fare between Washington and NYC is over $300. Families on a budget are still going to drive from Tampa to Orlando.

[skiingfast]

The Acela works because you have a lot of people who want to travel between BOS,NYC, PHL,Baltimore and Washington. A lot of business travelers. The time is competitive with flying when you consider the time it takes to get to the airport and go through security. Traffic in the NE is legendary.

I have no idea how many people go between Tampa and Orlando. I don't know how many people would rather take a train over driving. You need strong demand to support frequent (hourly) service. It won't work if the trains don't run when the passengers want to go.

It won't work if the number crunchers thinks 2 million DME passengers will be paying $30-$40 R/T for rail transportation from MCO to a station in WDW. Mears charges around $30 R/T and I wouldn't be surprised if a "bean counter" thinks customers will pay a premium price for rail. It won't work if Disney decides DME buses from MCO is a more efficient, and cheaper, way to go.

The R/T Acela fare between Washington and NYC is over $300. Families on a budget are still going to drive from Tampa to Orlando.

Tampa to Orlando I4 carries about a 274,000 vehicles per day. They hope the train will carry 10%. Sounds like fare a estimate to me. I imagine they can figure that by compairing track paralel to roads elsewhere in the US. The train is supposed to operate at speeds of 168mph the Acela trains go up to 150mph. The Acela trains carry about 300 passengers. 27000 one passengers(based on 1 per car now using train) / 300 seats per train = 90 trains a day that's about a train every 15 minutes.

The MCO to WDW with a station near Celebration is about 25 miles from MCO to it's Tamps 80 miles. A short run on the Northweat corridor New Haven, Ct into New York is 80 miles and cost $95 on Acela and $35 on the regional.

The Acela is a true high speed train, the regional is not. It only runs up to 125mph. The Acela though is a first class/business class only train raising the cost of travel.

While the trains in the northwest have the advatage of passing traditional bad traffic the Tampa/Orlando line is to bypass growing traffic. The train would run in place of adding on lanes to the freeway.

[seashoreCM]

Going to Disney, the train from the airport together with shuttle buses from Disney Station to resorts will be attractive. People will probably accept the perhaps half an hour greater travel time compared with a discontinued DME if the overall fare is noticeably lower than Mears' regular shuttle.

But going home, I am sure people will have to leave for the train station earlier compared with Magical Express.

[yitbos96bb]

This project is a boondggle of the worst kind. High speed rail over that short of a distance is a huge waste of money.
BD

No, its not. It actually makes a lot of sense and will be wonderful for the region. Plus as the high speed network expands, Eventually, the line will link all along most of the east coast with the Northern line and the Atlanta to DC line.

[skiingfast]

Train travel and freight for that matter is changing. Congress is going to essentially remove a speed limit by changing saftey regulations. Trains used to be faster in the US 100 years ago. The diesel engines that replaced the steam could now move faster all the time but are not allowed to.

Also the idea Amtrak uses to run trains in the Northeast with express and locals will be spreading as highspeed rail is built and reserved for express service.

A huge portain of the stimulus bill is being used to make over and under passes instead of road crossings.

Consider that it is 8B and Florida is getting a big piece of it at 1.25. They are only looking at setting up three high speed rail systems in the US. The rest of the money is to upgrade the low speed rail lines.

[rwdavis2]

No, its not. It actually makes a lot of sense and will be wonderful for the region. Plus as the high speed network expands, Eventually, the line will link all along most of the east coast with the Northern line and the Atlanta to DC line.

Sorry but I have to disagree. High (or low) speed rail over short distances makes no sense. If I understand the project correctly it's only from Tampa to Orlando. How much time are they going to cut off the travel time from Tampa to Orlando? A few minutes? Nothing that justifies the cost of the ticket or the huge expense of building it. You look at the cost of an Amtrak ticket lately. It's usually more than flying.

It may be wonderful for the region in construction jobs and infusion of $$ but it's a huge boondoggle for the those of us paying for it.

Long hauls say from DC to NY to Boston make sense as the travel times for air vs. rail in these corridors is comparable. (This includes the times wasted in airports and travel time to/from the airport. Rail usually gets you right to the middle of the cities).

But what's going to stop every Senator from demanding a stop in their state along the East Coast? Stopping every couple of hundred miles defeats the entire purpose.
Bob

[ambertides]

From what I've read, tickets are estimated to be around $20, one way from Tampa to Orlando. That's $80 for DH & I, round trip, plus whatever it costs to park in Tampa (we're about 20 minutes west). We pay $20 for gas, round trip, and it's about a 1.5 hour drive, that we take often enough that it doesn't seem very long at all. For the extra $60 we could toss a tent in the trunk and stay at FW and get two days out of it, plus not have the $28 in parking over two days.

So Tampa <-> Orlando is not very appealing to us, though if we had an older/less reliable car... maybe. But then we would not have APs, either, and it would be to replace renting a car for a single 3-4+ day trip, not 1-3 days a month.

Phase 2 is something we will use, when/if it comes about, and depending on which route they choose.

[rwdavis2]

From what I've read, tickets are estimated to be around $20, one way from Tampa to Orlando. That's $80 for DH & I, round trip, plus whatever it costs to park in Tampa (we're about 20 minutes west). We pay $20 for gas, round trip, and it's about a 1.5 hour drive, that we take often enough that it doesn't seem very long at all. For the extra $60 we could toss a tent in the trunk and stay at FW and get two days out of it, plus not have the $28 in parking over two days.

So Tampa <-> Orlando is not very appealing to us, though if we had an older/less reliable car... maybe. But then we would not have APs, either, and it would be to replace renting a car for a single 3-4+ day trip, not 1-3 days a month.

Phase 2 is something we will use, when/if it comes about, and depending on which route they choose.

I can see you understand the trade-offs. I used to work for a company in the heavy rail business. When there was lots of talk of MagLev projects in the early 90's the head of the company said he'd gladly take the work but said MagLev made no sense economically. Meaning that current train technology at the time could hit speeds about 1/3 less than MagLev and over the distances between destinations (mainly East Coast) the small time savings never justified the huge cost and experimental nature of MagLev.

It's the same for this project. The cost of taking rail over very short distance that don't get you exactly to your destination makes no sense. It works in NY City because of the good feeder system from outlying areas and the huge number of stations all across NYC.
BD

[skiingfast]

How much time are they going to cut off the travel time from Tampa to Orlando? A few minutes? Nothing that justifies the cost of the ticket or the huge expense of building it. You look at the cost of an Amtrak ticket lately. It's usually more than flying.
Bob

The DOT expects the travel time from Tampa to Orlando to be cut by just more than a third.

[Lewisc]

The information posted in wikipedia suggests the train time from downtown Tampa to MCO will be an hour and 4 minutes. It suggests the time to drive is an hour 22 minutes. That's about a 1/3 savings however the savings will be reduced for any passenger that has to drive out of his way to get to a train station. How many minutes before departure should you be at the train station? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? How much time do you need to allow for traffic and to find parking? Another 5 or 10 minutes?

I suspect the real time savings, door to door, will be minimal.

Florida politicians did a good job getting federal taxpayer money.

[SouthernExplorer]

Also, if the rail system is a success, won't we see it put into place in other cities as well? Atlanta anyone?

The city of Dallas has a rail system that I've used.

http://dart.org/

It was great going to the DMA by rail from Plano rather than to drive ourselves, find parking, etc. The DART rail is "green", cheap and hassle-free, and we will use it again and again. Many people use the DART rail to get to their jobs in Dallas, and from what I've read this sounds like a good idea for Central Florida.

[rwdavis2]

Many people use the DART rail to get to their jobs in Dallas, and from what I've read this sounds like a good idea for Central Florida.

Hardly. The population densities in Central Florida are not high enough to ever make rail a reasonable option. Politicians love this stuff because they get to pretend they are doing something productive when they are just spending other peoples' money. If this is a good idea for Florida then Florida alone should pay for it.

[skiingfast]

Hardly. The population densities in Central Florida are not high enough to ever make rail a reasonable option. Politicians love this stuff because they get to pretend they are doing something productive when they are just spending other peoples' money. If this is a good idea for Florida then Florida alone should pay for it.

Please have Florida return the money it used to build and maintain it's highway system. It was a good idea for Florida but it didn't pay for all of it. The same could be said for the air travel system as well.

Transit systems have benefited all Americans in immense ways. I think this should always be a priority of the Federal Government.

[rwdavis2]

Please have Florida return the money it used to build and maintain it's highway system. It was a good idea for Florida but it didn't pay for all of it. The same could be said for the air travel system as well.

Transit systems have benefited all Americans in immense ways. I think this should always be a priority of the Federal Government.

I generally agree with your last statement. But, again, costly rail projects in low density population areas are a waste of money. It would be far more economical to run buses between Tampa and Orlando. Rail projects in and of themselves are not necessarily "green" as some people in this thread have mentioned. The energy to run the trains comes from electrical power lines or diesel locomotives.

Just because people are in love with the idea of riding trains does not make them a good alternative. How many of us would take a several day train ride to get to the west coast vs. a 6 hour flight? Amtrak is proof that not many people do. Again, rail transport from DC through to Boston makes a lot of sense because the travel times from door to door are comparable as well as the costs. Also, the Bay Area of San Francisco is a good place for it as well. The roads there are very heavily traveled and relieving that congestion makes sense.

People quoting prices and travel time of a Tampa/Orlando train route pretty much show that very few people would take that train on a regular basis.
BD

[joelkfla]

I generally agree with your last statement. But, again, costly rail projects in low density population areas are a waste of money. It would be far more economical to run buses between Tampa and Orlando.
Buses run on roads. Someone has to pay for those roads and their maintenance. This fact is usually ignored by rail opponents.

Buses are also subject to traffic delays. Now you could go and build dedicated bus lanes, but then you're negating much of the alleged savings, as well as eating up real estate.

Buses are not as "sexy" as trains. There's a reason. Buses are less comfortable and generally cannot offer the on-board conveniences offered by modern trains. They therefore attract fewer riders.
Rail projects in and of themselves are not necessarily "green" as some people in this thread have mentioned. The energy to run the trains comes from electrical power lines or diesel locomotives.
Obviously, energy is not free. But the energy consumed per passenger mile is generally less than other forms of ground transportation. And there is more opportunity to use clean energy.
How many of us would take a several day train ride to get to the west coast vs. a 6 hour flight? Amtrak is proof that not many people do.

Wrong question, bad proof.

Amtrak is burdened with an antiquated, under-maintained infrastructure. Theoretically, a true high-speed rail system could make the 3,000 mile trip in about 20 hours. So the appropriate question is: "How many would take a one-day train trip, in roomy comfort, free to move about the cabin, dining on real food, over a 6-hour flight packed in like cattle?" The success of high-speed rail in other parts of the world is the answer to that question.

[skiingfast]

This is what they will be using in Wisconsin. The manufacturing plant for these cars is being built. The order for the cars has been placed.

http://www.talgoamerica.com/series8-passengerCars.aspx

[G8RFAN]

I would consider taking the Amtrak if it dropped you off at the TTC or some substation on property. Since it doesn't, I make the drive from S. FL to WDW in less time and hassle. On a micro level, when I have to walk past my car on the way to the bus stop at any WDW resort, I tend to want to drive instead to taking the resort buses as the hassles that come with "public transportation" negates most of the pleasure of not having to drive while on vacation. I might take the high speed train to Tampa from a vacation in Orlando to do a Busch Gardens day trip, however, if it is a hassle, I doubt I would do it more than once. IMHO, most people tend to avoid queues and for me idle time. I'd rather walk from the contemporary to MK than to wait for the resort monorail, especially when it is going in the other direction and has to make all the other stops.

[doconeill]

This is what they will be using in Wisconsin. The manufacturing plant for these cars is being built. The order for the cars has been placed.

http://www.talgoamerica.com/series8-passengerCars.aspx

These look more like long-haul commuter coaches...if this were to become a true long-haul intercity service, which would need to at least include Miami, then these might make sense, but for at least Phase I they'd probably go with something simpler.

Suddenly, the complexities of moving thousands of Disney tourists and all their bags renders some interesting problems...get luggage off plane, take luggage to train, get luggage on train, get self on train, ride train, get self off train, get luggage off train, get luggage on bus...

That is, unless Disney will offer a separate luggage service (i.e. Magical Express just for the luggage).

[skiingfast]

These look more like long-haul commuter coaches...if this were to become a true long-haul intercity service, which would need to at least include Miami, then these might make sense, but for at least Phase I they'd probably go with something simpler.

Suddenly, the complexities of moving thousands of Disney tourists and all their bags renders some interesting problems...get luggage off plane, take luggage to train, get luggage on train, get self on train, ride train, get self off train, get luggage off train, get luggage on bus...

That is, unless Disney will offer a separate luggage service (i.e. Magical Express just for the luggage).

Though invisible to the guests there is a seperate baggage service. I don't think it would go away, It's nessecary in either case or a mixed case as well.

These Talgo trains are for use in the Chicago to Milwaukee and Milwaukee to Madison route. Which is a semi commute route. So would be a Tampa, Lakeland, and Orlando route. This intercity distances are all pretty close.

This is why I added the post and link.