Could DW Parks be Expanded?

[DDLand]

I think some would argue horizons was an active e ticket that they destroyed I wouldn't know tho because I never got to experience it. Many are very bitter and miss that attraction greatly.

Ahh, Horizons. I too never got to see this cult classic. A shame, as I really enjoy the dark ride audio animatronic based attractions quite a bit. Spaceship Earth is in my top 5 favorite attractions at Walt Disney World.

From what I can gather from several sources, it was losing its appeal. It was an aging attraction that had a dedicated fanbase, but wasn't impressing new audiences. Nostalgia wasn't enough to keep the attraction open. There was also that massive sink hole too...

I'd be hard pressed to call it an E-Ticket though. Soarin and Test Track yes, Horizons no.

With that being said, don't all you older folks come out swinging.

This is all second hand for me, my best understanding of what was happening. I could be very wrong. Horizons for me is as foreign as Adventures Through Nature Train Ride.

Update: I thought of an E-Ticket that closed. Rocket Rods. Structural damage was too expensive to fix. Plus it was a stupid concept to begin with. Roller Coaster on a budget!

 

[LeeAndRobin]

Higher capacity boats have been put in during monorail 'down times' to handle the passenger capacity between the resorts and the Magic Kingdom. Like it or not those boats are far less expensive to manage than the monorail

Have you ever done maintenance on a boat? One that remains in the water 24/7/365? It is in no way "cheap". What facts and sources do you base your assertion that a ferry is "far less expensive to manage than the monorail"? The (very few) smaller resort boats are admittedly cheaper than the monorail, but those boats ain't gonna cut it if the monorail goes down for good. To paraphrase Jaws "you're gonna need a bigger boat", which means more crew, more maintenance, and more bigger boats to handle the load.

Buses are less expensive to manage than the monorail so you can't have a one to one comparison on the labor cost.

Again, what exactly is this assertion based on? (and when I say the labor for buses is higher, it is. It takes at least 6 bus drivers to make up for one monorail driver). It is hard to imagine that the maintenance costs of more boats + ferries + buses is less than the cost of the current monorail system.

This debate has been hashed and re-hashed multiple times throughout the years. Peak crowd movement? Just put more buses on the routes. Low crowd time periods? Take the buses off the route. This type of manipulation isn't possible with the monorails.

Umm, yes it is. Disney can run anywhere from one monorail per line up to the maximum number they have.

The time between retrofits has already been mentioned, and twenty-five years is a long time for a mechanical device that runs 365 days a year.

Many mechanical devices that run 365 days a year at WDW have been doing so since 1971. A few in DL since, what, 1955? Yes, they have been upgraded and fixed throughout the years, but they are still operating. All mechanical devices eventually fail, but they can all be fixed/upgraded. I submit that is what is going on *right now* with the monorail system.

If Disney wanted to replace them they would have done so by now. I don't think the plan is in the cards.

You're right, they haven't replaced the current monorails because they haven't wanted to. And the reason they haven't wanted to is that they haven't needed to. There has been no compelling reason to do so.

Regarding the recent upgrades for automation, I personally don't think that Disney did it as a foundation for some future large-scale upgrade, or even replacement, of the existing trains. I'm sure someone can do the digging to confirm, but I would be interested in seeing just how much Disney's liability insurance went down when the automation went in. When you remove the human element your insurance costs go down.

Another way to look at this (if indeed it is even the case, I have no idea) is that any monies saved in insurance costs by going to automation are monies freed up to be used for reinvestment in the monorails themselves.

Lastly any iconic-type status that fans give something has never been a reason for Disney to keep something around. There are devotees to the monorail, and I admit that I'm one of them, but more and more the monorail is seen as an attraction rather than a viable transportation tool, and Disney has shown it has no issue with shutting down an attraction if they so choose. If the monorail dumped guests into a gift shop after the 'ride' was done it might be different, but this ain't Pirates of the Caribbean.

Again, I ask you to come up with transportation options that would a) replace the monorail and b) be as cost-effective or cheaper to operate. Buses and boats and ferries ain't the answer. Those three combined with the required passenger volume are going to be more expensive, not less, to operate.

 

[wallrock]

The boats and monorails working together in conjunction are most effective. You may have never experienced what it's like when a monorail goes down, but it's not pretty. It's a pain, and it slows everything down. As the other poster @LeeAndRobin (100% on all your posts) has said, expanding capacity enough to appropriately handle additonal boat traffic would be impractical and costly. Which means that they'd have to use buses for guest transfer (I'll get to that) Keeping the existing system working is more cost effective and more green. It also keeps with their futuristic and cool image.

I wouldn't call something that is over half a century old 'futuristic', and I wouldn't exactly call the monorail completely green. There's a lot of lubricant that's needed to keep the machine running smoothly, and I doubt it's very eco-friendly. And regarding a monorail going down...sounds like your comment is more of an advocacy for the removal rather than keeping it.

Why not? Disney commonly adjusts the number of monorails based on expected attendance. I'm not sure 6 buses that will have to be replaced after a fraction of the service as monorails are really much more cost effective. One purchase for a long term investment that does take upkeep, but is energy efficient and speedy. Compare that to the average lifespan of a commuter bus of 12 years. In the same time period to cover the same job Disney would have had to acquire 12+ buses. Really? I see Disney continuing to use this system for the time being. Remember the trains are also not useless after being decomissioned. The same chassis can be used again. Look to Disneyland that has been using monorail components from the 1960's.

Buses last a bit longer than you think, and they're becoming more efficient. Also I need to see some stats before I concede that the monorail would be 'efficient and speedy'. Rail works that way in a large network, but remember all we're really talking about here is a small loop and a two and a half mile point to point that services around 10 percent of the total hotel rooms. Again this is no longer a viable transportation system - it's a ride. Ninety percent of the transportation traffic is not monorail based. If it were more cost effective there would be a network all over the campus.

Of course there's also the added issue of buses being incredibly clunky experience. Imagine this process. Drive to parking lot, get on a tram, then get on a bus. Sound bad? I think so.

I think you're confusing the issue. It isn't about selling the bus as a 'clunky experience' to favor the monorail, but rather what the business may be thinking. I want the monorail to stay, but what I want and what Disney wants are two very different things. Visitors and the fan base think with the heart while Burbank thinks with their checkbook. Just like mixing oil and water.

Increased bus options for those hotels is good, but not a replacement. People stay at those hotels partially for the monorails. 600$ a night is not a cheap hotel, and Disney likes those prices.

Disney can continue to charge that price regardless of the monorail presence. Take the Polynesian as an example; I'm sure the folks who stay in those new bungalows aren't doing it because of the monorail. Given how each of the resorts have a solid fan base I doubt that people would stop staying at the Contemporary because the monorail wasn't working. I've seen it down for a full day while staying there and I didn't hear a single complaint. The Polynesian is going through a construction nightmare and people are staying anyway (and Disney continues to charge an obscene price). I doubt they're doing it because the monorail stops there. When the monorail shuts down during the day there are a few temporarily sad faces, but they disappear once folks board a bus and head for the park of their choice.

Disney has canned attractions, but never an active E-Ticket. The monorail is just that. It would not only be expensive but also destroy goodwill. A bad proposition when people are supposed to be making memories.

The monorail isn't going anywhere.

I wouldn't classify the monorail as an E-ticket, but I'll concede that's subjective. Disney has mothballed E-tickets before. Again it's about the dollars, and the monorail doesn't generate revenue. There are no gift shops based on it, no potential for movie franchises, no chance to consume the last nickel, dime or quarter out of your pocket. If it can't do that then it's a candidate for the chopping block no matter how much we like it.

 

[wallrock]

Have you ever done maintenance on a boat? One that remains in the water 24/7/365? It is in no way "cheap". What facts and sources do you base your assertion that a ferry is "far less expensive to manage than the monorail"? The (very few) smaller resort boats are admittedly cheaper than the monorail, but those boats ain't gonna cut it if the monorail goes down for good. To paraphrase Jaws "you're gonna need a bigger boat", which means more crew, more maintenance, and more bigger boats to handle the load.

Again, what exactly is this assertion based on? (and when I say the labor for buses is higher, it is. It takes at least 6 bus drivers to make up for one monorail driver). It is hard to imagine that the maintenance costs of more boats + ferries + buses is less than the cost of the current monorail system.

Umm, yes it is. Disney can run anywhere from one monorail per line up to the maximum number they have.

Many mechanical devices that run 365 days a year at WDW have been doing so since 1971. A few in DL since, what, 1955? Yes, they have been upgraded and fixed throughout the years, but they are still operating. All mechanical devices eventually fail, but they can all be fixed/upgraded. I submit that is what is going on *right now* with the monorail system.

You're right, they haven't replaced the current monorails because they haven't wanted to. And the reason they haven't wanted to is that they haven't needed to. There has been no compelling reason to do so.

Another way to look at this (if indeed it is even the case, I have no idea) is that any monies saved in insurance costs by going to automation are monies freed up to be used for reinvestment in the monorails themselves.

Again, I ask you to come up with transportation options that would a) replace the monorail and b) be as cost-effective or cheaper to operate. Buses and boats and ferries ain't the answer. Those three combined with the required passenger volume are going to be more expensive, not less, to operate.

Rather than comment on each I'll summarize. The monorail has been unavailable before and the boats/buses handled the workload fine. There were some small inconveniences I'm sure, but guests got back to their cars or their rooms. And yes, I've done maintenance on a boat. If the overall cost was less versus boats and/or buses then Disney would have a monorail network across the campus. As the system stands you're only talking about a small percentage of the overall guest base that are 'serviced'.

Ninety percent of guests stay in resorts that aren't fed by a monorail. Again this is no longer a transportation system, it's an attraction.

 

[DDLand]

I wouldn't call something that is over half a century old 'futuristic', and I wouldn't exactly call the monorail completely green. There's a lot of lubricant that's needed to keep the machine running smoothly, and I doubt it's very eco-friendly. And regarding a monorail going down...sounds like your comment is more of an advocacy for the removal rather than keeping it.



Buses last a bit longer than you think, and they're becoming more efficient. Also I need to see some stats before I concede that the monorail would be 'efficient and speedy'. Rail works that way in a large network, but remember all we're really talking about here is a small loop and a two and a half mile point to point that services around 10 percent of the total hotel rooms. Again this is no longer a viable transportation system - it's a ride. Ninety percent of the transportation traffic is not monorail based. If it were more cost effective there would be a network all over the campus.



I think you're confusing the issue. It isn't about selling the bus as a 'clunky experience' to favor the monorail, but rather what the business may be thinking. I want the monorail to stay, but what I want and what Disney wants are two very different things. Visitors and the fan base think with the heart while Burbank thinks with their checkbook. Just like mixing oil and water.



Disney can continue to charge that price regardless of the monorail presence. Take the Polynesian as an example; I'm sure the folks who stay in those new bungalows aren't doing it because of the monorail. Given how each of the resorts have a solid fan base I doubt that people would stop staying at the Contemporary because the monorail wasn't working. I've seen it down for a full day while staying there and I didn't hear a single complaint. The Polynesian is going through a construction nightmare and people are staying anyway (and Disney continues to charge an obscene price). I doubt they're doing it because the monorail stops there. When the monorail shuts down during the day there are a few temporarily sad faces, but they disappear once folks board a bus and head for the park of their choice.



I wouldn't classify the monorail as an E-ticket, but I'll concede that's subjective. Disney has mothballed E-tickets before. Again it's about the dollars, and the monorail doesn't generate revenue. There are no gift shops based on it, no potential for movie franchises, no chance to consume the last nickel, dime or quarter out of your pocket. If it can't do that then it's a candidate for the chopping block no matter how much we like it.

For most, it's futuristic. It still stands as a model for better mass transit, and few have adopted it. Considering the vast majority of people coming to Disney World never ride a monorails it still is unusual and in many ways futuristic. Cars with batteries have been around for quite some time. Doesn't mean they aren't futuristic.

The best you can come up with is lubricant? Not like the buses need motor oil. Look up all the damage oil coming off cars does to the environment, and you may change your mind.

Diesel busses that have to stop at lights, Idle, and kneel are not nearly as efficient as the all electric monorail system.

What? I said "it's not pretty" when it goes down. Ehh, I don't think you get it. If you're saying that this proves the monorail is unreliable, that's hogwash. All mass transit systems are faced with occasional delays, and outages. The Walt Disney World Monorail System is exceptionally reliable. Especially compared to the atrocious WMATA from my area.

Here's information on bus life.
http://publictransport.about.com/od...-Do-Buses-And-Ohter-Transit-Vehicles-Last.htm
I'm not sure if Disney would be eligible for government funding now that I look more closely. That's the expected life though.

The Walt Disney World Monorail System services 100,000+ people daily. It's a real transportation system. Period. Idle, kneel, stop and wait in traffic. This is why monorail is more efficient.

Not true. Just because Disney up until this point has not decided it suits their needs to expand does not condemn the whole system. Continuing to maintain, and operate a line is different then sinking a couple 100 million into expansion. It's not like there's a race against time where Disney must build or it's all over. Nonsense.

You have to remember why people pay the ticket prices. It's for the experience. The monorail is part of that experience, and I'd argue is competitive towards buses as well. Some people are more scared of Burbank then they should be. Relax, they're not going to start destroying the monorail for laughs. The Disneyland one has spared the knife despite being almost pointless. (It's actually a ride)

I think you're underestimating the emotional attachment. Part of the draw to that glorified toaster oven is the monorail. Period. People ride the monorails sometimes even when it's faster to walk because it's just so fun. People love the look of the Learjet snake gliding into the station. People love when they're underneath and they pump their arm and they get horn blast in return. These things make guests days. I've seen it many times. It's absolutely a symbol of Walt Disney World that people love.

It's an E-Ticket. The only other verified case of an E-Ticket closure was Rocket Rods. Besides that 0. Disney is all about profiting from an experience, ticking off guests and destroying one is a stupid way to go.

 

[LeeAndRobin]

The monorail has been unavailable before and the boats/buses handled the workload fine.

Yes, but would they have been able to do so economically over the long term?

If the overall cost was less versus boats and/or buses then Disney would have a monorail network across the campus.

We aren't discussing the overall cost of a monorail system across the campus, just the cost of running the existing lines. The cost to put in a monorail line is likely many many millions per mile. That's not what we are discussing. We're discussing the ongoing costs of the existing system vs. a combination of boats + ferries + buses.

As the system stands you're only talking about a small percentage of the overall guest base that are 'serviced'.
Ninety percent of guests stay in resorts that aren't fed by a monorail. Again this is no longer a transportation system, it's an attraction.

Ninety percent of the guests that stay *on-site* stay in resorts that aren't serviced by a monorail. Those many thousands of cars in the parking lot, which add up to several resorts worth of guests, are currently all serviced either by the monorail or by the ferry system (and perhaps a few by the boat to the Poly if they chose to walk over to the Poly dock and take the small boat launch).

Buses are slow to load, slow to unload, and clunky as DDLand has already pointed out. Some of my *worst* experiences and longest waits at WDW were waiting on buses. The monorail, by contrast, has always been fast and efficient, at least in our experience.

I think it might be best for us to agree to disagree.

I would, however, be interested in why exactly you think the monorail is more expensive to operate than a combination of ferries + boats + buses.

 

[DDLand]

If the overall cost was less versus boats and/or buses then Disney would have a monorail network across the campus.

I've addressed all your other points in my other response, and I'll eagerly be awaiting your response.

This argument is a weak one, and you've got to realize it. I don't think me or the other poster is saying the monorail should be spread out to all the resort hotels and parks. That'd be expensive, and ineffective because the monorail would be covering too large of an area carrying too few passengers to justify expenditures and expansion. As you've also pointed out, buses are more flexible for these more far flung hotels. This does not mean that monorails don't have a place on property at all. Monorails do the job of moving the large groups of people like is required from TTC to MK better then any other form of mass transit they've got. It's also entirely different to continue to maintain an existing fleet and track, and invest heavily into expansion.

So all the "if monorails were so great they would've expanded it" people can look at the facts, and stop repeating that.

 

[rteetz]

Ahh, Horizons. I too never got to see this cult classic. A shame, as I really enjoy the dark ride audio animatronic based attractions quite a bit. Spaceship Earth is in my top 5 favorite attractions at Walt Disney World.

From what I can gather from several sources, it was losing its appeal. It was an aging attraction that had a dedicated fanbase, but wasn't impressing new audiences. Nostalgia wasn't enough to keep the attraction open. There was also that massive sink hole too...

I'd be hard pressed to call it an E-Ticket though. Soarin and Test Track yes, Horizons no.

With that being said, don't all you older folks come out swinging.

This is all second hand for me, my best understanding of what was happening. I could be very wrong. Horizons for me is as foreign as Adventures Through Nature Train Ride.

Update: I thought of an E-Ticket that closed. Rocket Rods. Structural damage was too expensive to fix. Plus it was a stupid concept to begin with. Roller Coaster on a budget!

Without having experienced it how can you tell for sure whether it was an e ticket or not. I also think they could've refurbed it. Horizons has that Epcot center theme with it. Soarin and test track only a little bit. Horizons was really what epcot was about. I think Disney could've done something with it, instead we got the mission space which isn't bad I like it but I wish I would've gotten to experience horizons once.

 

[rteetz]

I wouldn't call something that is over half a century old 'futuristic', and I wouldn't exactly call the monorail completely green. There's a lot of lubricant that's needed to keep the machine running smoothly, and I doubt it's very eco-friendly. And regarding a monorail going down...sounds like your comment is more of an advocacy for the removal rather than keeping it.



Buses last a bit longer than you think, and they're becoming more efficient. Also I need to see some stats before I concede that the monorail would be 'efficient and speedy'. Rail works that way in a large network, but remember all we're really talking about here is a small loop and a two and a half mile point to point that services around 10 percent of the total hotel rooms. Again this is no longer a viable transportation system - it's a ride. Ninety percent of the transportation traffic is not monorail based. If it were more cost effective there would be a network all over the campus.



I think you're confusing the issue. It isn't about selling the bus as a 'clunky experience' to favor the monorail, but rather what the business may be thinking. I want the monorail to stay, but what I want and what Disney wants are two very different things. Visitors and the fan base think with the heart while Burbank thinks with their checkbook. Just like mixing oil and water.



Disney can continue to charge that price regardless of the monorail presence. Take the Polynesian as an example; I'm sure the folks who stay in those new bungalows aren't doing it because of the monorail. Given how each of the resorts have a solid fan base I doubt that people would stop staying at the Contemporary because the monorail wasn't working. I've seen it down for a full day while staying there and I didn't hear a single complaint. The Polynesian is going through a construction nightmare and people are staying anyway (and Disney continues to charge an obscene price). I doubt they're doing it because the monorail stops there. When the monorail shuts down during the day there are a few temporarily sad faces, but they disappear once folks board a bus and head for the park of their choice.



I wouldn't classify the monorail as an E-ticket, but I'll concede that's subjective. Disney has mothballed E-tickets before. Again it's about the dollars, and the monorail doesn't generate revenue. There are no gift shops based on it, no potential for movie franchises, no chance to consume the last nickel, dime or quarter out of your pocket. If it can't do that then it's a candidate for the chopping block no matter how much we like it.

Actually the monorail was originally deemed a ride but has since been changed to transportation. That is part of the reason they don't allow people to sit with the driver anymore.

I would agree that they aren't that futuristic anymore.

I would also agree that not many stay at the monorail resorts because of the monorail anymore some do of course but not as many as before.

That is true that the monorail really doesn't generate revenue. Why do you think they haven't expanded it the cost out weighs the return.

 

[rteetz]

For most, it's futuristic. It still stands as a model for better mass transit, and few have adopted it. Considering the vast majority of people coming to Disney World never ride a monorails it still is unusual and in many ways futuristic. Cars with batteries have been around for quite some time. Doesn't mean they aren't futuristic.

The best you can come up with is lubricant? Not like the buses need motor oil. Look up all the damage oil coming off cars does to the environment, and you may change your mind.

Diesel busses that have to stop at lights, Idle, and kneel are not nearly as efficient as the all electric monorail system.

What? I said "it's not pretty" when it goes down. Ehh, I don't think you get it. If you're saying that this proves the monorail is unreliable, that's hogwash. All mass transit systems are faced with occasional delays, and outages. The Walt Disney World Monorail System is exceptionally reliable. Especially compared to the atrocious WMATA from my area.

Here's information on bus life.
http://publictransport.about.com/od...-Do-Buses-And-Ohter-Transit-Vehicles-Last.htm
I'm not sure if Disney would be eligible for government funding now that I look more closely. That's the expected life though.

The Walt Disney World Monorail System services 100,000+ people daily. It's a real transportation system. Period. Idle, kneel, stop and wait in traffic. This is why monorail is more efficient.

Not true. Just because Disney up until this point has not decided it suits their needs to expand does not condemn the whole system. Continuing to maintain, and operate a line is different then sinking a couple 100 million into expansion. It's not like there's a race against time where Disney must build or it's all over. Nonsense.

You have to remember why people pay the ticket prices. It's for the experience. The monorail is part of that experience, and I'd argue is competitive towards buses as well. Some people are more scared of Burbank then they should be. Relax, they're not going to start destroying the monorail for laughs. The Disneyland one has spared the knife despite being almost pointless. (It's actually a ride)

I think you're underestimating the emotional attachment. Part of the draw to that glorified toaster oven is the monorail. Period. People ride the monorails sometimes even when it's faster to walk because it's just so fun. People love the look of the Learjet snake gliding into the station. People love when they're underneath and they pump their arm and they get horn blast in return. These things make guests days. I've seen it many times. It's absolutely a symbol of Walt Disney World that people love.

It's an E-Ticket. The only other verified case of an E-Ticket closure was Rocket Rods. Besides that 0. Disney is all about profiting from an experience, ticking off guests and destroying one is a stupid way to go.

I don't see how you can count it as an e ticket if it isn't a ride, it's transportation. Now the one in disneyland like you said could be counted as one because its counted as a ride.

 

[DDLand]

Without having experienced it how can you tell for sure whether it was an e ticket or not. I also think they could've refurbed it. Horizons has that Epcot center theme with it. Soarin and test track only a little bit. Horizons was really what epcot was about. I think Disney could've done something with it, instead we got the mission space which isn't bad I like it but I wish I would've gotten to experience horizons once.

I'm with you. It's sad... I wish somehow all Disney attractions were accessible.

Just from reading around and trying to interpret what it was. People were saying it didn't have the draw to be an E-Ticket. Like you accurately point out I can't know for sure otherwise.

I think they were going to have to rebuild the building from the ground up. I also remember ADA compliance being a problem and prohibitively expensive.

Indeed. Just once would've been nice.

 

[DDLand]

I don't see how you can count it as an e ticket if it isn't a ride, it's transportation. Now the one in disneyland like you said could be counted as one because its counted as a ride.

Here's what my thinking was with that call. E-Ticket attractions were the biggest draws at Disneyland.(of course you know that) They were the type of attractions that made people's day, and shaped their perception of the entire property.

While what you're saying is accurate because it is a real transportation system, I think that it meets the E-Ticket criteria. Walt Disney World Monorail System is a draw and a definitive experience.

Hey, if we want to get technical we could also argue that since it goes inside Epcot it kind of qualifies right?

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Just a few things for brevity...

First,
Horizons wasnt an "e ticket"...what it was was a classic Disney story attraction with animatronics and omnimover...
but to many it represents the classic EPCOT "ideal"...and people long for that 70s/80s vision. Much like my hometown Steelers are revered as gods because they were great when the mills were shutting down...it was both a tie in and an escape.

It also doesn't help that mission space isn't a hit...and is
Just sitting there on a long wait for an eventual replacement...and everybody knows it.

Second, you're nuts if you think the monorail is the "cheap" form of transportation.
It never was...Disney has never claimed it was...internally the numbers never said it was... Neither from an upfront, operational, or maintenance perspective. The belchers are much cheaper...and would be moreso longterm if they went to cng or a cheaper/more efficient drive system...

That is why they are remiss to put more than the minimum dollars into them and the NTSB even went as far as saying so...

So they're paying for carpets? Have you smelled those things recently? Do you know what mold in a swamp and humidity does to carpets soaked with coke products?

Lol...not exactly a "50 year endorsement" of the "highway in the sky"

 

[Tonka's Skipper]

Disney will always have the monorail, its a icon like the castle.

The future will bring a expanded monorail and/or a light rail/pod system. The new monorails and light rail/pods system are a lot cheaper to build and provide excellent service just like the monorail did until about 10 years ago when the trains out lived their service life and maintenance was held off. (they have being doing more the last 3 years, but the Bombdier (spl?) trains were never as good as the earlier trains)

Buses are not as cheaper as people think, however they are flexible. The pods may prove to be the major transportation system in the future, flexible, fast and since its mostly grounded, not that expensive.....time will tell.

As to the parks being expanded, plenty of room and space, with and without removal of the stuff around the parks, everything can be changed.

AKK

 

[sachilles]

I still think the transportation related project at the race track will be very telling.

A north entrance is a very intriguing thing. I had assumed it was a north entrance to the current main lot. I think there are many possibilities. I do think the intent has always been for folks to come in the front, see the castle like an opening movie sequence. I think you could still have a an alternate lot north of the seven seas but west of the park, it could give you access to the front entrance as well as anything in the back. Coming in by the train station near the barnstormer could be one option, coming in by boat around Tom Sawyer Island also could work, or both. You just have your gate outside the current boundries of the park.
I did a quick sketch, to show what I mentioned above about a small move of the transportation center. It could be worked to include fort wilderness, but doing that would effectively eliminate whatever theoretical resort could end up on the peninsula.
Certain its far easier to make in MS paint than it is in real life. Changing it in any way would indicate a longer term commitment to the current monorail technology. It would also be a good time to do any major change to the technology. Either way there would be down time. Very much a flight of fancy on my part.

 

[sachilles]

Of course this is a complete reach. If I was king for a day, I might have developed the Peninsula as is with no change to the Monorail as Downtown Disney/Disney springs. It would give the logical pedestrian mall to connect the Poly, Wilderness Lodge, Contemporary and the MK. Central to the water shows, fireworks, everything. It would be your gateway gift shop.

 

[DDLand]

I still think the transportation related project at the race track will be very telling.

A north entrance is a very intriguing thing. I had assumed it was a north entrance to the current main lot. I think there are many possibilities. I do think the intent has always been for folks to come in the front, see the castle like an opening movie sequence. I think you could still have a an alternate lot north of the seven seas but west of the park, it could give you access to the front entrance as well as anything in the back. Coming in by the train station near the barnstormer could be one option, coming in by boat around Tom Sawyer Island also could work, or both. You just have your gate outside the current boundries of the park.
I did a quick sketch, to show what I mentioned above about a small move of the transportation center. It could be worked to include fort wilderness, but doing that would effectively eliminate whatever theoretical resort could end up on the peninsula.
Certain its far easier to make in MS paint than it is in real life. Changing it in any way would indicate a longer term commitment to the current monorail technology. It would also be a good time to do any major change to the technology. Either way there would be down time. Very much a flight of fancy on my part.

Good rendering! That's probably the best place place for the second parking lot if they ever decided to do that.

I think there's a misunderstanding with all the confusing talk of a second entrance. What they're saying is not a different entrance to Magic Kingdom Park, but an entirely new entrance to the property. You know the main gate at the end of World Drive? Just like that. I haven't seen anyone say that there's plans for a new entrance like International Gateway for MK. That would be interesting though. I expect Main Street USA to be the only entrance to MK for a long time.

 

[wallrock]

For most, it's futuristic. It still stands as a model for better mass transit, and few have adopted it. Considering the vast majority of people coming to Disney World never ride a monorails it still is unusual and in many ways futuristic. Cars with batteries have been around for quite some time. Doesn't mean they aren't futuristic.

A matter of interpretation. 'Futuristic' implies something related to, well, the future. When something has been around for half a century any sort of futuristic implications don't hold water in my book.

The best you can come up with is lubricant? Not like the buses need motor oil. Look up all the damage oil coming off cars does to the environment, and you may change your mind.

Lubricant was an example. I haven't put forth a green for green comparison between the transportation methods, just stating that the monorail is far from carbon free.

Diesel busses that have to stop at lights, Idle, and kneel are not nearly as efficient as the all electric monorail system.

You're right. Monorails never stop or sit idle.

What? I said "it's not pretty" when it goes down. Ehh, I don't think you get it. If you're saying that this proves the monorail is unreliable, that's hogwash. All mass transit systems are faced with occasional delays, and outages. The Walt Disney World Monorail System is exceptionally reliable. Especially compared to the atrocious WMATA from my area.

I never stated that the monorail was unreliable, but it is indeed more of a logistical pain when one goes down in comparison with a bus.

The Walt Disney World Monorail System services 100,000+ people daily. It's a real transportation system. Period. Idle, kneel, stop and wait in traffic. This is why monorail is more efficient.

It's a transportation system that services only a fraction of the guests, all of which have alternatives to get to those same destinations. And to some of the other comments, does it 'service' 100K per day? Or perhaps a percentage of those just ride it for fun? It's still more of an attraction than a transportation system.

Not true. Just because Disney up until this point has not decided it suits their needs to expand does not condemn the whole system. Continuing to maintain, and operate a line is different then sinking a couple 100 million into expansion. It's not like there's a race against time where Disney must build or it's all over. Nonsense.

It will never suit their needs to expand the system. Again it's about the dollars, and Team Mickey can't extract them from you while you're on board and Burbank has to spend too many of them on the monorail whether it be expansion or maintenance.

You have to remember why people pay the ticket prices. It's for the experience. The monorail is part of that experience, and I'd argue is competitive towards buses as well. Some people are more scared of Burbank then they should be. Relax, they're not going to start destroying the monorail for laughs. The Disneyland one has spared the knife despite being almost pointless. (It's actually a ride)

Many attractions are part of the experience yet Disney shuts the doors on them. The monorail is no different. And if recent behavior is any indication, the 'fear' of Burbank that you mention - assuming you are referring to any potential, or should I say further, slashings in Orlando - is certainly warranted. Unless of course you don't count the recent closing of attractions while continuing to send prices into the stratosphere. And speaking of Anaheim, that's a whole different animal. Disney pays attention because the devotees there speak with their wallets.

I think you're underestimating the emotional attachment. Part of the draw to that glorified toaster oven is the monorail. Period. People ride the monorails sometimes even when it's faster to walk because it's just so fun. People love the look of the Learjet snake gliding into the station. People love when they're underneath and they pump their arm and they get horn blast in return. These things make guests days. I've seen it many times. It's absolutely a symbol of Walt Disney World that people love.

Once again it isn't about the guest's emotional attachment. Disney has done away with attractions in the past that had strong emotional attachment and didn't bat an eye.

It's an E-Ticket. The only other verified case of an E-Ticket closure was Rocket Rods. Besides that 0. Disney is all about profiting from an experience, ticking off guests and destroying one is a stupid way to go.

Another matter of interpretation. You say it's an E-ticket and I don't. When there's a four hour wait to ride it just for the sake of doing so then I might agree with you. Disney profits when you swipe your credit card (or magic band) in the giftshops - that's always been the cornerstone of profitability in the parks. I'll play my record from an earlier post - the monorails don't dump you into a giftshop and there's no merchandising potential. Don't think that guests were ticked off when 20K closed? Mister Toad's Wild Ride? Turning half of Future World into a ghost town? The masses still marched through the entrance gates regardless. The devoted fans won't fold up their tents and refuse to come back if the monorail goes away. Back to Anaheim - the fans would probably do it there.

The common denominator here is that Disney's behavior over the past decade and a half with Orlando has been about maximizing profitability with the least amount of investment, and it works. If it doesn't separate you from your money it's a candidate for removal - if the opportunity presents itself. The arguments I hear in favor of the monorail are valid, but I look at behavior and things that Disney is doing and not what I want to happen. They have larger capacity boats going from the resorts to the Magic Kingdom than in the past, they now have a bus route between the three resorts serviced by the monorail, the current system has been around for 25 years with only minor tweaks to keep the thing running. Fifteen years ago mold, stained carpets and rust would have been taboo. Today it's acceptable. I don't think the closure is going to happen tomorrow, but when the time comes to replace the core mechanics - and that time will come - I think you'll see them discontinued.

 

[wallrock]

Yes, but would they have been able to do so economically over the long term?

I guess you'll have to define the scale of economics you're referring to. From an outsiders' perspective with little insight into how Disney spends (or doesn't spend) it's money I'd say there would be a financial hiccup, but one that can be easily addressed with a park admission price increase. I'm not being funny with that - both you and I know they would do it.

We aren't discussing the overall cost of a monorail system across the campus, just the cost of running the existing lines. The cost to put in a monorail line is likely many many millions per mile. That's not what we are discussing. We're discussing the ongoing costs of the existing system vs. a combination of boats + ferries + buses.

I think we may be drifting from the subject - I don't think the discussion was comparing the existing monorail system to the rest of the transportation options combined. It's about addressing what impacts there would be to the three resorts serviced by the monorail. The only destination that is truly impacted by the monorail is from those three resorts to Epcot - everything else is by either bus or boat as its primary source or an alternate. The cost of maintaining the monorail versus addressing that base need I bet are not very far off.

Ninety percent of the guests that stay *on-site* stay in resorts that aren't serviced by a monorail. Those many thousands of cars in the parking lot, which add up to several resorts worth of guests, are currently all serviced either by the monorail or by the ferry system (and perhaps a few by the boat to the Poly if they chose to walk over to the Poly dock and take the small boat launch).

I'm not following you here. Are you implying that the parking lot by the TTC is filled with cars driven by guests from other onsite resorts?

Buses are slow to load, slow to unload, and clunky as DDLand has already pointed out. Some of my *worst* experiences and longest waits at WDW were waiting on buses. The monorail, by contrast, has always been fast and efficient, at least in our experience.

Again this is a personal experience. I'm not discounting the negative aspects of it, just stating that Disney is more focused on which one is costing them more. Your transportation experience may have been bad, but did it stop you from spending money?

I think it might be best for us to agree to disagree.

I would, however, be interested in why exactly you think the monorail is more expensive to operate than a combination of ferries + boats + buses.

No argument here. Differing opinions are always welcome. On the expense I'll refer back to my earlier comment about what true impact the absence of the monorail would be on transportation, and not a combination of all transportation options. To counter, I would be interested in your earlier comment about the six to one ratio on bus vs monorail drivers. I think what's forgotten is the staff required to maintain the monorails outside of mechanics and drivers. Ever count how many castmembers are at each monorail stop? How often the shift changes are (I personally don't know)? How many are in traffic control? How many are dedicated to maintaining the track? There's more than a driver and a mechanic to address.

 

[Misthunter210]

The area that sachilles marked was my prime real estate for future expansion. I'm not suggesting that they would use it all but for another large "land" type area, it would be a great area.