Disney Skyliner (Gondola Transportation System) Read Post 1 Now Open!

[NicolaUK]

It is not. It's gondolas.

Is that confirmed or just speculation?

 

[NicolaUK]

Putting aside the fact the people have said it's a gondola, the station shape any layout makes much more sense for a gondola then a pod system.

Looks remarkably similar to what UltraPRT were doing in India http://www.ultraglobalprt.com/wheres-it-used/amritsar-india/

 

[rteetz]

Is that confirmed or just speculation?

The Sentinel confirmed it with Reedy Creek.

 

[DanBoris]

Looks remarkably similar to what UltraPRT were doing in India http://www.ultraglobalprt.com/wheres-it-used/amritsar-india/

There isn't enough detail there to make a comparison, that only shows the layout of the system, for the gondola system we have more details of the size, shape and location of each station. This station placement wouldn't make as much sense if it was for a pod system. Anyway, as we have said a number of times, people familiar with the project have said it’s a gondola.

 

[joelkfla]

What you guys are calling pods are technically PRT, for Personal Rapid Transit. I would love to see PRT, but the permits appear to include turning stations, and a PRT system doesn't need turning stations: the track just curves.

PRT would be more appropriate to replace the Resort Monorail loop, but it might not have the capacity, and I don't think today's Disney would risk going out on the limb for a mostly untested technology.

 

[NicolaUK]

It's been in use at Heathrow since 2011.

 

[joelkfla]

It's been in use at Heathrow since 2011.

It is the only modern PRT system in operation with more than 2 stations, and it has a simple layout and a small number of vehicles. The manufacturer has not convinced anyone else to install a system in the past 5 years, and the proposed expansion at Heathrow is currently on hold (not due to operational problems, just a lack of capital.)

 

[EastYorkDisneyFan]

It is the only modern PRT system in operation with more than 2 stations, and it has a simple layout and a small number of vehicles. The manufacturer has not convinced anyone else to install a system in the past 5 years, and the proposed expansion at Heathrow is currently on hold (not due to operational problems, just a lack of capital.)

There is also the Morgantown PTR at university in the US.

 

[joelkfla]

There is also the Morgantown PTR at university in the US.

Yes, but it's not a modern PRT; it uses 70's technology very different from what's being promoted now.

And while it's called PRT, it doesn't really operate as one, because it tries to group riders to the same destination together in one vehicle with more standing than seating space (Group Rapid Transit), or at other times runs as an ordinary people mover. True PRT gives each party their own personal vehicle, and runs nonstop to their destination.

GRT would also work great on the Resort Loop, but it's also not a mainstream technology, and I don't know whether anyone's marketing it.

 

[jknezek]

QUOTE="joelkfla, post: 57858595, member: 27217"]Yes, but it's not a modern PRT; it uses 70's technology very different from what's being promoted now.

And while it's called PRT, it doesn't really operate as one, because it tries to group riders to the same destination together in one vehicle with more standing than seating space (Group Rapid Transit), or at other times runs as an ordinary people mover. True PRT gives each party their own personal vehicle, and runs nonstop to their destination.

GRT would also work great on the Resort Loop, but it's also not a mainstream technology, and I don't know whether anyone's marketing it.[/QUOTE]


The resort loop is a loop, it doesn't need PRT or GRT or anything else. It is a loop with 5 large on/off points in close relationship to each other. It needs functional mass transport. A train is actually the correct solution, though I would wager a massive omnimover might work better rather than having the current static lines waiting for trains. Regardless, what the resort loop needs is a mass transit system that functions consistently every day with minimal breakdowns and massive capacity.

Now if you were going to expand away from the resort loop and include EPCOT, the other parks, other resorts, Disney Springs, etc., with multiple destinations not on a simple loop, that is when you look at PRT or GRT, though GRT already exists in the form of buses depending on how you want to stretch the definition of "rapid". However, so long as you are just discussing the Resort Loop, there is nothing wrong with the monorail except it doesn't work with the consistency needed and the capacity has become problematic.

 

[jknezek]

Alright, because I was curious. The people mover has 32 vehicles each seating 20 people. Those vehicles fit, almost continuously, on a 5484 foot track. So each vehicle takes up about 172 feet of track and carries 20 people. That's about 8.6 horizontal feet per person. It travels at 6.84mph on average.

Let's apply this information to the resort loop. The resort loop is roughly 3.5 miles long, or 18480 feet. You could convert this using the 8.6 horizontal feet per person of the people mover and get 2149 people, at a time, on the loop. Given an average speed of 10 mph, slightly faster for relatively long and gentle curved segments even supposing extra loading points at 2 mph, it would take around 21 minutes to go around the full loop (another benefit of using 10 mph is simple math!). So roughly 3 full loops an hour is an hourly capacity of 6447 people. Now, it's important to remember the people mover is only half as wide as a monorail, so using wider cars you could probably double that capacity to around 12,000 people an hour. Could you load that many per car given the length of the resort platforms? I would think it wouldn't be a problem at 2 mph.

So, at 12,000 people per hour, with the monorails running about 14.5 hours a day (30 minutes before park opening to 1 hour after) on a 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Magic Kingdom day, that is a daily capacity of 174,000 people. Total ridership of all 3 lines of the WDW monorail is 150,000, meaning this is more than enough capacity to replace both the resort and express loops. If you figure the Contemporary has 655 rooms, BLT 295 rooms, GF 867 rooms, Poly 864 rooms including DVC, and assume an average occupancy of 4 people, you get 10,724 people at those resorts. You could shift them all to MK within 2 hours (full capacity would suppose an equal number leaving the park, an unreasonable assumption in the morning).

For comparison purposes, the WDW monorail trains, are 203 feet long and carry 360 passengers maximum. So you get .56 horizontal feet per person. The PeopleMover cars are luxuriously spacious by comparison and could provide significantly more capacity. Now, is the PeopleMover the right choice? Probably not. I can imagine the maintenance requirements would be a bear with all those tires and engines. But it is interesting the capacity a system like the PeopleMover could provide over a long closed loop like the resort loop.

And with that, I'll close out this exercise in fantasy. I think we will see the next generation of WDW monorails within a few years with all the automation they have tested and incorporated, with such difficulty, into the current version. Although I also agree at some point they are going to have to do some serious beam maintenance.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Alright, because I was curious. The people mover has 32 vehicles each seating 20 people. Those vehicles fit, almost continuously, on a 5484 foot track. So each vehicle takes up about 172 feet of track and carries 20 people. That's about 8.6 horizontal feet per person. It travels at 6.84mph on average.

Let's apply this information to the resort loop. The resort loop is roughly 3.5 miles long, or 18480 feet. You could convert this using the 8.6 horizontal feet per person of the people mover and get 2149 people, at a time, on the loop. Given an average speed of 10 mph, slightly faster for relatively long and gentle curved segments even supposing extra loading points at 2 mph, it would take around 21 minutes to go around the full loop (another benefit of using 10 mph is simple math!). So roughly 3 full loops an hour is an hourly capacity of 6447 people. Now, it's important to remember the people mover is only half as wide as a monorail, so using wider cars you could probably double that capacity to around 12,000 people an hour. Could you load that many per car given the length of the resort platforms? I would think it wouldn't be a problem at 2 mph.

So, at 12,000 people per hour, with the monorails running about 14.5 hours a day (30 minutes before park opening to 1 hour after) on a 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Magic Kingdom day, that is a daily capacity of 174,000 people. Total ridership of all 3 lines of the WDW monorail is 150,000, meaning this is more than enough capacity to replace both the resort and express loops. If you figure the Contemporary has 655 rooms, BLT 295 rooms, GF 867 rooms, Poly 864 rooms including DVC, and assume an average occupancy of 4 people, you get 10,724 people at those resorts. You could shift them all to MK within 2 hours (full capacity would suppose an equal number leaving the park, an unreasonable assumption in the morning).

For comparison purposes, the WDW monorail trains, are 203 feet long and carry 360 passengers maximum. So you get .56 horizontal feet per person. The PeopleMover cars are luxuriously spacious by comparison and could provide significantly more capacity. Now, is the PeopleMover the right choice? Probably not. I can imagine the maintenance requirements would be a bear with all those tires and engines. But it is interesting the capacity a system like the PeopleMover could provide over a long closed loop like the resort loop.

And with that, I'll close out this exercise in fantasy. I think we will see the next generation of WDW monorails within a few years with all the automation they have tested and incorporated, with such difficulty, into the current version. Although I also agree at some point they are going to have to do some serious beam maintenance.

Thank you for doing the math and examining this

One question from me is cost ... would a People Mover type replacement for the monorail be cheaper than just redoing the monorails? Is there something unique/specific to the monorails that makes them so darn expensive vs other options? because isn't the issue with Disney not wanting to redo the monorails the cost and not because they don't like the monorail concept?

 

[jknezek]

Thank you for doing the math and examining this

One question from me is cost ... would a People Mover type replacement for the monorail be cheaper than just redoing the monorails? Is there something unique/specific to the monorails that makes them so darn expensive vs other options? because isn't the issue with Disney not wanting to redo the monorails the cost and not because they don't like the monorail concept?

I'll be honest. I have no idea. I suspect that neither system is cheap. Disney built a bespoke monorail system at the beginning, so now the trains they buy and any repairs they do are custom as well. That's always expensive. I'm guessing the gondola system was extensively vetted and found to be a cheaper alternative than anything else they could have done in that area. But it also is a much lower capacity area than the resort loop and TTC express monorails, even after SWE opens. DHS is not going to double in attendance, there simply isn't enough to do in that park they way MK can gobble up people. And let's not forget you can't actually park at MK...

I imagine that if they had to do it all over again, a monorail would not be the choice. Or at the very least, a more off the shelf monorail system would be a better choice. But at this point, it probably is very difficult to get rid of something that is symbolic of your parks, though I bet the lifespan of the beams will be the deciding factor for when the end comes. Rolling stock can be replaced with money, replacing beams means closing the system down.

 

[Roxyfire]

I'll be honest. I have no idea. I suspect that neither system is cheap. Disney built a bespoke monorail system at the beginning, so now the trains they buy and any repairs they do are custom as well. That's always expensive. I'm guessing the gondola system was extensively vetted and found to be a cheaper alternative than anything else they could have done in that area. But it also is a much lower capacity area than the resort loop and TTC express monorails, even after SWE opens. DHS is not going to double in attendance, there simply isn't enough to do in that park they way MK can gobble up people. And let's not forget you can't actually park at MK...

I imagine that if they had to do it all over again, a monorail would not be the choice. Or at the very least, a more off the shelf monorail system would be a better choice. But at this point, it probably is very difficult to get rid of something that is symbolic of your parks, though I bet the lifespan of the beams will be the deciding factor for when the end comes. Rolling stock can be replaced with money, replacing beams means closing the system down.

I think they definitely need to look into replacing the monorail, and perhaps they are. They need to find something where the cars/trains look similar enough that people won't have real legitimate complaints. People won't like it for sure, but it needs to happen. Changing over the Epcot line is probably the smartest thing to do. Put bus service in for the resorts that don't have it right now. Get it done right, and people will want that on the Resort/Express Loop too.

 

[danikoski]

I think they definitely need to look into replacing the monorail, and perhaps they are. They need to find something where the cars/trains look similar enough that people won't have real legitimate complaints. People won't like it for sure, but it needs to happen. Changing over the Epcot line is probably the smartest thing to do. Put bus service in for the resorts that don't have it right now. Get it done right, and people will want that on the Resort/Express Loop too.

The resort/express loop is in better structural shape. They cut corners on the build for the Epcot line that is literally leading to them crumbling. They will eventually have to shut that line down and rebuild. It's not really a matter of if, but when. And I still say the company making the gondola system also makes transport systems similar to the monorail. I would not be surprised if something is in the works.

 

[Roxyfire]

The resort/express loop is in better structural shape. They cut corners on the build for the Epcot line that is literally leading to them crumbling. They will eventually have to shut that line down and rebuild. It's not really a matter of if, but when. And I still say the company making the gondola system also makes transport systems similar to the monorail. I would not be surprised if something is in the works.

I hope so! And what gets people on board is a working, necessary proof of concept. Then if it's great, you'll have people on board for change. But it has to be done right. This corporate desire to shave the budgets thin (not just Dis but other companies too!) really irks me. Do it right, save money in the long term!

 

[sndral]

Alright, because I was curious. The people mover has 32 vehicles each seating 20 people. Those vehicles fit, almost continuously, on a 5484 foot track. So each vehicle takes up about 172 feet of track and carries 20 people. That's about 8.6 horizontal feet per person. It travels at 6.84mph on average.

Let's apply this information to the resort loop. The resort loop is roughly 3.5 miles long, or 18480 feet. You could convert this using the 8.6 horizontal feet per person of the people mover and get 2149 people, at a time, on the loop. Given an average speed of 10 mph, slightly faster for relatively long and gentle curved segments even supposing extra loading points at 2 mph, it would take around 21 minutes to go around the full loop (another benefit of using 10 mph is simple math!). So roughly 3 full loops an hour is an hourly capacity of 6447 people. Now, it's important to remember the people mover is only half as wide as a monorail, so using wider cars you could probably double that capacity to around 12,000 people an hour. Could you load that many per car given the length of the resort platforms? I would think it wouldn't be a problem at 2 mph.

So, at 12,000 people per hour, with the monorails running about 14.5 hours a day (30 minutes before park opening to 1 hour after) on a 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. Magic Kingdom day, that is a daily capacity of 174,000 people. Total ridership of all 3 lines of the WDW monorail is 150,000, meaning this is more than enough capacity to replace both the resort and express loops. If you figure the Contemporary has 655 rooms, BLT 295 rooms, GF 867 rooms, Poly 864 rooms including DVC, and assume an average occupancy of 4 people, you get 10,724 people at those resorts. You could shift them all to MK within 2 hours (full capacity would suppose an equal number leaving the park, an unreasonable assumption in the morning).

For comparison purposes, the WDW monorail trains, are 203 feet long and carry 360 passengers maximum. So you get .56 horizontal feet per person. The PeopleMover cars are luxuriously spacious by comparison and could provide significantly more capacity. Now, is the PeopleMover the right choice? Probably not. I can imagine the maintenance requirements would be a bear with all those tires and engines. But it is interesting the capacity a system like the PeopleMover could provide over a long closed loop like the resort loop.

And with that, I'll close out this exercise in fantasy. I think we will see the next generation of WDW monorails within a few years with all the automation they have tested and incorporated, with such difficulty, into the current version. Although I also agree at some point they are going to have to do some serious beam maintenance.

How does the People Mover option compare to the Monorail @ peak times? You mention that mornings have increased demand, closing right after the fireworks does as well & I'm curious whether either system has an advantage in moving a mass of people in a short amount of time v. the even flow the models predict.
Of course if the People mover replacement for the resort monorail loop did not stop at the TTC all those day visitors wouldn't be jamming the cars so that people staying at a monorail loop resort could actually ride the vehicles back to their resort at closing w/out having to share w/ the TTC bound people then I'd be 1000% for it, ah well, that's what boats are for, right?

 

[jknezek]

How does the People Mover option compare to the Monorail @ peak times? You mention that mornings have increased demand, closing right after the fireworks does as well & I'm curious whether either system has an advantage in moving a mass of people in a short amount of time v. the even flow the models predict.
Of course if the People mover replacement for the resort monorail loop did not stop at the TTC all those day visitors wouldn't be jamming the cars so that people staying at a monorail loop resort could actually ride the vehicles back to their resort at closing w/out having to share w/ the TTC bound people then I'd be 1000% for it, ah well, that's what boats are for, right?

That's hard to answer because it depends on the frequency of the monorails as opposed to a consistent flow from an omnimover system. The monorails, in my experience, at peak run about every 5-10 minutes on the Resort Loop. At 360 passengers per train, that is between 2160 and 4320 people per hour. As I noted above, an omnimover could have a capacity of 12,000 per hour but it is unlikely to happen. You would have to assume all seats are always filled all the way around the route, which is a stupid assumption at any time of day but especially at MK closing time.

The monorail platforms are a little longer than each monorail, so assuming you could use the same stations that's about 200 feet. Needing 4.3 horizontal feet per person, you could load about 46.51 people on all the cars fitting into the platform at any given time. Yes, I get the absurdity of .51 of a person, but we're just dealing with math here. The platform is 3.8% of a mile, so at 2mph it takes an omnimover vehicle 1.14 minutes to traverse the platform. So you can get 52 "loads" through the MK station in an hour. If the load is 46.51 people, that is 2,447 people loading from the MK station in an hour. Somewhere on the low end of the Resort Loop monorail capacity.

The advantage with the omnimover, of course, is that load rate goes up with the length of the platform, however the time to traverse goes up as well. You would need higher speeds on the loop to maintain the average 10mph I stated above. On the other hand, decreasing the horizontal feet per person by making the cars mostly standing room, like the monorail cars, would greatly increase capacity while making for a much less luxurious ride. In order to match the top of the monorail capacity, 12 trains in an hour, you would need to cut it down to maybe 2 to 2.25 horizontal feet per person. Still 4-5x as much horizontal space as a monorail car. You would have to have basically 8 across in the current PeopleMover configuration or you would have to cut down on the space between the vehicles or make them standing room only type cars. Alternatively you would need it go probably more than twice as fast, as you still have to maintain a 1.5-2 mph pace through the stations. With 5 200 foot stations that is about 18% of the total mileage of the resort loop. So to average 10 mph, you need to go 11.75mph the rest of the way, to go 20mph you need to go 24mph.

None of this replaces the express train either, so while you actually have more capacity with a single omnimover loop, it is difficult to take advantage of and probably at best a wash for peak strain leaving MK. In the mornings, with 4 loading platforms around the lake to take advantage of, the capacity would be amazing at getting people in to MK, but leaving from a single point is a constraint.

FYI... I did the math back of the envelop and pretty fast, so I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't quite right.

 

[joelkfla]

I find it highly unlikely that Disney would attempt to build an omnimover all the way around 7 Seas Lagoon. I've never seen any serious discussion of omnimover technology as real transit (at least not since Walt passed on.) If they were feasible, they would be installed in airports instead of automated people movers (APM for short.)

In the transit industry, people movers are lightweight automated vehicles running on a fixed guideway, usually on rubber tires but some move on rails. They're in use all around the world both as airport shuttles and urban transit (Miami & Jacksonville each have one.) It is well-proven technology and several companies (including Siemens) market turnkey off-the-shelf systems. They're generally cheaper to install than traditional rail because the guideways are smaller and subject to lesser forces.

IMO, if Disney opts to replace the monorail system rather than rebuild the failing beams and replace the rolling stock, an APM would be the most likely selection.

 

[disneynutz]

IMO the recent monorail system upgrades and testing indicate that they will be adding additional trains to the line.

Bill