Originally Posted By TP2000 Anaheim is building a streetcar line from the stadium/train station to the convention center, with two intermediate stops; at GardenWalk and the Fritz strip club near the freeway. They ran the numbers for the past few years with endless committee meetings, and quickly ruled out a dedicated bus lane service even though it was the cheapest option and could be easily modified or expanded in the future. Instead they went with the streetcar option for a few hundred million dollars more, because it's chic and "Like the ones they have up in Portland" according to the city council. It will have to operate at a huge public subsidy courtesy of the taxpayers for its entire lifetime. The buses in WDW are overcrowded, tired, and notably unglamorous. I noted recently that the last time I tried to do WDW without a rental car and was subject to bus travel there I felt like I had been cast as an extra on Jersey Shore, and it wasn't fun. But you have to recognize that Disney management in WDW is going with the cheapest and most efficient use of their transportation dollars by having a huge bus fleet. As un-hip and working class as they may be.
Originally Posted By TP2000 Correction: There are FOUR intermediate stops between the train station/Stadium stops and the Convention Center on the proposed Anaheim Street Car line. 1. The Denny's and Carl's Jr. at Katella/State College 2. The Fritz strip club at Katella/Lewis 3. The WorldMark timeshares off Haster 4. GardenWalk/Disneyland near Harbor What a way to go! Glamour! Style! Denny's! Lap dances!
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <All the talk of High Speed Rail is so much political boondoggle.> The talk of high speed rail is not usually for inter-city but intra-city, i.e. the way they do it quite successfully in Europe and Japan (and increasingly, China). Coast to coast probably doesn't make sense, but NY to DC certainly would. Hell, it's almost as fast to take Amtrak now, what with the hassle of getting to and from the airport at each end, and having to get to the airport early. High speed rail here would make most sense for those city-to-city routes where flying is a short hop (but a hassle) and it takes too long to drive. I'd love to have the equivalent of bullet trains from NY to DC (or Boston), or LA to SF.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I guess I'm an oddity. I don't mind the buses, in fact have always been very satisfied with them. They aren't glamorous, but they get me where I want to go and usually do it quite efficiently. Most times I don't have to stand... in fact there have been many times when my wife and I have been the ONLY people on the bus from our resort to the park. It is costly enough to run buses for two people... could you imagine the cost of trying to provide that type of service with monorails? Yes, at park closing there is a wait and the buses are jammed. But so are the monorails. But with the buses at times you get a driver who really does his best to keep the guests amused on the ride home instead of the same old pre-recorded schlock that you hear on the monorails. Anyone who thinks the buses at WDW are second-rate has never ridden one in a major city. They are GLORIOUS by comparison.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***<<Clearly you've never been to Japan.>> Except for the Tokyo monorail where else is there either a monorail or Peoplemover example? The Tokyo monorail exists only because it was the only solution for that route (and it was to show off the tech for the '64 Olympics)*** Off the top of my head, there's one in Chiba (might be a bad example though, I've been told it's a boondoggle), one driverless small train (not sure if it counts as "monorail" or "light rail" or what) I've been on many times in Yokohama, another I've seen in the Odaiba area, you've mentioned the ones in Osaka and China... None of these are the sort of system I'd imagine would work well moving millions, but at WDW that's not really the point, right?
Originally Posted By dagobert I loved the monorail at WDW and I hope it continues to run for several more years. Maybe they will modernize it in the future. The bus system worked also fine when we have been. And we didn't mind to interchange, since we are used to public transport systems over here. However I would like to see a light rail system, that was mentioned a few posts earlier, because I think they look great and they are efficient.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Hell, it's almost as fast to take Amtrak now, what with the hassle of getting to and from the airport at each end, and having to get to the airport early. High speed rail here would make most sense for those city-to-city routes where flying is a short hop (but a hassle) and it takes too long to drive. I'd love to have the equivalent of bullet trains from NY to DC (or Boston), or LA to SF.>> I don't think we are likely to see HST along the northeast coast any time soon. Acela already has something like 50% of the total passengers between DC and NYC and that runs on the existing infrastructure. However I suspect Amtrak in the northeast is just about the only place in the world where ever with tilting trains the service is slower than it was in the '60s due to competing railroads. Crazy. I've looked at using Acela a couple of times but have always been priced out of the service. Their price structure is archaic and doesn't seem to be flexible to adapt to competing options like air travel. Most of the time it seems easier and cheaper to fly from LGA to National. The current UK coalition is hellbent on building a new HST service from London to Birmingham (I think it is about 100 miles) and onwards to Manchester and Liverpool. The first phase is projected to cost £33bn due to the environmental impact issues that need to be resolved through the Chilterns. However it is absolutely necessary to upgrade that line to HST and try and take more cars off the road and reduce domestic air travel (Heathrow will receive a spur). I regularly travel between the southeast and Liverpool to see my football team play and the options are limited - and what limited train service there is is very expensive compared with driving.
Originally Posted By leemac <<None of these are the sort of system I'd imagine would work well moving millions, but at WDW that's not really the point, right?>> True but they still need to be able to shift several tens of thousands at peak time. Anyone that has to had to wait for a monorail at MK after parking closing knows that monorails aren't efficient at shifting those numbers. Monorails seem to be vanity projects by most cities. They seem to work in metro areas where there are alternative transportation options. Building those gigantic beams is not cost-effective and they are unsightly.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Anyone that has to had to wait for a monorail at MK after parking closing knows that monorails aren't efficient at shifting those numbers*** Well, sure, but those outdated trains are a joke, aren't they? I mean, you can't even stand up, the capacity must be awfully low (not to mention all the "waiting for clearance" garbage that holds up the show). I suppose WDW will limp along as it always has...it's nice to dream, though.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I don't think we are likely to see HST along the northeast coast any time soon" Nor do I, sadly. How delicious would it be if the proposed Anaheim to Vegas line were to show the feasibility of HSR in the US? I'm not holding my breath there either, but it would be delicious.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>How delicious would it be if the proposed Anaheim to Vegas line were to show the feasibility of HSR in the US?<< Speaking of boondoggles. If anything, this "project" has all the potential to set HSR back 100 years. I can't imagine a scenario where it doesn't lose spectacular amounts of money.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Speaking of boondoggles. If anything, this "project" has all the potential to set HSR back 100 years. I can't imagine a scenario where it doesn't lose spectacular amounts of money.>> XpressWest claims they will be profitable on a $89 fare. I just don't grasp how it will interconnect with the existing trainlines in LA. The HST line will terminate at Palmdale and Victorville which is entirely pointless as it still means LA County folks and those further south will need to connect via regional rail to Victorville. I have higher hopes for California High Speed Rail as a LA-SF route is probably the most viable in the nation. Going via Bakersfield and Fresno joins the dots but it will add a lot of mileage to the route.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Speaking of boondoggles. If anything, this "project" has all the potential to set HSR back 100 years. I can't imagine a scenario where it doesn't lose spectacular amounts of money.> Really? I saw a website a year or so ago (can't find it now) that was not written (AFAIK) by anyone involved in the proposal that was pretty dry but showed a potential for good ridership and profit. Though it argued that extending the HST to San Bernardino or Ontario would increase its chances for success. <I have higher hopes for California High Speed Rail as a LA-SF route is probably the most viable in the nation. > I think that one makes a lot of sense too.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Really? I saw a website a year or so ago (can't find it now) that was not written (AFAIK) by anyone involved in the proposal that was pretty dry but showed a potential for good ridership and profit.>> They are relying on converting the majority of SoCal visitors to Las Vegas into rail passengers. I think the numbers claim that constituent to be c.10m. I think approximately one quarter of all Las Vegas visitors come from SoCal - although that includes LA, OC, San Diego etc. They have two massive stumbling blocks: 1) Convincing folks to ride the rails rather than drive (I wager they won't be able to do that in sufficient numbers); and 2) Connect folks to Victorville as quickly as possible which will also be another tall ask. The drive to Las Vegas is manageable even in traffic so I'm struggling to see the conversion possibilities. LA-SF is far more viable as a longer route that is more susceptible to peak time road traffic.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <They are relying on converting the majority of SoCal visitors to Las Vegas into rail passengers. > Not the study I saw. They were pretty conservative on ridership numbers. Obviously, for this route to work, it has to be sufficiently faster than driving (including transfer time in Victorville) and reasonably priced - otherwise, you'd just drive. In that way, it's like NY to DC (about the same distance) and I agree that LA to SF would be a better route. I wish I could find the study.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>XpressWest claims they will be profitable on a $89 fare.<< Companies say the darndest things when they're after a few truckloads of tax money. >>They are relying on converting the majority of SoCal visitors to Las Vegas into rail passengers.<< Exactly. And this with very little convenient rail service into and out of LA County from points south. Here's a wacky idea: How about some sort of rail service to LAX? I mean, I know it's not as awesome as Vegas, and Lord knows we like for the 405 to have as many cars on it as possible, but by golly, it just might work!
Originally Posted By leemac <<it has to be sufficiently faster than driving (including transfer time in Victorville) and reasonably priced - otherwise, you'd just drive.>> Sadly I think even if it was quicker you wouldn't get SoCalers out of their cars. It is just too engrained into the psyche that the car is king. <<Here's a wacky idea: How about some sort of rail service to LAX?>> That is crazy talk. I've missed countless flights due to the vagaries of LA freeway traffic and I'd use it. The problem is that you can't get anywhere in LA without a car and so the link would only solve one aspect.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Here's a wacky idea: How about some sort of rail service to LAX? > I like the idea in theory - the Jamaica to JFK driverless train works great. In NY, they built the airport train along the median of the Van Wyk expressway, with just a little spur of "its own" into the airport. Does the green line in LA do that along the 105? Could they create a spur off the green line to continue to the airport? (Right now, I think they have a shuttle bus, which is what the old "JFK express" used to do, which never really worked.) Do they think (frankly) that people who don't live in the neighborhoods along the green line would be afraid to take it? Or could they build a light rail along the median of the 405 to connect to the west side? What makes sense to you?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Sadly I think even if it was quicker you wouldn't get SoCalers out of their cars. It is just too engrained into the psyche that the car is king.> It's possible it would compete with drivers per se. It would compete (potentially) with those who currently fly. I've flown from NY to LV, stayed a couple of days in LV and then flown from LV to LAX or OC a few times. I was amazed how many daily flights there were from LV to SoCal, and they were all packed. So there's a market for those who want to get there quickly. Obviously, the rail wouldn't be as quick as flying, so they'd have to find the sweet spot of "quicker than driving, cheaper (and/or less hassle) than flying." It's the same spot Amtrak has for NY - DC; what's weird there is it often isn't cheaper than flying (though sometimes just as fast).
