Originally Posted By crapshoot <<I assume that when people say "monorail" they actuall just mean some sort of elevated train, and not really an actual monorail.>> Here, check out this site. <a href="http://www.lvmonorail.com" target="_blank">http://www.lvmonorail.com</a>
Originally Posted By jonvn That's a nice site. Looks like the track might go 10 blocks. But the truth is, that monorail is not very practical. Vegas got these probably for cheap, and it's theme park like, so that's how they got a monorail. The only other city in this country that I can recall with a monorail system is Seattle, and that was built as part of a World's Fair. Real transit systems that are not designed by entertainment people, are not monorail based. This is why I say when people talk in general about monorail, they simply want elevated trackage for their rail transit system. It really is not important to a rider of a transit system what the trackage is like, except when the inconveniences of monorail come into play (like when having to evacuate a train).
Originally Posted By crapshoot <<But the truth is, that monorail is not very practical.>> Neither is the physical layout of the Strip and Off-Strip Properties. But when completed, the monorail will connect the Airport with the rest of the system. Also, it will venture west of the Strip in future planned expansions. But with the traffic snarls jamming the Strip, cross streets and I-95 Freeway most evenings and every weekend it is one of the best practical solutions at this time to get around the Miracle Mile (note: about five miles). There is no Master Plan for the Strip, other than to reduce congestion and add more hotel/casino properties. They were quite brilliant when the isolated the pedestrians from the autos with overwalks at the intersections and some intermediate locations as well. The next expansion boom is underway. It is great that they will be able to move conventioneers and tourists around to the most popular destinations and do it by reducing auto traffic and particulate matter, for that matter.
Originally Posted By thrillmountain jonvn is quite right about the cost of monorails..I live in Seattle and the city council has made lots of studies into extending the monorail system... almost all the studies discover that it will be more cost effective to build a whole new light rail system than to try to extend the monorail... --Richard
Originally Posted By EdisYoda I suggest that you check out this site regarding monorails as transportation systems: <a href="http://monorails.org/" target="_blank">http://monorails.org/</a> Also, the Las Vegas monorail being built, is not just 10 blocks but will ultimately be several miles long. Also, while the original short track used retired monorail cars from WDW, the new system is using newly built monorails based on the current WDW design, but automated, so there will be no need for a driver.
Originally Posted By ParrotHead I was just about to post a link to that very site! Obviously, the folks behind the site are biased. But it still provides good information about situations where monorails are, indeed, a viable and efficient means of transportation. In fact, I've been told that Disney's internal transportation studies have resulted in a recommendation that the monorail system be expanded. The short-term costs were high, but over the long-term it balanced out. But right now, the company is more concerned about the short-term. The plans I've heard rumored called for a new Transportation and Ticket Center (I'm not sure where it would be located) with monorail service to all four parks plus the Downtown Disney area.
Originally Posted By jonvn "Neither is the physical layout of the Strip and Off-Strip Properties." Doesn't have anything to do with it.
Originally Posted By jonvn Ok, I just looked at that site. It's not particularly well informed. What you would want is a grade separated rail system, if you want a rail system. The cheapest and most flexible are buses. I don't know what Disney's internal transportation studies have shown, but if they show monorail based transit as being cost effective, then it flies in the face of findings in other studys done. The only reason people even are discussing it is because it's what is at Disney. Like maglev, it's a bad technology in the real world.
Originally Posted By tangaroa >I don't know what Disney's internal >transportation studies have shown, but >if they show monorail based transit as >being cost effective, then it flies in >the face of findings in other studys >done. Studies done by who? Advocates of Light Rail systems?
Originally Posted By jonvn Done by transit agencies. One mentioned here is Seattle. People who make monorails also make can light rail vehicles. Basically, there are many cons to a monorail based system, and very few positives that allow it to win out over more conventional rail based systems. Switching, for one thing, is slow and time consuming. Emergency evacuation is another. There are reasons that there aren't any monorail systems in practical civic use in this country, while other rail systems get built. Monorails are very inflexible, and problematic. Check out this link, and what it says about monorails: <a href="http://www.soundtransit.org/reports/Transit" target="_blank">http://www.soundtransit.org/re ports/Transit</a>%20_Tech_Review.pdf It's the general attitude towards them, and why you don't find them being built.
Originally Posted By funnymanjake "Like maglev, it's a bad technology in the real world." Question, jonvn: I have only limited knowledge of the maglev. What makes it different from other rail systems, and why is it bad technology?
Originally Posted By jonvn It is profoundly expensive, for one thing. The other thing is that maglev trains can not transfer to existing types of rail equipment. Say if you have a bullet train type of operation that uses standard gauge railroad tracks. You can transfer a train like that at slower speeds to existing track, and it would be functional. You can't do that with maglev, and that makes it commercially not viable. The only way maglev would work is if you had devoted tracklines between two major destinations. But the thing is that there is no reason to do this if you can get trains that run on regular tracks to go those speeds anyway. So, this is why you don't see too much maglev anywhere, either.
Originally Posted By slaakker The monorail here in Vegas was not designed to move people to and from work which is why many mass transit systems are used. From what I have read in the local papers the prime reason for the monorail is to move people from one casino to the next and to move them to the multiple convention centers. Two of the largest ones are connected to the first phase with plans to connect Downtown and Cashman Field. Just think of all the people who can be moved by this monorail that would normally take a taxi. They will also, in the future connect it to the airport. Imagine getting off your plane and taking a monorail directly to your hotel. Also, from what I remember, the trains will be controlled by a computer with intervals of four minutes between them. I think they said eventually there will be upwards of 30 trains in use at a time. This is far different from any monorail system that I know of. But then again, I know what I read in the paper.
Originally Posted By funnymanjake "So, this is why you don't see too much maglev anywhere, either." Ah, I understand. Thanks much for the info.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Monorails are fun, but not all that practical. One thing that major transit systems to move people around it to interline several lines (that's running more than one line on the same alignment until you reach a point where the lines run on different alignments - LA's Metro Red Line does this...two lines run on the same tracks for about 6 stations until they split off). Steel wheel (whether heavy rail or light rail) switching is quick and easy. This makes interlining easy. If WDW wanted to have a flexible system for moving large numbers of people (and buses do NOT cut the mustard in terms of capacity), a light rail system would be a perfect alternative. Replacing monorails in WDW would be a bad idea, as monorails are a Disney staple, but creating a series of Light Rail lines with hubs around central areas (i.e., Ticket and Transportation Center, EPCOT, Downtown Disney, for example) with feeder bus lines to outlying areas would work wonderfully. That's the what was originally planned for the Los Angeles area (only one of the original lines got built - the Red Line - and only after changing the alignment to go through Hollywood) -- a five or six heavy rail system with feeder bus lines. It would have worked, but it never came about...we're still hoping though. lol
Originally Posted By ParrotHead The thing to remember is that the monorails are both transportation AND attractions. When you invest in them, you're getting more bang for your buck because of this. Buses certainly aren't attractions; they don't add to the ambience of the parks (in fact, I would argue that they take away from it), and they don't allow for a unique guest experience. I think this needs to be factored in when considering the costs. When I was a kid, seeing those "highways in the sky" above my head as my mom drove me onto WDW property elicited quite a sense of excitement in me. To this day, I still get a thrill out riding the monorails. That kind of experience is worth something, because it creates the kind of memories that keep people coming back to WDW again and again, even after they're adults. I've seen a lot of kids (and adults, for that matter) excited over riding the monorail, but very few excited over riding the bus.
Originally Posted By jonvn That makes the monorail an entertainment offering. There is nothing wrong with that. If that's what you want to look at, great. It's just not what you'd use for regular transit. In WDW, a light rail line would be much more flexible and practical. If desired, it could be placed on an elevated roadbed so it did not cross any roadways at grade. WDW is the size of a small city. If it's going to use rail transit, it kind of needs to use what is practical. Buses are the most practical. They can and do move millions of people every day. People enjoy riding rail lines more than taking buses. But rail lines are much more expensive to maintain, and if you misroute the thing, you're stuck with it.
Originally Posted By FigmentMI Jonvn, I suggest you dig a little deeper into the monorails.org site. Many of the arguments you make are countered there. I don't have enough intimate knowledge of transportation to vouch for their accuracy personally. But you will find that Japan has several transit monorails, and in fact there is a line in Japan that turns a profit. I don't think there are many strong arguments about the cost-efficiency of monorail, but monorails bring other important advantages that may outweigh the higher costs. I think that for many communities the advantages of monorail, such as a much less intrusive presence in the environment (through a smaller physical track presence, as well as less noise), would make it worth considering. After all, communities put in sidewalks, bike lanes, etc. even though they are not really "cost effective" either. Seattle voters approved a major extension to their monorail system to make it a true transit system, and even approved a tax increase to fund it. And don't quote me on this, but I believe the site you posted is a propaganda site for standard rail much as monorails.org is for monorail. -Figment
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Here is one article... <a href="http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/2001/Jul-24-Tue-2001/news/16605484.html" target="_blank">http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/ 2001/Jul-24-Tue-2001/news/16605484.html</a> >>Mayor Oscar Goodman told Congress on Monday that his Las Vegas public works wish list is topped by a Strip-to-downtown monorail, a project he touted as the biggest potential improvement to the city's quality of life. Goodman said the monorail would take traffic off the city's major thoroughfares, alleviating congestion and improving air quality. At the same time, he added, it would boost tourism and casino business. "Everything has an interrelated effect," he told a Senate public works subcommittee. "We have air quality problems, and EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) is looking at us very carefully. And all this comes about from traffic. I think we have to address the issue of traffic. We're the largest city in the United States that doesn't have a fixed-rail system. That's why it's so crucial that we have a monorail." << And here is another good link... <a href="http://www.nctransportation.com/Economics.html" target="_blank">http://www.nctransportation.co m/Economics.html</a> And here is a great report that deals with the Seattle expansion that shows that benefits do exceed costs, and that gives an economic return of 8.7% to the funds invested in the project! <a href="http://www.elevated.org/SPMAdocs/dbom/082602_Benefit-Cost_Analysis_Report_Final.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.elevated.org/SPMAdo cs/dbom/082602_Benefit-Cost_Analysis_Report_Final.pdf</a> And here is a report dealing with Montreal... <a href="http://www.arvox.ca/monorail/monorail-proposal.htm" target="_blank">http://www.arvox.ca/monorail/m onorail-proposal.htm</a> >>"We all recognize the urgency of the situation. The monorail project represents the solution that best suits today's and tomorrow's needs. The monorail has proven itself all over the world, in terms of its safety record and its protection of the environment. It also has the advantage of producing phenomenal economic benefits for both the southwest and the entire metropolitan area." notes Mr. Lavigne. Economic benefits...estimated at over $1 billion<<
