Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Monorails, light rail, people-movers and boats are all environmentally friendly. Disney is a green company when it is convenient to be so, just like every other company.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost They are pressure proof. They only run buses on their own property with the exception of the Airport buses. They do not need to conform to anyone's standards. Buses are expensive and they have a planned life in years rather than mileage. In Florida where there is no snow, ice or corrosive materials. RTS buses are built to last forever. Now at some point they may be retro-fitted to use other fuels but if you think the buses smell bad now, wait until you get a whiff of Bio-fuels. Less pollution but, in my opinion, foul smelling. There is always a trade-off!
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << Monorails, light rail, people-movers and boats are all environmentally friendly. >> 3 out of 4 are. Boats are not environmentally friendly. Fuel consumption on boats is horrible, usually in the neighborhood of 3 to 4 miles per gallon. When you can load a ton of people on a ferryboat it gives you the mass transit scale to justify the inefficiency of the propulsion system, but boats are generally not very efficient forms of transport compared to other transit systems.
Originally Posted By MPierce UPS had a fleet of clean burning tractor trailers that ran on natural gas, but they really lacked the power needed to pull heavier loads. Their package deliver cars were a little better, but again you have to be set up to fuel natural gas, and it no longer is a cheap alternative. Right before I retired they had just introduced some new miracle engine, and they seemed quite taken with it. I really can't remember what it ran on, but it was suppose to be very efficent. I believe they were doing experimental trials with it either in California or New York. I believe they still run a small electrical fleet in New York, but I don't know much about them either. At present they are phasing out their regular diesel fleet, and going with a more fuel efficent, envirometal friendly disel engine.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj The only truly revolutionary "alternative" fuel is electricity. Electric vehicles are, on average, ten times more efficient than any vehicle with a combustion engine.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost It is really too bad that they didn't expand on the idea of the People Mover. It was way less expensive then the monorail and because it had very few moving parts it is like the energizer rabbit...it keeps going and going and going.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> The resort is looking closely at replacing the diesel buses with either a clean fuel or all-electric fleet. They should make a decision this year and start to bring them online next. I suspect the resort will opt for a biofuel or gas which will be more reliable than electric. << Wow -- first I've heard of this rumor. I hope something happens in the bus area. I would still vote for something electric. There would be something very special about buses in traffic that not only didn't generate smoke or smell, but that were SILENT.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> I predict that post #30 will make ssWED a very happy man. << And you would be right....
Originally Posted By plpeters70 For some really neat, and some supposedly in development, ideas for futuristic transportation systems, you should check out the following site: <a href="http://faculty.washington.edu/~jbs/itrans/" target="_blank">http://faculty.washington.edu/ ~jbs/itrans/</a> Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Disney decided to be a leader in cutting-edge transportation technology once again? WDW should be a showcase for how cities around the world can transform their transportation systems. You know, that EPCOT ideal that WDW is supposed to be functioning under.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> "collective wisdom" is a driver for mediocrity << How true. When new and special things happen in this world they are usually because of visionary leadership. People who make things happen because of their vision about what is a good and right thing. IF they can get someone to fund their vision. And when that leader someday goes on to their great reward, the company is left behind for the "more sensible" business majors to run. Let the ROI statements begin.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Disney decided to be a leader in cutting-edge transportation technology once again? << One reason we have monorails at all is because Walt simply discovered the notion on a European trip. (working on memory on this...) He was taken with the apparent value, correctness, and simplicity of the transportation solution, and wanted to make them work in the US. I'm sure he wasn't thinking of ROI that early. I can only imagine if someone like Walt were still in charge today that some sort of PRT system might be considered a great thing to demo in a big way at WDW. PRT is effectively raised track "monorail." On-demand, point-to-point transportation for small groups. No transfers necessary. Like an automated cab service. There would have to be sidetracks and such so that some cars would be stopping to dropoff or pickup, and others would be bypassing on their way to their own destinations. Computers would run the whole thing. No drivers.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Computers would run the whole thing. No drivers.<< The now failed automated luggage system at Denver International Airport would suggest that such a system is much harder to implement than what one might think. In the Denver system each piece of luggage was to be placed into an individual cart and be routed automatically to the right location (check-in to plane, plane to plane, plane to luggage claim). The system was a disaster and could never be made to work. The most spectacular problem was that the luggage carts would crash into each other at high speed. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but consider how long it takes to certify that something as simple as a roller coaster is safe. I think that such a system is beyond the abilities of Disney's imagineers. IIRC, one of the reasons the Las Vegas monorail was late and ran over budget were problems debugging the system's computer software.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Also when people lives are at stake, I want the chance for human intervention from the monorail captain....... ( did we not learn from the SImpson's monorail episode - LOL ! )
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>Also when people lives are at stake, I want the chance for human intervention from the monorail captain.......<< Some of the luggage cart crashes in Denver were so intense that the luggage wound up completely mangled. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/27/national/27denver.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=55c1a4d8ddb7988a&ex=1282795200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss" target="_blank">http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08 /27/national/27denver.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=55c1a4d8ddb7988a&ex=1282795200&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss</a>
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Yes... as was mentioned before monorails were existing technology in Europe. As far as I know there is not a PRT system operating anywhere in the world. I don't think you want to use WDW tourists to test a totally new transit concept.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << Yes... as was mentioned before monorails were existing technology in Europe. As far as I know there is not a PRT system operating anywhere in the world. >> West Virginia University uses a PRT system to connect its downtown and Evansdale campuses in Morgantown, WV. I used to ride it everyday when I was a grad student there.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> I'm not saying that it can't be done, but consider how long it takes to certify that something as simple as a roller coaster is safe. I think that such a system is beyond the abilities of Disney's imagineers. << I did not mean to suggest that driverless is easy. What I was pointing out was that PRT systems would feature driverless transportation. Obviously a point-to-point system with small cars couldn't all have their own drivers and be financially sensible. I may be dating myself a little, but do you remember when elevators used to have operators? Even when it just involved pressing the buttons? Well, they don't anymore.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy I don't know what the problems were with the Denver airport luggage system. Probably a lot of things, including the software. But I'm guessing a big cause was that it needed to be high speed, the switching and loading mechanisms were complex, and luggage is all different sizes and weights. I would expect a PRT system to not have as many of these variables. --------------------------- Did you know that the monorails at Tokyo Disney are driverless? (Yes, there relatively few trains, and there are no switch tracks) --------------------------- >> did we not learn from the Simpson's monorail episode? << < chuckle >
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> as simple as a roller coaster << Methinks you oversimplify. A roller modern coaster is nowhere near a simple thing.
