Drive with care, or else.

Originally Posted By danyoung

>I don't think it's a good thing. But, sadly, it is a necessary one.<

So I'm confused. Are you glad that there is a greater police presence on property, or mad that there's a need for one? Or both?

 

Originally Posted By ssWEDguy

>> So I'm confused. Are you glad that there is a greater police presence on property, or mad that there's a need for one? Or both? <<

I wish Walt would have had the chance to do the Epcot he wanted. He had planned for MANY more monorails and peoplemovers to connect things. Many more than we see now.

By doing this on-property vehicle traffic would be very reduced. You would have arrived for your vacation, parked your car at the TTC (Underground parking? Or at least covered parking?), and then left it there during the duration of your Disney visit.

As it is now, we have as much traffic on property sometimes as the rest of the world.

Sigh.....

 

Originally Posted By ssWEDguy

And buses -- Don't get me started about diesel buses again....

 

Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom

Underground parking in Florida isn't a good idea. As much as I LOVE monorails and people movers; given a choice between a monorail link between the resorts and TTC, EPCOT and DTD OR having MGM, DAK, Blizzard Beach and Typhoon Lagoon. I would take MGM, DAK, Blizzard Beach and Typhoon Lagoon. I'm not on property to ride monorails for a week. I am on property to visit the parks. Now that there are sufficient parks in place to warrant a week long stay, its time to focus on alternative fast, efficient and quiet modes of onsite transportation.

 

Originally Posted By pixiedust1

<<<12
Goofyernmost
Sun 4/9/2006 7:33a It's my belief that most of the speeding is by CM's. Tourists are usually looking for the exit they need and, although they move along, it wouldn't really be considered reckless.

I have seen numerous single occupancy vehicles weaving in and out of traffic at high speeds. I can't help but think that they must work there. >>

Hi.. I'm fairly new to the board, but doing a lot of reading since I joined.... And I know that some of you are CM's so please don't take offense to my husbands and my comments.. My husband and I read with interest this particular thread.. When I saw it, I included him because I knew he would have a comment...
We have been traveling to WDW for almost 25 yrs and my husband has done all the driving everywhere we go in WDW... we never ever take a bus and only ride the Monorail from the POLY to MK.. We are so happy to see the POLICE presense... and the security at all the resorts... these are diff times.. way back when you could go from park to park and resort to resort and never even be a guest... anyone could come and go .. we were always resort guests and drove anywhere we wanted, even areas that were off limits to guests.. hey, my husband said we are stockholders, I want to check out my holdings...LOL Driving has given us a clear view of who's speeding, and its cast members most of the time... weaving and flying around the tourists.. our last visit in March at POP Century we actually saw a cast member not nake the first curve coming in and cross the medium and went up the embankment and hit a tree... It was only a few years ago that Disney allowed the police to come and write tickets... I'm not sure when , but I'm glad they did... My husband wants to drive bus at Disney since he knows every square inch of the property.. LOL... Just our opinion....

 

Originally Posted By haiderodes

They have been doing patrol "blitzes" for years. Usually they are catching those cast members who hit upwards of 90 miles an hour approaching the MK tollbooth.

They would then give out copies of the reports. I remember having them on our tables in westgate (TTC breakroom) as a deterrant.

 

Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney

>I don't think it's a good thing. But, sadly, it is a necessary one.<

"So I'm confused. Are you glad that there is a greater police presence on property, or mad that there's a need for one? Or both?"

Both.

 

Originally Posted By ssWEDguy

>> I'm not on property to ride monorails for a week. I am on property to visit the parks. Now that there are sufficient parks in place to warrant a week long stay, its time to focus on alternative fast, efficient and quiet modes of onsite transportation. <<

You've got me confused. "It's time to focus on fast, efficient and quiet modes of transportation," but you don't have time for monorails or peoplemovers?

What are those? Chopped liver?

 

Originally Posted By fkurucz

^^^I think the implication is that having to wait for a slow bus or monorail is no fun, especially if you are impatient.

I have to admit, it bothers me a bit that the bus ride from the Pop Century to MK takes so long. But then, I am used to DLR where every is a stone's throw away.

 

Originally Posted By trekkeruss

<<its time to focus on alternative fast, efficient and quiet modes of onsite transportation. >>

<<<You've got me confused. "It's time to focus on fast, efficient and quiet modes of transportation," but you don't have time for monorails or peoplemovers?>>>

Light-rail would do just as good a job at moving bodies as the sexier monorail and peoplemovers, and it could be built for far less money. Disney could also phase in alternative fuel buses.

 

Originally Posted By ssWEDguy

I don't have a problem with light rail. I figure the Imagineers would "Disneyfy" it anyway.

 

Originally Posted By mrichmondj

<<< Light-rail would do just as good a job at moving bodies as the sexier monorail and peoplemovers, and it could be built for far less money. Disney could also phase in alternative fuel buses. >>>

So says the heavy construction industry, and transportation unions. Light rail is less expensive at initial construction by a small margin, but always more expensive in the operational phase. The cost of labor to operate light rail, lifetime maintenance costs, and liability exposure to injuries inherent in rail-at-grade systems always make them a more expensive proposition in the long run. Light rail systems very rarely operate at a profit. Monorail systems are operated worldwide on a for-profit basis.

I think Disney could slowly expand the monorail system over a 10 year period, and greatly enhance the transportation environment on their resort property.

 

Originally Posted By LuvDatDisney

^^Not to mention enhancing the quality of guest experiences and improving air quality and removing buses and cars from the roads. I doubt it'll ever happen.

 

Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom

Excellent point. I'm sold on the monorail.

 

Originally Posted By avromark

Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
Like a genuine,
Bona fide,
Electrified,
Six-car
Monorail!
What'd I say?

Monorail!

What's it called?

Monorail!

That's right! Monorail!

[crowd chants `Monorail' softly and rhythmically]

I hear those things are awfully loud...

It glides as softly as a cloud.

Is there a chance the track could bend?

Not on your life, my Hindu friend.

What about us brain-dead slobs?

You'll be given cushy jobs.

Were you sent here by the devil?

No, good sir, I'm on the level.

The ring came off my pudding can.

Take my pen knife, my good man.

I swear it's Springfield's only choice...
Throw up your hands and raise your voice!

Monorail!

What's it called?

Monorail!

Once again...

Monorail!

But Main Street's still all cracked and broken...

Sorry, Mom, the mob has spoken!

Monorail!
Monorail!
Monorail!

[big finish]

Monorail!

Homer: Mono... D'oh!

They should raise the speed limit to 90m/h htough

 

Originally Posted By trekkeruss

<<The cost of labor to operate light rail>>

How would the cost of labor be different?

<<lifetime maintenance costs>>

I will grant that track and roadbed would need more upkeep than a beamway.

<<liability exposure to injuries inherent in rail-at-grade systems>>

This isn't an urban situation like where most light-rail systems operate. Grade crossings could easily be worked around.

<<Light rail systems very rarely operate at a profit. Monorail systems are operated worldwide on a for-profit basis.>>

Disney wouldn't be installing a monorail or light-rail to generate a profit. I also doubt that monorails are more profitable because they are superior technology; rather, it's where they are that allows them to turn a profit. Light-rail, on the other hand, is commonplace in many parts of the world... and likely subsidized by goverment as necessary for low-income citizens.

Don't get me wrong... I am definitely not against a monorail. Far from it. I am merely putting on the pragmatic hat, and thinking about what Disney what direction Disney would more likely take.

 

Originally Posted By trekkeruss

<<I am merely putting on the pragmatic hat, and thinking about what Disney what direction Disney would more likely take.>>

Edit, please!

 

Originally Posted By mrichmondj

<< How would the cost of labor be different? >>

Driverless monorails are common in many parts of the world.

There is also less maintenance personnel required.

<< This isn't an urban situation like where most light-rail systems operate. Grade crossings could easily be worked around. >>

I would say it is a worse situation -- lots of people driving around who are from out of town, unfamiliar with the area and with kids in tow to distract them.

<< Disney wouldn't be installing a monorail or light-rail to generate a profit. >>

No, but they need the least expensive transportation solution to ensure that WDW remains profitable. To that end, the busses will probably be around for a very long time before any monorail expansion ever takes place, if ever.

 

Originally Posted By ssWEDguy

>> busses will probably be around for a very long time before any monorail expansion ever takes place <<

Ok -- if only the buses were quieter and run cleaner than what the rest of the world uses. Wouldn't it be great to at least have electric buses running on fuel cells?

 

Originally Posted By SuperDry

It would seem to me that if a monorail was cheaper in the long run than operating busses, Disney would have already done it. The up-front cost doesn't matter much to a company like Disney. They can just issue corporate bonds to pay for it, and if the operating cost of the monorail was cheaper than the current bus system, they'd save money from Day 1. The fact that this hasn't been done and in fact seems to be completely off the table tells me that a monorail solution would be far more expensive than the current busses (as much as I hate the busses).

Regarding monorails being cheaper than ground-based rail transport, as others have pointed out, this has a lot to do with the urbanness of the setting. Two reasons why monorails are more cost effective in an urban setting is that they take up less land, and disrupt traffic less. Neither of these are issues at WDW.