Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Peoplemover from new parking structure?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Peoplemover from new parking structure?

    I went to the park for the first time in five months yesterday and saw the progress of the new parking structure. There were three or four levels where the ends were rounded with a similar diameter to the loading area of the peoplemover. Does anyone know if that is the plan with this new lot? Personally I think that’d be a much better and efficient way to transport people to the park.

  • #2
    Nope, there will just be a sky bridge to Downtown Disney. They're not even willing to pay for a moving walkway.

    Comment


    • #3
      Efficient way to transport people to the park ? Good Old -wait in line- Tram System !
      Soaring like an EAGLE !

      Comment


      • #4
        It'd be a great idea and just about everyone would like it but it costs money and doesn't provide a huge return on the investment so it'll never happen.

        It's really sad what the Disney company has become these days.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by micromind View Post

          It's really sad what the Disney company has become these days.
          $$$$$""""$$$$$ running fewer trams-does not help.
          Soaring like an EAGLE !

          Comment


          • #6
            I know it wouldn't be glamorous, but those automated airport tram systems are very efficient, as well as accommodating to strollers and wheelchairs. While it'd be a huge initial investment, it'd seems like it'd have to pay off long term. It'd kinda baffled me why they've never done this.
            Does anyone even bother with signatures anymore?

            Comment


            • #7
              The only problem with the moving walkways is when they stop working. DL would have to build a walkway adjacent to the moving walkway for those instances incase maintenance takes longer than an overnight to repair. Fortunately the escalators for the M&F have some redundancy built into the way they are set up so when one is down you can go to the next one and just take stairs one floor up or down to get to yours.

              Like many have said thought the cost would make it a gift to guests versus a profit sector. DL does not invest in gifts. Now make it part of the FP program and then they may be interested or have it an upcharge like prefferred parking, if there is a nickel to be made they'll consider it.
              Last edited by Starcade; 11-06-2018, 12:35 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Starcade View Post
                The only problem with the moving walkways is when they stop working. DL would have to build a walkway adjacent to the moving walkway for those instances incase maintenance takes longer than an overnight to repair.
                This would be true of a Peoplemover system as well. I think this is the biggest hangup for building some automated transport system: you would still need a backup system capable of handling the capacity.

                ​​​​​​
                any have said thought the cost would make a it a gift to guests versus a profit sector. DL does not invest in gifts. Now make it part of the FP program and then they may be interested or have it an upcharge like prefferred parking, if there is a nickel to be made they'll consider it.
                i don't think money has as much to do with it as people think. There are a lot of logistical problems that such a system would create that would need to be solved. Capacity is the biggest one as DL is unique in needing upwards of 10,000 people per hour moved to the esplanade early in the day and far less in the afternoon. You would need a system that is scalable and reversable. The old Tomorrowland PeopleMover did less than half of that. I remember reading somewhere that the current trams have a capacity of around 7,000-8,000 per hour, and already have a hard time keeping up. So you need a large system, but also one that doesn't take up too much space due to DL's size constraints.

                There's also some other weird issues that would need solving. Is it a ride or is it transportation? If it's transportation is it free? If it's free what prevents people from clogging the system just for fun? If you charge for it and require admission, do you need to move the ticket booth or put it behind a paywall of some kind?

                And what about all the poor tram drivers that would be out of a job due to automation? I'm sure the union would have some issues with this plan as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  ^While I don't have actual numbers, I'd have to believe the automatic tram systems at airports have to be pretty high in capacity. Certainly more than our old Peoplemover. These are bigger, and faster to load with greater numbers of people, and, again, don't need any special accommodations for strollers or wheelchairs, which often take up so much of the tram's time. As far as a backup system, I don't see why there can't be a walkway parallel to the tracks, or even keeping the current tram roads the way they are as a back up.

                  As for "is it a ride or transportation", who really cares? Isn't the monorail at WDW free to ride (assuming you pay for the parking)? And I believe the upcoming Skyway gondola systems (again, at WDW) are going to be free to ride (again, assuming you've paid for parking). I mean, right now, the current Disneyland parking tram is a "free ride" if you want to think of it that way. Is it clogged with people who go just to ride it?

                  As for the tram drivers that would be out of work, while that is sad, and it's never fun to lose jobs, this is sometimes the price of progress. Autoworkers, newspaper printers, et al, have all lost some of their jobs to automation. In the greater scheme, they move on to other work, and new jobs are created in keeping the new system in place and operational.
                  Does anyone even bother with signatures anymore?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    IMO...I can not see WHY....anyone wants to come to Disneyland ,so they just ride on the TRAM........

                    System transportation ,to gate to the parks !
                    And Disney ,does need to run more TRAM's not fewer.....to operate and handling the capacity !
                    This all from the parking fee that guest pay !

                    Also preferred parking ,is noting more than a upcharge/CA$H GRAB........again IMO...it Wrong.........
                    Last edited by Eagleman; 11-05-2018, 11:06 PM.
                    Soaring like an EAGLE !

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      1. If a moving walkway breaks down, you can still walk on it.

                      2. The unions didn’t seem to be worried about losing jobs when they demanded a wage increase. And as far as the automated idea goes, as JesterMn said, sometimes people lose their jobs due to technological advances.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by JesterMn View Post
                        ^While I don't have actual numbers, I'd have to believe the automatic tram systems at airports have to be pretty high in capacity. Certainly more than our old Peoplemover.
                        Browsing Google I see a lot of 3000-4000 numbers quoted for Airport PeopleMover systems. And a note that says LAX may build one capable of 10,000 pph for about 5 billion dollars. For that kind of money I think I would rather have another park instead.

                        These are bigger, and faster to load with greater numbers of people, and, again, don't need any special accommodations for strollers or wheelchairs, which often take up so much of the tram's time.
                        A lot of airport systems I've been on were standing room only (with maybe a couple benches here and there). How would you mitigate the risk of people falling over? Would you put in safety restrictions on who could and could not ride? Would you rent wheelschairs at the station? You'd have to build a secondary system to handle special accomodations.

                        As for "is it a ride or transportation", who really cares? Isn't the monorail at WDW free to ride (assuming you pay for the parking)?
                        Slight difference between WDW's more remote location and the urban environment of Disneyland.

                        Disneyland parking tram is a "free ride" if you want to think of it that way. Is it clogged with people who go just to ride it?
                        But you're suggesting converting the trams to a Peoplemover system, simply because you think it would be fun to ride. And of you think it's more fun to ride a Peoplemover, what would stop the other ten thousand people going to Downtown Disney from hopping on too.

                        In the greater scheme, they move on to other work, and new jobs are created in keeping the new system in place and operational.
                        Sure, but in the mean time, the ability of the unions to engage in a massive campaign against Disney and the PeopleMover is just another notch in the column against such a project.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Good Old -wait in line- Tram System ....that all Disney going to do !
                          Disney is not spend money , were they do not have to .......................
                          Soaring like an EAGLE !

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Mastersarge View Post
                            1. If a moving walkway breaks down, you can still walk on it.
                            Yes but maintenance crews need access and often these can take more time then an over night repair. This is why a walkway adjacent to it is needed.

                            Ideally you'd have 3 or 5 belts going in parallel so the center (or center group) can be reversed during early morning and late evening to allow traffic flow to be better absorbed. Also if one belt goes down the others can take up the slack. Problem is space as this would have to be a rather wide straight (wish) system.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MrLiver View Post

                              Browsing Google I see a lot of 3000-4000 numbers quoted for Airport PeopleMover systems. And a note that says LAX may build one capable of 10,000 pph for about 5 billion dollars. For that kind of money I think I would rather have another park instead.
                              Again, I haven't looked at specific numbers myself, but based on tentative plans I've seen, the LAX one will be much longer and go over multiple city streets, which would obviously increase it's costs. I don't think one installed at Disney would need to be that extensive. That said, I am quite sure they probably are still very pricey, which I suspect is why we haven't seen one already.

                              Originally posted by MrLiver View Post
                              A lot of airport systems I've been on were standing room only (with maybe a couple benches here and there). How would you mitigate the risk of people falling over? Would you put in safety restrictions on who could and could not ride? Would you rent wheelschairs at the station? You'd have to build a secondary system to handle special accomodations.
                              I mean... if standing room only is good enough for airport, why wouldn't it be good enough for Disney? It's the same demographics (families, older, strollers, etc.). And it's not like it's going a huge distance. Plus, it'll allow people to load a heck of a lot faster. As for all your questions about risk and safety... airport trams all have the exact same issues, and it doesn't seem to be any sort of problem for them. If so, I don't think so many airports would have and keep them (Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Orlando, Minneapolis, Las Vegas... just to name a few).

                              As for wheelchairs... I mean, they don't get them at the parking/tram station now as it stands, so why should that change? And what special accommodations would even be needed that can't get on a standing room only/space for strollers/wheelchairs? While I say "standing room only", there are typically a few bench seats at the ends that disabled can use, so it's not all SRO. If there is something else I can't imagine, I'd suspect they can take a van along the roads already in place.

                              Originally posted by MrLiver View Post
                              Slight difference between WDW's more remote location and the urban environment of Disneyland.
                              In terms of who'd be coming just to ride a tram, I don't think location makes a lick of difference. The tram would be way more functional than "fun". It wouldn't go very far, and isn't likely to be very scenic. The monorail and skyways at WDW would be way more of a temptation to ride just to ride (I know I'll likely hop on the Skyway at WDW next time I go, even if I don't "need" to).

                              Originally posted by MrLiver View Post
                              But you're suggesting converting the trams to a Peoplemover system, simply because you think it would be fun to ride. And of you think it's more fun to ride a Peoplemover, what would stop the other ten thousand people going to Downtown Disney from hopping on too.
                              The old Peoplemover was a much longer, very scenic track. Plus it always had a short line, so it was a great and easy rest after being on your feet all day. This tram would be short length, not scenic, and would be at the beginning and end of people's day. I don't think it'd be "fun"; it'd be efficient, quick, and in the long run, cost effective. And if built correctly, better for the environment (low or no emissions). I think you're greatly overestimating who would ride it for "fun".



                              Does anyone even bother with signatures anymore?

                              Comment


                              • #16
                                Originally posted by micromind View Post
                                It'd be a great idea and just about everyone would like it but it costs money and doesn't provide a huge return on the investment so it'll never happen.

                                It's really sad what the Disney company has become these days.
                                Yes, people would probably really like a PM from the parking structure to the esplanade, instead of the current trams... until said PM broke down for a couple of hours. Then there would be people freaking out and complaining about how stupid it was that Disney didn't opt for a tram system that was more full-proof. Maybe what we think the best decision is, really isn't always so. Maybe Disney would have loved to build a PM from the parking structures to the park, but they saw that there were big problems inherent in that idea, so they went with individual trams that have a look reminiscent of the old PM.
                                Dead Mice Tell No Tails!

                                Comment


                                • #17
                                  Originally posted by JesterMn View Post
                                  I mean... if standing room only is good enough for airport, why wouldn't it be good enough for Disney? It's the same demographics (families, older, strollers, etc.). And it's not like it's going a huge distance. Plus, it'll allow people to load a heck of a lot faster. As for all your questions about risk and safety... airport trams all have the exact same issues, and it doesn't seem to be any sort of problem for them. If so, I don't think so many airports would have and keep them (Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Orlando, Minneapolis, Las Vegas... just to name a few).
                                  Disney has a much higher bar to maintain for customer satisfaction and level of comfort, than airports do.
                                  Dead Mice Tell No Tails!

                                  Comment


                                  • #18
                                    Originally posted by BiggestDisneyFan View Post

                                    Yes, people would probably really like a PM from the parking structure to the esplanade, instead of the current trams... until said PM broke down for a couple of hours. Then there would be people freaking out and complaining about how stupid it was that Disney didn't opt for a tram system that was more full-proof. Maybe what we think the best decision is, really isn't always so. Maybe Disney would have loved to build a PM from the parking structures to the park, but they saw that there were big problems inherent in that idea, so they went with individual trams that have a look reminiscent of the old PM.
                                    While I'm sure they do break down, it seems airport tram breakdowns seem relatively rare. In any case, people are already freaking out and complaining about the long lines and crowds for the current tram system, so it's a bit of a lateral trade off there. Personally, I do think they're relatively full proof from an operational point of view (even more so in that they don't have to run 24/7 like airport trams do... so there'd be time for maintenance if so needed).

                                    I will freely concede, however, that the cost would likely be enormous. That would obviously be the biggest problem, and I would imagine the main reason Disney isn't really looking into it.

                                    Originally posted by BiggestDisneyFan View Post

                                    Disney has a much higher bar to maintain for customer satisfaction and level of comfort, than airports do.
                                    Yeah, I can really tell that judging by the gargantuan and incredibly inefficient lines for security that--frankly--airports (not to mention Six Flags) do better.

                                    And really, how much level of discomfort is there on an airport tram, exactly? You'd be on it for less than 5 minutes.
                                    Last edited by JesterMn; 11-06-2018, 06:26 PM.
                                    Does anyone even bother with signatures anymore?

                                    Comment


                                    • #19
                                      Originally posted by BiggestDisneyFan View Post

                                      Yes, people would probably really like a PM from the parking structure to the esplanade, instead of the current trams... until said PM broke down for a couple of hours. Then there would be people freaking out and complaining about how stupid it was that Disney didn't opt for a tram system that was more full-proof. Maybe what we think the best decision is, really isn't always so. Maybe Disney would have loved to build a PM from the parking structures to the park, but they saw that there were big problems inherent in that idea, so they went with individual trams that have a look reminiscent of the old PM.
                                      They could use the trams as a backup if needed.

                                      Comment


                                      • #20
                                        Originally posted by JesterMn View Post
                                        This tram would be short length, not scenic, and would be at the beginning and end of people's day. I don't think it'd be "fun"; it'd be efficient, quick, and in the long run, cost effective.
                                        I'm at a loss, as to what exactly you're arguing here for. It's pretty clear to me that the current tram setup is actually more efficient and cost effective than a custom built peoplemover solution. I can understand the argument that something fun, a premium, could be added to improve the overall experience, but if the argument now is that this new PeopleMover wouldn't be fun then what's the point?

                                        Until they can engineer a Peoplemover capable of transporting 10,000+ people per hour for less than five billion dollars, there's absolutely no point in building one.

                                        But I do understand that the current setup isn't meeting capacity demands either, but the answer to me would be an expansion of the current setup that would allow for more tram loading, rather than a completely new solution. I'm also a little worried that the new parking structure will increase demand on the western side without a corresponding increase in capacity on the downtown Disney side.

                                        Disney really needed the option of splitting the parking demand with the Eastern gateway.
                                        Last edited by MrLiver; 11-07-2018, 09:36 AM.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X