People Mover Track

**Giant Panda** · 03-03-2005, 05:07 PM

Originally Posted by XterraceEmp

I just had a weird idea....sort of morphing a Incredibles type vehicle with RR track and software and not having to slow the momentum of the vehicle or banking the turns.

What if the vehicle itself stayed on the normal plane and the ride vehicle itself when reaching the turns at a high rate of speed tilted. Would it or could it not simulate the same g-force as if it was an actual banked turn? Indy for example is on a level plane, yet throuh high speed turns the chassis is tilted.

Any thoughts or ideas?

The engineer hemisphere of my brain says that was part of the problem with rocket rods ....... the imaginative hemisphere says great idea ...... but my soul questions (not saying it is wrong, just questioning) whether Incredibles is right for T-land ....

**ModHatter** · 03-03-2005, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by ah schucks

Its probably true, I don't have a very deep voice. Ha ha. Good times guys. I was able to kill an entire day discussing a subject which will never see the eyes of any Disney exec or Imagineer but sure is fun to discuss and argue this stuff.

Well, all I can say to that is, you never know who will walk away from these discussions and go do something good with it.

**ah schucks** · 03-03-2005, 05:11 PM

Incredibles is more suited for Tommorrow than Fantasy despite obvious reasons, so the Sphere idea is splendid just not moving nearly as fast as rocket routers

**XterraceEmp** · 03-03-2005, 05:13 PM

well not so much incredibles but I was simply going for a futuristic type vehicle. If I recall the RR didn't have a tilting chassis. They stayed level, except for when it accelerated the nose lifted. What about a vehicle style similar to the those speed bikes I think they were called in Star Wars. Or perhaps X-wing type vehicles that seat 3 rows of 2

**ModHatter** · 03-03-2005, 05:18 PM

Originally Posted by ah schucks

Incredibles is more suited for Tommorrow than Fantasy despite obvious reasons, so the Sphere idea is splendid just not moving nearly as fast as rocket routers

You know... if it were tastefully done on the exterior, and the actual attraction was indoors, Incredibles actually could fit well in Adventureland. I just have no idea where you'd put the thing.

**MiceMan** · 03-03-2005, 05:33 PM

I was thinking, I know that the peoplemover track has been a problem since 1995. RR was not a solution, it only added to the problem. There is a new style of mass transit called MagLev. The trains, instead of resting on the tracks magnetically levitate above them. Due to little or no resistance the trains are able to go in upwards of 200 miles per hour very easily.

While, I know a system on this scale would not work in Disneyland, why couldn't they scale it down a bit? I know, some may argue that it's not about the future, since it is already in Japan, but Monorails were in other places before Disneyland too. I think that the MagLev is a very utopian way of travel which would fit perfectly into the theme of TL.

Here is the link if you are interested in more information.

JMHO

**Giant Panda** · 03-04-2005, 05:25 AM

I was thinking about maglev on the way home last night .... might work ....

**ah schucks** · 03-04-2005, 08:26 AM

Correct me if I am wrong but mag lev trains traditionally are not above ground, rather for support reasons I thought they were at ground level or buried, because the forces exerted on the track by the two opposing magentic forces push down on the support structures and track.

Either way it is a unique idea.

Also to respond to the notion of the Incredibles connection to Adventureland, yes it is a fit, if you are building a volcano island but they also fought in the modern city too.

Something came to me last night- if we almost are sure of the Nemo Sub refurb, strong very strong chances of a "Cars" redress on the Autopia, then making the People Mover's into those spheres from the Incredibles would actually be a good fit. with very little work back out in the Autopia track a new show buidling could be errected, like the interior of the volcano, with rockets and the whole nine yards. Point is it would actually create an almost new area on the land where Autopia is- Pixar land.

Only thing left is to replace HISTA with a Pixar related 3d movie experiance of some sort and Tommorrowland meets Pixarland...just a thought

**Big Bad Leroy Brown** · 03-04-2005, 08:41 AM

This is descriptive.... the way it is..... a description of the unfortunate reality of the economics we find ourselves in. Not a thing we can do anything about, therefore not something that can be argued for or against.

Yes, but really not the point of this thread now, is it?

All I'm saying is that a nice B or C-ticket ride isn't such a bad thing especially in light of what DL was supposed to be: a place where families could experience things together. And not just Dad-Mom-Kids. But Granpa and Granma as well. There aren't very many concepts coming down the line that keep this in mind.

Look at the disaster of DCA: almost all of the rides there are thrill rides and everything else is an "experience" like the Tortilla Factory. Huh? Six Flags and parks like it are great for what they are. But they're not Disney.

*I agree that costs need to be taken into account with these things. If the PM was too costly to maintain/operate with what it brought in for ridership, then the suits would have had no choice but to figure out something else. Amazing though that they would go with something like RR to replace it which had a lower ridethru rate and a much higher maintenance cost...*

**dshimel** · 03-04-2005, 08:44 AM

Originally Posted by XterraceEmp

What if the vehicle itself stayed on the normal plane and the ride vehicle itself when reaching the turns at a high rate of speed tilted. Would it or could it not simulate the same g-force as if it was an actual banked turn? Indy for example is on a level plane, yet throuh high speed turns the chassis is tilted.

Any thoughts or ideas?

I see two concerns with sticking with RR type vehicles and just tilting them...

The pilons and track were not designed for lateral G's. PM moved at 5MPH so lateral acceleration was never a concern..... Just vertical gravity. They'd have to redo the supports and track, and if you're doing that, may as well just bank the corners.

Also, the rocket rods didn't ride on a track, like a coaster. They rode on their tires. The lateral G's would eat through tires even more quickly, and this was already a major problem of the ride.... or so it has been said.

**Gregor** · 03-04-2005, 09:34 AM

Originally Posted by dshimel

The pilons and track were not designed for lateral G's. PM moved at 5MPH so lateral acceleration was never a concern..... Just vertical gravity. They'd have to redo the supports and track, and if you're doing that, may as well just bank the corners.

Just a minor correction

: The track and pylons experience lateral forces not lateral-g's. G-force is used to indicate the force to which a body (object) is subjected when it is accelerated. The track and pylons are not being accelerated, they're stationary.

**ah schucks** · 03-04-2005, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Gregor

Just a minor correction

: The track and pylons experience lateral forces not lateral-g's. G-force is used to indicate the force to which a body (object) is subjected when it is accelerated. The track and pylons are not being accelerated, they're stationary.

You are right. Sort of. What dshimel is pointing out, is that while the vehicle in motion is being accelerated, a greater force of pressure, weight distribution and other factors are being exherted on those stationary pilons which were not designed for those forces.

If the pilons were reenforced, encased in a steal reenforced cage, with additional supports in the areas where the ride experiance the fastest movements, perhaps it would be able to handle it, but as it stands now, the infrastructure of that entire track was badly damaged by the RR. It was one of many reasons they were removed. The track simply cannot handle those forces without major reassement.

**dshimel** · 03-04-2005, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Gregor

Just a minor correction

: The track and pylons experience lateral forces not lateral-g's. G-force is used to indicate the force to which a body (object) is subjected when it is accelerated. The track and pylons are not being accelerated, they're stationary.

Well, the vehicle is being laterally accelerated, and for every force there is an equal and opposite force. The source of the force on the track is the lateral acceleration of the vehicle pushing on it.

I'll restate for clarity....

The track was not designed to expereince the substantial lateral force which would be caused by a vehicle having its velocity significantly altered by contact with it.

**Giant Panda** · 03-04-2005, 09:54 AM

Actually, if a banked track were attached to the beamway, the force exerted by the vehicle on the banked track would still require the force to be transmitted to the columns ... thus the columns and beamway would require reinforcement if any sort of high-speed vehicle,ride system were attached to the beamway. All banking does is convert that force into a relatively "vertical" force that the vehicle "feels" on the track (and what riders feel in their seats.

As far as maglev, the magnetic repulsion is only applying force to support the weight of the vehicle ... so that should not be an issue. Maglevs are usually on or under ground because it's cheaper than building a bridge

**ah schucks** · 03-04-2005, 01:50 PM

Originally Posted by Giant Panda

Actually, if a banked track were attached to the beamway, the force exerted by the vehicle on the banked track would still require the force to be transmitted to the columns ... thus the columns and beamway would require reinforcement if any sort of high-speed vehicle,ride system were attached to the beamway. All banking does is convert that force into a relatively "vertical" force that the vehicle "feels" on the track (and what riders feel in their seats.

As far as maglev, the magnetic repulsion is only applying force to support the weight of the vehicle ... so that should not be an issue. Maglevs are usually on or under ground because it's cheaper than building a bridge

Curious- is it viable to build a mag lev based ride/attraction on that track? is there clearance? how much room does it take between the track and the object moving on the mag lev? and how is this different from LIM or can they be used together?