How about replacing the parking lot trams with the Peoplemover?

[Jeronius]

^ To add further 1313 Harbor, I envy the fact that you believe so strongly in Computers never failing. Err, you do know all the motors are dependant on that computer functioning correctly 100% of the time.

[AEGuy42]

Now, before everyone out there comes crashing down on how unfeasable what I'm about to say is; let me just say that for right now trams are the best solution for moving people between the parking structure and the parks.

With that said, let's consider another option, a hybrid system that uses less trams and a peoplemover system in combination.

Disneyland's Peoplemover reputedly had a capacity of 3,000 guests per hour; and if properly designed, a new system could possibly have a higher capacity. This extra capacity (but not the EXACT same system, for issues all ready brought up) would be great for park opening and closing. And since you are still running trams, the accessibility is still there for whoever needs it. In other words, guests would have a choice of which transportation option to take, peoplemover or tram. If they cannot take the peoplemover for whatever reason, they (and their party) would take the tram.

If (when) there is a breakdown of one system (trams or peoplemover) you all ready have an operating backup to keep guests moving while repairs are made and/or more trams are brought online.

During non-peak hours, the need for transportation to and from the parking structure would be lower, and with two systems more trams could be taken offline. This would save on labor and maintenance without adversely affecting guests. But again, if (when) a system breaks down, guests will still be moving (albeit more slowly) until repairs are made and/or more trams come online.

Like I said, for now, the trams are the best solution. However, if a peoplemover were to be added, I believe that a hybrid system using a peoplemover and less trams would be an effective solution.

[mrfantasmic]

As for Gracey's electric vehicle thing, the problem with that is that there aren't electric motors strong enough for the rediculous amount of torque those trams need.
The best bet would be to use biodeisel, maybe even renewable from the cooking oil in the restaurants.

[mrfantasmic]

Good ideas but...

But there is no need for Disney to do this. Those trams are (1.) Mass transit vehicles (for you public transit people) and (2.) Massively efficient.
No need.

[wave789]

Bigger - sounds good.
Enclosed - sounds good.
Faster - No way.

A faster Peoplemover means having to slow down or completely stop the vehicles completely in order to get on them. This would essentially mean a very large back-up of vehicles at the load/unload stations. It's not practical. The Peoplemover vehicles need to move consistantly at the same speed and a slow enough speed that would allow guests to climb aboard their perpetually moving vehicle without causing the thing to have to stop.

Also, how would a seperate station for hadicapped guests work? Just because they're on thier own load/unload platform doesnt mean having to stop or drastically slow down the vehicles for them would not affect all the other vehicles moving on the same track. And if you're suggesting the handicap guests have their own track completely - well, thats a HUGE investment and maitenance costs for a small fraction of Guests.

I think the trams are the best option. It would be wise to convert the trams to electric vehicles though. It's possible, and would certainly be more cost-effective for Disney and score them some emissions points.

What I'm saying is that at each big station, the PM vehicles would divert to multiple loading platforms. At the end of the station, all the loading platform tracks would converge again. This would help prevent a back-up of vehicles if the PM goes fast on the main track, but has to slow down at the station. MULTIPLE LOADING PLATFORMS at the same station. And one of those loading platforms could accomodate handicapped guests.

[paradigm4]

It's certainly an interesting idea. One thing I've always found peculiar is with both the Monorail, it's not really "automated". There was always CMs around slowing down the whole process. The design of the train didn't really facilitate real transportation, it felt more like a ride. At least, compared to our Automated Light Rail "SkyTrain" here in Vancouver. Disneyland's Monorail is really dated.

What I'm trying to say is if they were to put a PeopleMover system in, it would have to be a real form of transportation that is automated. If they could pull that off, it would certainly speed up travel to the park and reduce the number of CMs required to man that whole aspect of the operation. And there's definitely no way that it would ever be un-enclosed; that's *way* too risky. One point I didn't think about though is the strollers which always slow down everything.

Anyways, I know if Disney really wanted to, they could pull it off. However, as cool as it would be, considering the shape the "resort" is in right now, I don't think it would be the best use of their cash.

[MasterGracey]

What I'm saying is that at each big station, the PM vehicles would divert to multiple loading platforms. At the end of the station, all the loading platform tracks would converge again. This would help prevent a back-up of vehicles if the PM goes fast on the main track, but has to slow down at the station. MULTIPLE LOADING PLATFORMS at the same station. And one of those loading platforms could accomodate handicapped guests.

I still fail to see how multiple loading platforms would help. When it's all said and done, vehicles STILL have to slow down at the (multiple) loading station(s), which would undoubtedly cause a backup of the vehicles on the normal, faster-moving track, which would end up slowing down the entire system... I dont know... I just don't see it working...

[fkurucz]

What do you think?

Some sharp pencil guy in TDA finance will ask the dreaded question: What is the ROI? And that will be the end of it.

[DarkRider]

I see this as a big non-issue. There's really nothing wrong with the tram system, is there? Not when you compare it with the expense and possible woes of a Peoplemover that visitors would have to depend on.

I say put some moving sidewalks in the parking structure before you start messin' with the trams.

[Soulquarian]

How about replacing the track above tomorrowland with peoplemovers!

[DarkRider]

How about replacing the track above tomorrowland with peoplemovers!

Oh, now you're just being silly.

[Trekkie Dad]

I like the idea in concept. It's the kind of challenge that would be given to imagineers back in the day.

The peoplemover moved pretty quickly out on the open track, but slowed to a creep in the station where the trains appeared to form a continuous chain of cars.

With a slow enough creep, wide door openings, and adequate floor space, standard strollers and wheelchairs could be accomodated. And it probably would be a good idea to continue to run trams as an alternative, backup system, or overflow during peak times.

[ESRLoop]

Whats failed to be mentioned so far is that regardless of which system would offer higher capacity, The Disneyland Resort does not operate tram service at 100% capacity on purpose, ever, due to the bottlenecks this would create at checkpoint charlie, the ticket booths and the main entrance. Is the trams were run at 100% capacity (which Disneyland is perfectly capable of doing) you'd never, ever, wait for tram, period, no matter how many Guests were arriving with you. The problem would be checkpoint charlie would be backed up to the AMC theaters.

[audibleatom]

i have grown fond of the exaust smell of the trams...it means i am going to disneyland!!!