| # | Author | Message |
11
| Hans Reinhardt
Fri 7/11/2008 2:43p | When I say from the ground up I mean a radical rethinking of how it operates and where.
The Disneyland system really is nothing more than a flashy amusement park ride. It needs a larger structural beam to support larger trains that are climate controlled. A larger beam, however, would require that the route be removed from the parks. Thus the system could mature and become a legitimate transportation link around the DLR and possibly the city of Anaheim. |
12
| oc_dean
Fri 7/11/2008 2:48p | I just thought of this.......
if the capacity has been brought down .. for each cabin ... then with less people ... that means less weight ... and installing A/C systems should not be a problem! |
13
| oc_dean
Fri 7/11/2008 2:52p | I like your idea Hans ....
but think about where those beams cross. That would be one massive project! |
14
| spacejockey
Fri 7/11/2008 3:11p | I would cost too much money to remove the beams. |
15
| Hans Reinhardt
Fri 7/11/2008 3:44p | "That would be one massive project!"
Not more massive than building an entire theme park in the former parking lot. Yes, it would be big, but it isn't impossible. I think the only thing keeping it from happening is the expense and a lack of motivation on the part of the powers-that-be within the organization.
"I would cost too much money to remove the beams."
What, exactly, is "too much" money? Are you saying that the cost would be high or that the cost would be so high as to warrant not removing them? So far a lot of money has been spent (wasted) on a new poorly functioning design that will likely have to be revamped either now or down the road. They might as well cut their losses and reinvest in a new state of the art system for the Disneyland that exists in the 21st Century, not the one from 1959.
The short term expense of rebuilding the system would probably be a smarter move long term than patching it up as they are doing now. As the resort area grows (third theme park, Garden Walk, California High Speed Rail, etc.) some thought needs to be given as to how people are going to be transported around the area with public transit. Frankly, I'm not a Monorail fan (I'd prefer a PTR system) but I'm aware of the iconic stature of DL's Monorail and I can only imagine the howls if Disney ever removed it completely.
|
16
| Dabob2
Fri 7/11/2008 4:33p | I can't see them doing it till the third park comes on line. DL and DCA are close enough to hop easily. When the third park opens, it probably WOULD be cost-effective to start from scratch with a larger-beam, larger-capacity system, rather then trying to fit a square peg (the needs for higher capacity) into a round hole (the current track). That's the kind of thinking that brought us the rocket rods on an existing track not suited to them. |
17
| believe
Fri 7/11/2008 4:57p | The Las Vegas Monorail system cost $650million for what, 4 miles? That kind of $ built DCA.
Red needs bigger air scoops. It'll be interesting to see what happens when it starts to rain!.
Also, if the trains ever break down on a warm day, there wouldn't be much air circulating if the trains not moving. And guests stuck on it would start getting hot.
I hope those windows are heat blocking instead of just tinted. It would definitely help. |
18
| Hans Reinhardt
Fri 7/11/2008 5:04p | "The Las Vegas Monorail system cost $650million for what, 4 miles? That kind of $ built DCA."
Yep, and it's losing money I believe. The route isn't very scenic and it's a real kind of sluggish ride too. I was very disappointed by the Vegas monorail. |
19
| oc_dean
Fri 7/11/2008 5:10p | >> The route isn't very scenic <<
Never understood why they run it on an ugly side street .. and not the scenic main strip. |
20
| Elderp
Fri 7/11/2008 7:27p | I know I am going to get slammed on this, but the monorail is over 40 yrs old. Why can't imagineers think up a new method of transportation? |
