I have decided to retire Armchair Park Stuff for a new blog with an even worse name. Any new articles on theme parks, movies, and whatever else I feel like writing about will now be found at Real Heroes are Sandwiches. I look forward to neglecting the new blog!
Saturday, November 21, 2020
A New Home
Sunday, January 12, 2020
2019 At The Movies
In accordance with the prophecy, it was well into January before I had an opportunity to think about all the movies I saw last year. As always, my ratings are influenced by more than just the movie (I am only human after all.) So you may find movies in a weird order. If you think any movie rating is crazy, let me know about it.
2019 Movies
Shazam! ****
Good Boys ****
Booksmart ****
Knives Out ****
Spider-Man Far From Home ****
Frozen II ***1/2
Avengers: Endgame ***1/2
Tag (2018) ***1/2
Aladdin (2019) ***1/2
Klaus ***1/2
Toy Story 4 ***1/2
Spies in Disguise ***1/2
Fast & Furious Pressnts: Hobbs & Shaw ***
Stuber ***
Long Shot ***
Jumanji The Next Level ***
Men in Black International ***
Secret Life of Pets 2 ***
Lego Movie 2: The Second Part ***
Captain Marvel ***
Dark Phoenix ***
Missing Link ***
Stan & Ollie ***
Dora and the Lost City of Gold **
The Spy Who Dumped Me (2018) **
Holmes and Watson (2018) **
Fantastic Beasts The Crimes of Grinderwald (2018) **
Haunt **
Vice *1/2 (2018)
Most of the movies on the 2019 list were seen in the theater, although Booksmart, Aladdin, Klaus, Long Shot, Lego Movie 2, Dora, The Spy Who Dumped Me, and Haunt were seen in a home viewing situation. Tag, Stan & Ollie, Holmes & Watson, Fantastic Beasts, and Vice were seen on a plane. You can infer what you want about the impact of seeing these films outside the theater on my opinion of them. None of the films I saw outside of the theater that I rated low were particularly critically acclaimed, with the exception of Vice. But I believe that the positive reception of Vice was more politically motivated on the part of the professional reviewers. I found Christian Bale's performance to be Saturday Night Live-quality with over-exaggerated lip smacking. But the worst crime of this movie is that it was boring. The twist about the narrator was interesting, but ultimately meaningless. And I was very disappointed that a movie by the maker of The Big Short was so dull, despite the possibly more straightforward source material.
I was happy to see a fun DC comic book movie, and this year had two excellent coming of age comedies. And Knives Out was definitely a highlight of the year.
I finally got around to seeing a Fast and Furious movie. It was good fun! No wonder they have made so many of them. I still hate the naming convention, though.
The list of older movies I saw this year includes any movie I saw all the way through for the first time or any movie I saw for the first time in a long time.
Older Movies
Irma La Douce (1963) ****
Bringing Up Baby (1938) ****
The Muppet Movie (1979) ****
Lawrence of Arabia (1962) ****
The Maltese Falcon (1941) ****
Palm Beach Story (1942) ****
The Third Man (1949) ****
The Music Man (1962) ****
Attack the Block (2011) ****
White Heat (1949) ****
The Thing (1982) ****
West Side Story (1961) ****
The Miracle of Morgan's Creek (1944) ****
Mad Max 2 (1981) ****
Scream (1996) ****
Four Weddings and a Funeral (1994) ****
Top Hat (1935) ***1/2
The China Syndrome (1979) ***1/2
Strike Me Pink (1936) ***1/2
Baby Face (1933) ***1/2
Dial M For Murder (1954) ***1/2
Gidget (1959) ***1/2
My Favorite Wife (1940) ***1/2
Strangers on a Train (1951) ***1/2
Desk Set (1957) ***1/2
Funny Girl (1968) ***1/2
Hot Millions (1968) ***1/2
Bachelor Mother (1939) ***1/2
The Bachelor (1925) ***1/2
The Lost Boys (1987) ***1/2
Sleeping With Other People (2015) ***1/2
The Descent (2006) ***1/2
The Three Caballeros (1944) ***1/2
The Little Hours (2017) ***
Mission: Impossible (1996) ***
The Candidate (1972) ***
Move Over, Darling (1963) ***
Meet Me in St. Louis (1944) ***
Penelope (1966) ***
Lifeboat (1944) ***
Saludos Amigos (1942) ***
By the Light of the Silvery Moon (1953) ***
Ice Station Zebra (1968) ***
Abbott and Costello meet Frankenstein (1948) ***
Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) ***
Start the Revolution Without Me (1970) ***
Designing Woman (1957) ***
Meet John Doe (1941) ***
The Big Sleep (1946) ***
Escape from New York (1981) ***
Penn & Teller Get Killed (1989) ***
Unfinished Business (2015) ***
Broadway Melody of 1940 (1940) ***
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) ***
A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) ***
Bye Bye Birdie (1963) ***
Sabrina (1954) ***
The Man Who Knew Too Much (1934) ***
In Person (1935) **1/2
The Three Musketeers (1946) **1/2
Horse Feathers (1932) **1/2
A View to a Kill (1985) **1/2
The Freshman (1990) **1/2
Promise Her Anything (1965) **
Moonraker (1979) **
Luxury Liner (1948) **
The Quiet Man (1952) **
Octopussy (1983) **
Jaws 2 (1978) **
A Fine Pair (1968) *1/2
Mad Max (1979) *1/2
Saturday, January 5, 2019
2018 At The Movies
Every year, I like to put together a list of all the movies I saw in the previous year.
A small number of movies on the 2018 list were released in December 2017, but I watched them in 2018. Some of them were released in the US earlier than December, but I saw them in the theater in Japan in 2018. Many American movies released in Japan come out several months after their US premieres. So, even though Coco was released in mid-November in the US, I saw it in its second week of release in Japan in February.
This year, I am trying something new and am creating a second list of movies that were released before 2018. This list contains any movie that I saw for the first time in 2018 (or saw for the first time as an adult in 2018) in addition to the new release movies I saw last year.
Movies I saw on a plane may not have been seen in the best of possible circumstances. I used movies to keep awake for the flights so the jetlag wouldn't be as bad. Maybe these movies are better than I thought? I was particularly tired when I watched the movies that are ranked lower on my lists. Because of this, I have noted these movies with a (+).
As always, the movies are ranked on a scale from zero to four stars.
(Movies of 2018)
Spider-Man Into the Spider-Verse **** (Why haven't you seen this yet? It's amazing! I've seen it in theaters twice already!)
The Death of Stalin **** (+)
Mission: Impossible – Fallout ***½
Deadpool 2 ***½
The Disaster Artist ***½ (+)
Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri ***½ (+)
Incredibles 2 ***½
Coco ***½
Ralph Breaks the Internet ***
Ant-Man and the Wasp ***
Halloween (2018) ***
First Man ***
Ready Player One ***
The Greatest Showman ***
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle ***
Aquaman ***
The Post *** (+)
Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom **½
A Futile and Stupid Gesture **½
Darkest Hour **½ (+)
All the Money in the World **½ (+)
Avengers: Age of Ultron **
Mary Poppins Returns **
The Happytime Murders **
Christopher Robin **
Nutcracker and the Four Realms ½
(Other movies I saw for the first time in 2018)
Poltergeist (1982) ****
Gone with the Wind (1939) ****
The Walk (2015) ****
Arthur (1981) **** (+)
Soapdish (1991) ****
Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017) **** (I saw this in 2017, but it somehow didn’t make it on the list for that year)
The Women (1939) ****
The Imitation Game (2014) ****
Vivacious Lady (1938) ***½
What About Bob? (1991) ***½ (+)
Goon (2011) ***½
Backdraft (1991) ***½
The Conjuring (2013) ***½
The Blair Witch Project (1999) ***½
Marshall (2017) ***½
It Should Happen to You (1954) ***½
Walk, Don’t Run (1966) ***½
O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000) ***½ (+)
War Dogs (2016) ***
High Society (1956) ***
Trick ‘r Treat (2007) ***
American Hustle (2013) ***
Miss Grant Takes Richmond (1949) ***
Summer Stock (1950) ***
Sully (2016) ***
Pillow Talk (1959) ***
Keanu (2016) ***
The Adventures of Tintin (2011) ***
Dunkirk (2017) *** (+)
Father of the Bride (1950) ***
The House (2017) **½
Father’s Little Dividend (1951) **½
The French Connection (1971) **½ (+)
Goon: Last of the Enforcers (2017) **½
Brainstorm (1983) **
A Million Ways to Die in the West (2014) **
X Men: Apocalypse (2016) ** (+)
The Rock (1996) ** (+)
Brigadoon (1954) *½
Antz (1998) *½
The Black Hole (1979) ½
The Last Flight of Noah’s Ark (1980) [zero stars]
I love talking about movies, so I would be happy to hear how I am wrong! Let me know.
Sunday, February 4, 2018
The Monorail Project - Phasing
Recently, there was an article posted at Theme Park University about how the existing Walt Disney World monorail system is overextended. The essay below is a slightly expanded response to that article.
In the article, Josh Young describes the recent string of well-publicized
monorail problems and asks how could Disney World go about getting the monorail
system back into good shape? And how could it possibly be expected to handle
any of the increase in demand that the new attractions currently under
construction and beyond will surely generate?
The most obvious and cheapest solution to fix the
reliability issues would be to hire more maintenance workers. Without knowing
any specifics, it stands to reason that additional people can do the same work
in a shorter time. But it is also possible that some tasks simply take too long
to be completed in the short time when the monorail is closed for the night.
If those tasks are train-maintenance related, they could be
solved by purchasing an additional train or two. This would increase the amount
of time each train could be out-of-service without impacting system capacity.
It would be very expensive, and would probably not improve capacity as much as
it would improve reliability.
If the tasks are track-maintenance related, I can’t imagine
that additional labor would be insufficient for all but the most serious
problems. Urban mass transit systems the world over successfully maintain much
longer track networks in similar time frames.
To seriously increase the capacity of the monorail would
require adding trains and/or allowing for platform-level boarding. Both of
these tasks would probably require closing the Resort Line for a few months. So
if I was in charge, I would do both.
For the sake of argument, I will describe what I think it
might take to upgrade the monorail system to have 8-car trains and platform
level boarding. Please note that everything I say here should be suspect. I am
not currently employed by Disney, and I have never been involved with anything
that would give me any insight to this problem that isn’t publically available.
This is just a thought experiment from a person with some theme park operations
and design experience who has been researching the Disney monorails in his
spare time since 2013.
The first step in converting the system to platform-level
boarding would be to order new trains or modify the existing trains so that the
doors do not swing out. These pocket doors would probably negatively impact the
current sleek Bob Gurr-designed “LearJet” look of the trains. So the trains may
need to be entirely redesigned.
A new custom train set would probably take on the order of
magnitude of 1 1/2 years to receive from the manufacturer. But the new trains
(with 6 cars) would need to replace the old ones before any station work can
begin. The new trains might take six months of after-hours testing before they
can be in normal operation.
Before any trains could be increased to 8 car lengths, the
monorail barn would need to be expanded to accommodate longer trains. This
would probably be completed while the trains are being manufactured. This
monorail barn expansion might impact the maintenance of existing monorail
trains, but it may be possible to phase the work so this is not a problem. I
would be curious to know if the monorail barn was expanded when the monorail
went from five car train to six car train operations in the 1980s.
Once the fleet has been converted to new six car trains, the
Epcot line and the Resort line would close for the stations to be lengthened to
accommodate eight car trains. The Epcot station remodel would also impact Epcot
parking lot tram operation, because the station is above the tramway.
The new stations would be built to the height of the new
monorail train floors, and would have a minimal gap to allow wheelchair access
through every door without a ramp.
Work on the Magic Kingdom and TTC stations would need to be
done as quickly as possible. But luckily, they are both big enough buildings
that construction should be possible 24 hours a day without disrupting the
operation of the active monorail line that is adjacent. Unfortunately, the monorail
tracks at the Polynesian, Contemporary, and Grand Floridian stations are
directly adjacent to one another. So the expansion of these stations would probably
only be possible overnight when the Express line is not in service. This phase might
take four months?
Once the Resort line stations have been expanded and have
platform level boarding, the track of the Resort line could be put back in
service as the new temporary Express line. At this point, the Epcot line could
reopen and both the temporary Express line and the Epcot line six car trains
could be expanded to eight cars.
At this time, work on the Express line platforms at the TTC
and Magic Kingdom would be completed, maybe taking another four months. This
would mean that for eight months, the Polynesian, Contemporary, and Grand
Floridian resorts would be without monorail service. These resorts would also
have major construction near their main entrances or (in the case of the
Contemporary) in their lobbies for four months.
This would probably cost the same as one or two major E-ticket
attractions. And when all the work is done, nobody will notice it. I mean, they
currently notice the long lines for the monorail, but when that goes away, they
won’t remember that their used to be long lines for it. Like expanding restroom
capacity, nobody thinks about transportation capacity until it is inadequate.
And like expanding restroom capacity, sometimes it needs to be done.
Like I said above, my numbers are likely to be very
inaccurate, because I don’t really know what I am talking about. But this is
how I see the Disney World monorail problem today.
In the comments to the original article, one of the most
common responses was about how the monorail should be converted to a
transit-sized peoplemover system with continuous loading. I think the idea is
fairly common among theme park fans. But it is fundamentally flawed.
Believe it or not, a continually moving train actually has a
lower maximum theoretical capacity than a train that stops for boarding,
assuming the train length can be extended. Think of it this way: a continuously
moving train has to have a moving sidewalk entrance and exit width narrow
enough that everyone can hold onto a handrail at the transition. Also, such a
system has to come to a stop every time a guest arrives who is incapable of stepping
onto a moving platform.
Think about how frequently Spaceship Earth has to go to
crawl mode or stop while you ride it. I could imagine that Spaceship Earth has
probably about half the theoretical maximum capacity for a continuously moving
ride system. So that would mean a capacity of maybe 6,000 people per hour?
Anything more than that would require such a wide moving sidewalk that I think
it would be wider than the current Magic Kingdom monorail station platforms.
The limiting factor to conventional monorail capacity is
train length and dispatch interval. The dispatch interval is based on the
control system for the train and boarding characteristics such as door width,
the presence of a step into the cabin, and the interior layout of the cabin.
The door width and cabin interior layout are probably about as efficient as
they can be without removing seats in terms of capacity. But the current requirements
that wheelchairs need portable ramps to board (a function of door design and
the height of the station platform) are what makes the trains take up to twice
as long to dispatch as is theoretically possible.
Fixing that, in addition to lengthening the trains could
dramatically increase the capacity. I did some back-of-the-envelope
calculations and figured that solving the platform level boarding issue by
eliminating the step into the cabin would give the monorail a theoretical
maximum hourly capacity of 8,640 with a two minute dispatch interval. If the
number of trains were increased from the current six to eight, the capacity
would be 11,520 people per hour. To go completely crazy and make the trains as
long as the Contemporary Resort (13 cars) would give you a capacity of 18,720
people per hour. You can read about my methodology here.
Saturday, January 6, 2018
2017 At The Movies
I post to this blog relatively infrequently. This is mostly because the posts here tend to be about creative work that I do in my very limited spare time, and lately I haven't had enough time to make enough progress to be worth posting about. So, as an experiment, I am posting my thoughts about the movies I saw last year. If people find this sort of thing interesting, I may decide to post about my other interests as a way to fill in the very long gaps between major project updates. In other words, I am considering adding more filler!
In many popular discussions about the movie industry in 2017, there was a theme about how people are not going to the movies any more. Certainly, this summer was one of the least attended in recent memory. And movies continue to be a much smaller industry than video games. A lot of the discussion about the poor summer box office seemed to focus on the role of TV streaming services and other changes in the way people like to see movies.
This is probably true to some extent, but I think a far more important factor is that there was a huge hole in the big studios release schedules. I like to go to the movies a lot, and for a period between mid-July and November, there was no new movies released that looked particularly appealing.
Disney, the box office leader for 2017, released zero movies between Cars 3 (June) and Thor (November). The number two studio Warner Brothers, released a few genre pictures in that same time frame and did quite well with 'It', but mostly had an unimpressive slate. The US Domestic Box Office was down by the equivalent of only two or three moderately successful movies. And the overcrowded holiday period probably is hurting some of the current releases that may have done better earlier in the year when there was less competition.
In particular, I feel like this year was lacking in medium-scale comedy films. The only pure comedy movie I saw this year was Fist Fight, which left theaters before I got a chance to see it. But usually I see more than one of this type of movie. And it just felt like there weren't any made that stuck around.
Below is a list of movies I saw in 2017, listed approximately by how much I liked them and scored on a scale of zero to four stars (although I apparently don't see zero star movies).
**** Wonder Woman
**** Baby Driver
***1/2 Thor: Ragnarok
***1/2 Star Wars The Last Jedi
***1/2 Shin Godzilla
***1/2 Logan Lucky
*** War for the Planet of the Apes
*** The Boss Baby
*** Murder on the Orient Express
*** Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 2
*** American Made
*** Despicable Me 3
*** Beauty and the Beast (2017)
*** Dunkirk
*** The Mummy (2017)
*** Fist Fight
**1/2 Star Trek Beyond
**1/2 The Lego Batman Movie
**1/2 Logan
** Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
** X-men Apocalypse
*1/2 Kong: Skull Island
* Hot Pursuit
You may notice a few movies from 2016 or 2015 on this list. I saw them in 2017, so sue me.
Also, note that there are a small handful of movies that I wanted to see but so far have eluded me. I have not yet had the opportunity to see the following:
Coco
The Disaster Artist
The House
Goon: Last of the Enforcers
The Little Hours
The Post
I decided on my movie ratings on the day I saw the movie. As I compiled the list, I allowed myself to adjust the ratings based on how well the movie aged in my head. For instance, Shin Godzilla went from a *** movie to a ***1/2 movie, because the more I thought about it, the more I appreciated the movie and liked how it was partially about the difficulty of making coordinated decisions about group actions. Likewise, Baby Driver and The Boss Baby got better the more I thought about them.
Not all movies got better with time. War for the Planet of the Apes, Kong Skull Island, and Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 2 went down in the ratings the more I thought of them. Of course, movies that I saw very recently like Star Wars The Last Jedi and Dunkirk may not stick in my mind either. So I guess I am less confident about my thoughts about them.
So, am I a monster for liking Fist Fight better than Logan? Did I miss any other movies that I didn't list here that I should see? And why didn't you go see Logan Lucky?
Sunday, August 27, 2017
The Monorail Project–Build Out Monorail Ridership Daily Trip Distribution
With the Skyliner gondola transit system announced to connect Hollywood Studios, Epcot, and some nearby resorts, I figured it is time to do some more work on the monorail project.
I have calculated the estimated demand for every hour of each segment of my preferred alternative monorail networks. However, to understand what they mean, it is important to understand how many people an hour a monorail can realistically carry.
The design capacity of any grade-separated transit line is determined by several factors:
Likewise, the Contemporary Resort also forms the overall maximum length of trains. Currently, the monorail station is the northern half of the building. But it is conceivable that the monorail station platform could be extended to run the length of the building (approximately 430 feet). If the monorail cars remain the same dimensions as they are currently, this creates a maximum train length of 13 cars.
Unfortunately, determining the headway of the monorail requires more than some simple extrapolations of the current monorail system.
From the beginning, I have been assuming that the monorail trains and stations would need to be reconfigured to allow for platform-level boarding. Platform level boarding is when the station platform is level with the floor of the train so passengers in wheelchairs can board without the use of a ramp. This eliminates the requirement for a cast member to be present at all stations to operate the ramp, and can dramatically reduce the required station dwell time.
I also assume that all the bugs in the automatic train control can be worked out to allow for the most efficient train spacing.
Because both of these characteristics are not present in the existing monorail system, I have to look to other transit systems to identify a realistic headway time.
Some metro systems have been known to operate with headways of as little as 70 seconds, but that is on metro systems that primarily serve commuters, people most likely to know where they are going and how things work. Perhaps a better comparison might be airport people movers such as the ones at the Orlando International Airport. An airport people mover's load and unload characteristics are similar to the monorail because they have platform level boarding, automated train control, and platform doors. Airport people movers are not as familiar to riders as urban metro systems, because they are not a part of the daily commute for most passengers. Additionally, the riders of such systems frequently have rolling suitcases which may take up space during passenger flows through doorways in a fashion similar to strollers upon exit and entry of the monorail at Walt Disney World.
An airport people mover system can have headways as fast as 90 seconds, but according to the Transportation Research Board's Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, a more typical headway for such a system is 120 seconds.
Once the design capacity was determined using the numbers above, I calculated the achievable capacity. This is the capacity that a transit line can be reasonably assumed to achieve given the variability in demand across an operating hour. The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual recommends a peak hour factor of 0.8 to be used. This means that if the design capacity for a specific segment is 1,000 people in an hour, it should be assumed that only 800 people in an hour will actually be carried before unacceptable train loads or queuing would be experienced.
Monorail Achievable Capacity for Two Minute Headway Operation by Train Length
Now that these capacities have been determined, we can look at the estimated hourly capacities of each network to determine what each network would look like (and whether it would even work at all).
When I first calculated these numbers, I wanted to create some GIFs that would show the estimated ridership on each segment for each hour of the day. Unfortunately, after spending my free time on this task for the last several months (I determined the ridership numbers in February 2017), I have come to the conclusion that either Data Driven Graphics in Photoshop defy logic or (more likely) that I bit off more than I could chew. So, I will instead present some charts showing the maximum hourly demand for each line and maps showing the peak hour passenger flows for each network. If anyone out there knows anything about Data Driven Graphics in Photoshop and wants to help, feel free to comment on this post. Because I still think it would be a helpful way to visualize the passenger flows on each network.
Network 1094 Characteristics
The monorail network with the highest score per mile, Network 1094, has one link with a passenger demand greater than the maximum achievable capacity of a monorail at Disney World given my original constraints. This link, connecting Hollywood Studios to Epcot, would require the longest trains possible to operate at headways of only 1.7 minutes. Unfortunately, this would not be possible to achieve on a consistent basis, so this network must be rejected.
Before we completely reject this network, I do want to discuss a possible confounding factor that may make this a more feasible option. When I started working on this project four years ago, there wasn’t even the slightest hint that the Skyliner gondola transit system would be built connecting Hollywood Studios to Epcot. It remains to be seen exactly how this system will operate and how it would be integrated with any monorail network expansion. But this gondola transit system is being built in the area where my network model suggests there would be the greatest demand. So potentially a network like this may still have a chance of being technically possible.
Network 838 Characteristics
Monorail network 838 was investigated because it has the least amount of new monorail track out of any of the 25 top-ranked networks. As you can see in the graphic above, my passenger demand model does not call for greater capacity than a monorail is technically capable of providing, given my initial constraints. This Network would carry an estimated 208,000 people a day--well over the 78,100 people per day that the Miami Metro Rail carries on its 24.4 miles of track (source). In fact, the ridership would be almost identical to that on Atlanta’s MARTA Rail and would carry more people than the Los Angeles Metro Rail. If this network was built, it would be the 9th busiest rapid transit system in the United States (source).
This network would call for 13 car trains that would arrive on 2.2 minute headways for the Park Connector B line. To provide operational flexibility, I assume that the 13 car trains would be used on the other lines, even though they could achieve an acceptable capacity with shorter trains. The table above indicates that the Epcot Loop C, Studios Loop A, and Animal Kingdom Loop A lines could have headways of approximately 7 or 8 minutes, so riders would have an average wait time of 3 or 4 minutes, comparable to the Existing Resort line and much better than the average headways on many major city’s rapid transit lines.
The Existing Resort line, however, would be able to operate with a single train and would have a headway of almost 16 minutes. I would consider this unacceptable, and although enough capacity could be provided with a single train, I think two trains would be necessary to maintain service quality and keep wait times within the limits described at the onset of this project.
Network 1112 Characteristics
Network 1112 was investigated because it was the highest ranked alternative to have a station at the ESPN Wide World of Sports. This network would carry a whopping 329,000 riders per day and would be the 6th busiest rapid transit system in the United States (behind San Francisco’s BART system which moves 35% more people on 140% more track (source)). However, this network would most definitely not work. At the peak hour in the morning with 13 car trains, the Park Connector B would need to operate at a headway of only 1.1 minute. My research suggests that some rapid transit systems in Eastern Europe may be able to operate at nearly that frequency, but the train doors open before the trains come to a complete stop, the riders are generally commuters who know where they are going and don’t have strollers, the weather is colder so people get out of their seats faster, and the liability and insurance requirements work very differently there than in the United States. In short, this network could not work. Not even the Skyliner gondola system can save it.
To make this system work, I would need to connect the Animal Kingdom side of the Park Connector B to Magic Kingdom and make two separate Park Connector lines running in loops in opposite directions. Maybe one day I will sketch out what that could look like. But for now, pretend this network doesn’t exist and we can move on to discuss something that could work.
Network 453 Characteristics
Network 453 was selected because at 23rd, it was the highest ranked alternative to use Park Connector A. This network would be able to operate eight car trains with a 2.1 minute headway on the Park Connector A line and headways of between four and five minutes on all of the resort loops except for the existing Resort Line. The existing Resort Line would be able to operate with only two trains, but the headway would be eight minutes, and would probably be noticeably longer than the waits on the other lines. So, because I can make up whatever I want to, I would recommend having three trains operating on the existing Resort Line so the headways would be in the neighborhood of five minutes like the other resort loops.
This network would carry 178,000 people per day and would be the 9th busiest rapid transit system in the United States (source). The eight-car trains in this network would dramatically reduce the amount that the existing stations would need to be modified, and in most cases would not even require a replacement of any existing track in station areas.
This transit system would require an additional 22 miles of track to build, 36 new eight car trains, 17 new stations and major reconstruction of all the existing stations. This system or any other system expansion described in these posts would optimistically cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and at the end of the day would only increase Disney’s bottom line by the amount that a premium could be charged to the hotel rooms that would be gaining monorail service access. As a fan of the Walt Disney World Monorails and theme parks in general, I am not sure whether I would want Disney to spend that kind of money on something like this instead of, say, a major expansion of an existing theme park.
The construction of such a system would cause major disruption to the existing monorail lines. And once it is built, a minor mechanical problem on a single train would cause incredible disruption resort-wide.
On the other hand, it would be separate guests traveling between parks and hotels from the growing surface traffic congestion across the resort. Wider roads and new bridges aren’t cheap either. Potentially, a monorail expansion could be taken on by the Reedy Creek Improvement District to take advantage of its ability to utilize tax free municipal bonds like what was done with the Disney Springs parking garages.
I am working with a friend who has done some cost estimation for large scale transportation projects so we can try to put together an order of magnitude cost estimate for one of these networks.
If you have any feedback or questions about my methodologies here, please feel free to comment on this post.
About the author: Ben Lytle is an AICP Certified Urban Planner living in Orlando, Florida. He is currently working at AECOM on the architectural facility design of a major theme park attraction in Central Florida and previously worked on the preliminary ground transportation infrastructure design for a theme park resort in Asia. The views expressed in this blog do not represent those of his employer, his employer’s clients, Walt Disney World, or potentially even his own. The information contained in this post is purely speculative and is derived from publicly available information as described elsewhere in this blog. The author does not make any claims to the accuracy of any information presented here. It has not been verified by anybody, and should not be taken any more seriously than any other Armchair Imagineering you read online. So there.
I have calculated the estimated demand for every hour of each segment of my preferred alternative monorail networks. However, to understand what they mean, it is important to understand how many people an hour a monorail can realistically carry.
The design capacity of any grade-separated transit line is determined by several factors:
- total passengers per car
- number of cars per train
- headway (the time between train departures), which is the sum of:
- minimum train separation in seconds
- dwell time at station
Likewise, the Contemporary Resort also forms the overall maximum length of trains. Currently, the monorail station is the northern half of the building. But it is conceivable that the monorail station platform could be extended to run the length of the building (approximately 430 feet). If the monorail cars remain the same dimensions as they are currently, this creates a maximum train length of 13 cars.
Unfortunately, determining the headway of the monorail requires more than some simple extrapolations of the current monorail system.
From the beginning, I have been assuming that the monorail trains and stations would need to be reconfigured to allow for platform-level boarding. Platform level boarding is when the station platform is level with the floor of the train so passengers in wheelchairs can board without the use of a ramp. This eliminates the requirement for a cast member to be present at all stations to operate the ramp, and can dramatically reduce the required station dwell time.
I also assume that all the bugs in the automatic train control can be worked out to allow for the most efficient train spacing.
Because both of these characteristics are not present in the existing monorail system, I have to look to other transit systems to identify a realistic headway time.
Some metro systems have been known to operate with headways of as little as 70 seconds, but that is on metro systems that primarily serve commuters, people most likely to know where they are going and how things work. Perhaps a better comparison might be airport people movers such as the ones at the Orlando International Airport. An airport people mover's load and unload characteristics are similar to the monorail because they have platform level boarding, automated train control, and platform doors. Airport people movers are not as familiar to riders as urban metro systems, because they are not a part of the daily commute for most passengers. Additionally, the riders of such systems frequently have rolling suitcases which may take up space during passenger flows through doorways in a fashion similar to strollers upon exit and entry of the monorail at Walt Disney World.
An airport people mover system can have headways as fast as 90 seconds, but according to the Transportation Research Board's Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, a more typical headway for such a system is 120 seconds.
Once the design capacity was determined using the numbers above, I calculated the achievable capacity. This is the capacity that a transit line can be reasonably assumed to achieve given the variability in demand across an operating hour. The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual recommends a peak hour factor of 0.8 to be used. This means that if the design capacity for a specific segment is 1,000 people in an hour, it should be assumed that only 800 people in an hour will actually be carried before unacceptable train loads or queuing would be experienced.
Monorail Achievable Capacity for Two Minute Headway Operation by Train Length
Cars Per Train
|
6 (Existing)
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
Train Capacity
|
360
|
420
|
480
|
540
|
600
|
660
|
720
|
780
|
Achievable Train Capacity (Peak Hour Factor of 0.8)
|
288
|
336
|
384
|
432
|
480
|
528
|
576
|
624
|
Design Capacity (people per hour)
|
10,800
|
12,600
|
14,400
|
16,200
|
18,000
|
19,800
|
21,600
|
23,400
|
Achievable Capacity (people per hour)
|
8,640
|
10,080
|
11,520
|
12,960
|
14,400
|
15,840
|
17,280
|
18,720
|
Now that these capacities have been determined, we can look at the estimated hourly capacities of each network to determine what each network would look like (and whether it would even work at all).
When I first calculated these numbers, I wanted to create some GIFs that would show the estimated ridership on each segment for each hour of the day. Unfortunately, after spending my free time on this task for the last several months (I determined the ridership numbers in February 2017), I have come to the conclusion that either Data Driven Graphics in Photoshop defy logic or (more likely) that I bit off more than I could chew. So, I will instead present some charts showing the maximum hourly demand for each line and maps showing the peak hour passenger flows for each network. If anyone out there knows anything about Data Driven Graphics in Photoshop and wants to help, feel free to comment on this post. Because I still think it would be a helpful way to visualize the passenger flows on each network.
Network 1094 Characteristics
Line
|
Max. Hourly Passengers
|
Peak Hour
|
Peak Segment
|
Cars Per Train
|
Headway (minutes)
|
Cycle Time (minutes)
|
Trains Required
|
Park Connector B
|
22,139
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Hollywood Studios - Epcot
|
13
|
1.7
|
34.7
|
21
|
Existing Resort
|
2,163
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Grand Floridian - Magic Kingdom
|
13
|
8.0
|
15.9
|
2
|
Epcot Loop B
|
3,378
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Port Orleans French Quarter - Epcot
|
13
|
9.9
|
9.9
|
1
|
Epcot Loop E
|
8,193
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Saratoga Springs - Disney Springs West Side
|
13
|
4.0
|
31.9
|
8
|
Studios Loop A
|
4,559
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Boardwalk - Hollywood Studios
|
13
|
5.3
|
15.9
|
3
|
Animal Kingdom Loop A
|
6,392
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
All Star - Animal Kingdom
|
13
|
4.7
|
14.1
|
3
|
The monorail network with the highest score per mile, Network 1094, has one link with a passenger demand greater than the maximum achievable capacity of a monorail at Disney World given my original constraints. This link, connecting Hollywood Studios to Epcot, would require the longest trains possible to operate at headways of only 1.7 minutes. Unfortunately, this would not be possible to achieve on a consistent basis, so this network must be rejected.
Before we completely reject this network, I do want to discuss a possible confounding factor that may make this a more feasible option. When I started working on this project four years ago, there wasn’t even the slightest hint that the Skyliner gondola transit system would be built connecting Hollywood Studios to Epcot. It remains to be seen exactly how this system will operate and how it would be integrated with any monorail network expansion. But this gondola transit system is being built in the area where my network model suggests there would be the greatest demand. So potentially a network like this may still have a chance of being technically possible.
Network 838 Characteristics
Line
|
Max. Hourly
Passengers
|
Peak Hour
|
Peak Segment
|
Cars Per Train
|
Headway
(minutes)
|
Cycle Time
(minutes)
|
Trains
Required
|
Park Connector B
|
16,775
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Hollywood Studios - Epcot
|
13
|
2.2
|
34.7
|
16
|
Existing Resort
|
1.391
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Grand Floridian - Magic Kingdom
|
13
|
15.9
|
15.9
|
1
|
Epcot Loop B
|
2,580
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Old Key West - Epcot
|
13
|
7.8
|
15.5
|
2
|
Studios Loop A
|
2,701
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
Yacht & Beach Club – International Gateway
|
13
|
8.0
|
15.9
|
2
|
Animal Kingdom Loop A
|
3,912
|
10:00AM – 11:00AM
|
All Star – Animal Kingdom
|
13
|
7.0
|
14.1
|
2
|
This network would call for 13 car trains that would arrive on 2.2 minute headways for the Park Connector B line. To provide operational flexibility, I assume that the 13 car trains would be used on the other lines, even though they could achieve an acceptable capacity with shorter trains. The table above indicates that the Epcot Loop C, Studios Loop A, and Animal Kingdom Loop A lines could have headways of approximately 7 or 8 minutes, so riders would have an average wait time of 3 or 4 minutes, comparable to the Existing Resort line and much better than the average headways on many major city’s rapid transit lines.
The Existing Resort line, however, would be able to operate with a single train and would have a headway of almost 16 minutes. I would consider this unacceptable, and although enough capacity could be provided with a single train, I think two trains would be necessary to maintain service quality and keep wait times within the limits described at the onset of this project.
Network 1112 Characteristics
Line
|
Max. Hourly Passengers
|
Peak Hour
|
Peak Segment
|
Cars Per Train
|
Headway (minutes)
|
Cycle Time (minutes)
|
Trains Required
|
Park Connector B
|
34,520
|
11:00AM - 12:00PM
|
Hollywood Studios - Epcot
|
13
|
1.1
|
34.7
|
33
|
Existing Resort
|
3,619
|
11:00AM – 12:00PM
|
Grand Floridian - Magic Kingdom
|
13
|
8.0
|
15.9
|
2
|
Epcot Loop B
|
5,080
|
11:00AM - 12:00PM
|
Port Orleans French Quarter - Epcot
|
13
|
4.9
|
9.9
|
2
|
Epcot Loop E
|
14,905
|
3:00PM - 4:00PM
|
Disney Springs West Side - Typhoon Lagoon
|
13
|
2.5
|
31.9
|
13
|
Studios Loop A
|
6,840
|
11:00AM – 12:00PM
|
Boardwalk – Hollywood Studios
|
13
|
3.8
|
11.3
|
3
|
Sports Loop A
|
11,597
|
11:00AM - 12:00PM
|
Art of Animation - Hollywood Studios
|
13
|
2.6
|
12.8
|
5
|
Animal Kingdom Loop A
|
9,611
|
11:00AM - 12:00PM
|
All Star – Animal Kingdom
|
13
|
3.5
|
14.1
|
4
|
Network 1112 was investigated because it was the highest ranked alternative to have a station at the ESPN Wide World of Sports. This network would carry a whopping 329,000 riders per day and would be the 6th busiest rapid transit system in the United States (behind San Francisco’s BART system which moves 35% more people on 140% more track (source)). However, this network would most definitely not work. At the peak hour in the morning with 13 car trains, the Park Connector B would need to operate at a headway of only 1.1 minute. My research suggests that some rapid transit systems in Eastern Europe may be able to operate at nearly that frequency, but the train doors open before the trains come to a complete stop, the riders are generally commuters who know where they are going and don’t have strollers, the weather is colder so people get out of their seats faster, and the liability and insurance requirements work very differently there than in the United States. In short, this network could not work. Not even the Skyliner gondola system can save it.
To make this system work, I would need to connect the Animal Kingdom side of the Park Connector B to Magic Kingdom and make two separate Park Connector lines running in loops in opposite directions. Maybe one day I will sketch out what that could look like. But for now, pretend this network doesn’t exist and we can move on to discuss something that could work.
Network 453 Characteristics
Line
|
Max. Hourly Passengers
|
Peak Hour
|
Peak Segment
|
Cars Per Train
|
Headway (minutes)
|
Cycle Time (minutes)
|
Trains Required
|
Park Connector A
|
10,382
|
10:00AM - 11:00AM
|
Epcot – Hollywood Studios
|
8
|
2.1
|
40.6
|
19
|
Existing Resort
|
2,163
|
10:00AM - 11:00AM
|
Grand Floridian - Magic Kingdom
|
8
|
8.0
|
15.9
|
2
|
Epcot Loop B
|
3,378
|
10:00AM - 11:00AM
|
Port Orleans French Quarter - Epcot
|
8
|
4.9
|
9.9
|
2
|
Epcot Loop E
|
5,626
|
10:00AM - 11:00AM
|
Saratoga Springs - Disney Springs West Side
|
8
|
4.0
|
31.9
|
8
|
Studios Loop A
|
4,559
|
10:00AM - 11:00AM
|
Boardwalk – Hollywood Studios
|
8
|
4.0
|
15.9
|
4
|
Network 453 was selected because at 23rd, it was the highest ranked alternative to use Park Connector A. This network would be able to operate eight car trains with a 2.1 minute headway on the Park Connector A line and headways of between four and five minutes on all of the resort loops except for the existing Resort Line. The existing Resort Line would be able to operate with only two trains, but the headway would be eight minutes, and would probably be noticeably longer than the waits on the other lines. So, because I can make up whatever I want to, I would recommend having three trains operating on the existing Resort Line so the headways would be in the neighborhood of five minutes like the other resort loops.
This network would carry 178,000 people per day and would be the 9th busiest rapid transit system in the United States (source). The eight-car trains in this network would dramatically reduce the amount that the existing stations would need to be modified, and in most cases would not even require a replacement of any existing track in station areas.
This transit system would require an additional 22 miles of track to build, 36 new eight car trains, 17 new stations and major reconstruction of all the existing stations. This system or any other system expansion described in these posts would optimistically cost hundreds of millions of dollars, and at the end of the day would only increase Disney’s bottom line by the amount that a premium could be charged to the hotel rooms that would be gaining monorail service access. As a fan of the Walt Disney World Monorails and theme parks in general, I am not sure whether I would want Disney to spend that kind of money on something like this instead of, say, a major expansion of an existing theme park.
The construction of such a system would cause major disruption to the existing monorail lines. And once it is built, a minor mechanical problem on a single train would cause incredible disruption resort-wide.
On the other hand, it would be separate guests traveling between parks and hotels from the growing surface traffic congestion across the resort. Wider roads and new bridges aren’t cheap either. Potentially, a monorail expansion could be taken on by the Reedy Creek Improvement District to take advantage of its ability to utilize tax free municipal bonds like what was done with the Disney Springs parking garages.
I am working with a friend who has done some cost estimation for large scale transportation projects so we can try to put together an order of magnitude cost estimate for one of these networks.
If you have any feedback or questions about my methodologies here, please feel free to comment on this post.
About the author: Ben Lytle is an AICP Certified Urban Planner living in Orlando, Florida. He is currently working at AECOM on the architectural facility design of a major theme park attraction in Central Florida and previously worked on the preliminary ground transportation infrastructure design for a theme park resort in Asia. The views expressed in this blog do not represent those of his employer, his employer’s clients, Walt Disney World, or potentially even his own. The information contained in this post is purely speculative and is derived from publicly available information as described elsewhere in this blog. The author does not make any claims to the accuracy of any information presented here. It has not been verified by anybody, and should not be taken any more seriously than any other Armchair Imagineering you read online. So there.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)