Bigger Busses?

[GrumpyFan]

I had a thought about Disney transportation and wanted to see what others thought.

Disney, for the most part uses slightly modified, standard commuter-style busses for transport to and from the parks, which have a decent capacity, but somewhat limited when it comes closing time and other peak hours. I wonder why they don't use bigger busses, such as the articulated style (accordion, slinky, tandem) or the extra-wide style used at many airport terminals, or even double-decker busses. I know the wider busses and the double-deckers would require some modifications to accomodate, but it would seem to be a worthwhile change if it helped them reduce a few of the busses on the road/in use.

[dudeman1975]

Good idea. In 1998 we were coming back from Illumination and they used a bus connected to a tractor trailer front. The thing was huge.

[BigRedDad]

Double decker buses are unlikely. The height would possibly exceed the necessary clearance for power lines, over passes, "tunnel" to Mk. The buses are not that bad. They just need to have a better logistics when the parks close. In other words, don't send 5 buses to MK for CR, Poly, and GF with only 10 people in line and 1 for the All-Stars with 1000 people in line.

[thumperbug]

I personally don't think that the seat configuation on most buses is the best use of space. I know they need to leave room for strollers (even closed up) etc but some of the buses look like they can only seat 15-20 people but there is tons of extra "space" (I'm not including space for Handicap) in my idea of extra space)

[GrumpyFan]

Double decker buses are unlikely. The height would possibly exceed the necessary clearance for power lines, over passes, "tunnel" to Mk. The buses are not that bad. They just need to have a better logistics when the parks close. In other words, don't send 5 buses to MK for CR, Poly, and GF with only 10 people in line and 1 for the All-Stars with 1000 people in line.

Oh yeah, I forgot about the tunnel! IThat would be somewhat difficult for double-decker. However, I think that would be one of the few places that it wouldn't go.
But, instead of going to MK, they could just drop/pick up at TTC.

For the most part, Disney transportation is great and does an excellent job. I was just thinking of ways it could possibly be improved.

[Mickey Loves Golf]

It would be pretty much impossible to use larger buses than what they run. Its difficult enough driving them through the resorts as they are. Old Key West is the WDW Bus Driver proving ground LOLOLOL. So withouth major reconstruction they couldn't use buses bigger than what they already have.

[Polynesian Dweller]

But, instead of going to MK, they could just drop/pick up at TTC.

Then you shift the load from the buses to the ferries and the monorail. That would become a real slow point like it was when the TTC was the main drop off point.

[Polynesian Dweller]

It would be pretty much impossible to use larger buses than what they run. Its difficult enough driving them through the resorts as they are.

Got to agree with that. There is no way an articulated bus could get into the Poly, the turns at the entrance are just too tight. Wider or double decker buses would also cause problems for the gating systems.

[GrumpyFan]

Got to agree with that. There is no way an articulated bus could get into the Poly, the turns at the entrance are just too tight. Wider or double decker buses would also cause problems for the gating systems.

Well, as I stated, adding bigger buses might necessitate some modifications around the resort to accommodate them. But, doing so, would still be less costly for WDW than building a monorail extension, which doesn't appear to be happening anytime soon. From what I've been reading, an articulated bus, carries almost double the capacity of a regular bus. So, it would really help in moving people at closing time.

[DisneyFanaticDargon]

Articulated would probably be the best option here but they would have to modify all the stops at all the resorts and parks. Not to mention could you imagine the mess this would make at the bus stops for Downtown Disney, which are already a nightmare as it is?

I would also agree that the next best option would be better logistics. Any resort that does not have a monorail line attached to it or any other form of transportation available from the parks, where its guests are less likely to be using rental cars (e.g. the value resorts) needs to have more buses designated to it at peak times than the resorts that have other transportation options.

[Ed]

Maybe I'm hallucinating, but I seem to recall seeing a few experimental articulated WDW buses a few years back. The fact that they're no longer there tells me they didn't work too well in that environment.

[GrumpyFan]

Even if they only used them in the mornings and at closing times going to Pop and All Stars, the amount of guests they could move would be twice what they already do. I haven't seen the bus stops at All Stars, but I would assume they're pretty similar to Pop, which would seem to be big enough already to accommodate to handle an articulated bus.

[TheRustyScupper]

. . . I haven't seen the bus stops at All Stars, but I would assume they're pretty similar to Pop, which would seem to be big enough already to accommodate to handle an articulated bus . . .

1) The bus stop drives could handle an articulated bus.
2) The loading zone could not.
3) This would require substantial changes in concrete.
4) Plus, articulated buses are really expensive.

NOTE: We used to make articulated urban and inter-urban buses.

[GrumpyFan]

1) The bus stop drives could handle an articulated bus.
2) The loading zone could not.
3) This would require substantial changes in concrete.
4) Plus, articulated buses are really expensive.

NOTE: We used to make articulated urban and inter-urban buses.

Rusty, can you elaborate? Particularly on 4. Are they more expensive to buy and operate than the cost of 2 buses, which would include maintenance, fuel and driver? And, explain you note. What are urban and inter-urban buses?

[Marker]

Even if they only used them in the mornings and at closing times going to Pop and All Stars,

That wouldn't seem very cost effective to me. Having a set of buses that you could only use during certian times, or for certain destinations. It's a lot more flexible for the system to be able to use any bus, anytime, anywhere.

I would also think maintenance cost would be higher on those buses as well.

[mainemajor]

Good idea. In 1998 we were coming back from Illumination and they used a bus connected to a tractor trailer front. The thing was huge.

We rode on one of these, too! People kept getting on and on and on. It help A LOT of people. We were staying at AS Sports on that trip.

[Polynesian Dweller]

Well, as I stated, adding bigger buses might necessitate some modifications around the resort to accommodate them. But, doing so, would still be less costly for WDW than building a monorail extension, which doesn't appear to be happening anytime soon. From what I've been reading, an articulated bus, carries almost double the capacity of a regular bus. So, it would really help in moving people at closing time.

Agreed. If it was practical that would be helpful. But its not small inexpensive change at the Poly from what I see there. The regular buses barely fit now and have trouble with the turns. It would require considerable realignment of the roadways into and out of the Poly. Yes, cheaper than a monorail but not necessarily cost effective either especially if there are similar issues at the other resorts.

[TheRustyScupper]

Rusty, can you elaborate? Particularly on 4. Are they more expensive to buy and operate than the cost of 2 buses, which would include maintenance, fuel and driver? And, explain you note. What are urban and inter-urban buses?

1) Bus types
. . . urban buses are "city" buses
. . . inter-urban are meant to travel between cities
2) Our articulated buses
. . . regular buses of 40 & 45-feet, articulated buses at 60-feet
. . . carried 1½ times more people than regular buses
. . . cost 2½ times more than regular buses
. . . maintenance and fuel costs were 1½ times regular vehicle
. . . there is a 1:1.8 driver savings ratio
3) On the surface, sounds more economical than regular bus
4) But, that assumes the articulated buses ALWAYS ran full.
5) Once they run 3/4 full, they cost more to operate than regular buses.

NOTE: The above aside, there is one other huge problem with articulated buses. Since there can be no diesel engine in the high-rear of the first section, the buses cannot be "low floor". So, WDW would be back to 4-steps (one onto bus and three up to coach floor).

[GrumpyFan]

If they only used them at opening/closing time, they would most assuredly be full. And, it would use 1 less driver for each, and cut down on 1 less bus. So, even if they only bought 4-6 of them and used them at peak times, there could still be some advantage.

I thought WDW moved or was moving away from Diesel in their busses. Aren't they all pretty much hybrid now? Some of them are even running on LP/natural gas aren't they? I've seen several, low floor articulated busses, so I'm not sure about your comment.

[TheRustyScupper]

If they only used them at opening/closing time, they would most assuredly be full. And, it would use 1 less driver for each, and cut down on 1 less bus. So, even if they only bought 4-6 of them and used them at peak times, there could still be some advantage.

OK, let's look at this.
. . . let's assume, for this argument, the bus capacity is double
. . . you use the bus 4-hrs AM and 4-hrs PM
. . . you save one driver per say
. . . drivers are paid $15.64/hr max +benefits
. . . so, manpower saved is $54,000/yr per bus
. . . let's assume 20% saving in fuel per hour over two busses
. . . fuel savings could be $10,440/yr per bus
. . . total savings per bus = $64,440
. . . 40' bus costs about $131,000
. . . 60' articulated bus costs about $312,000
. . . we now add cost of money, extra maintenance, extra-long garages
. . . payoff would be about 6½-yrs

NOTE1: 40' CNG (gas) buses cost $319,000-$385,000 each, and get 25% less fuel efficiency than diesel fuel. CNG high-floor or low-floor buses are more expensive to own and operate than diesel, per NREL (National Renewable Energy Lab of Dept of Energy).

NOTE2: I am in the biodiesel refining business, so I get involved with NREL on several proposals per year. I also used to build urban and interurban buses. I am very interested with mass transit and alternative fuels.