Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
MIA/MCO Automated People Mover Vehicle Replacement  
User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6447 posts, RR: 2
Posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4874 times:

I was wondering, does anyone know if there are plans to replace the automated people mover vehicles at MIA (Concourse E) and at MCO? These APM systems operate some of the last remaining Westinghouse/Adtranz C-100 vehicles still in service. Most other airports (including ATL, LAS, LGW, SEA, and TPA) have already replaced their C-100 vehicles with Bombardier CX-100 aka Innovia APM 100 vehicles in the 1990s and 2000s. I wonder if MCO and MIA plan on upgrading soon.

I know that MIA's two new people movers (the MIA Mover and the North Terminal APM) will use the Mitsubishi Crystal Mover. Perhaps the Crystal Mover could eventually replace the aging C-100s in Concourse E, however, the Innovia APM 100/CX-100 would probably be an easier and cheaper upgrade.


The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7125 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4866 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Thread starter):
I know that MIA's two new people movers (the MIA Mover and the North Terminal APM) will use the Mitsubishi Crystal Mover. Perhaps the Crystal Mover could eventually replace the aging C-100s in Concourse E, however, the Innovia APM 100/CX-100 would probably be an easier and cheaper upgrade.

Good question, I have not heard anything in MIA. They have had some problems with the peoplemover including and accident that had injuries. However once the full north terminal is oppened the high E gates that use the people mover wont be used much if at all. So I think for now spending money on new trains will be a waste of money.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3309 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4574 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 1):
Good question, I have not heard anything in MIA. They have had some problems with the peoplemover including and accident that had injuries. However once the full north terminal is oppened the high E gates that use the people mover wont be used much if at all. So I think for now spending money on new trains will be a waste of money.

This is the same I've heard. With AA currently occupying Concourse E, only one functioning train is woefully inadequate, but it should be more than enough once AA's settled in its new digs.

The future of the Concourse E satellite is itself up in the air (if you'll pardon the pun). If it's closed down or demolished, the train would no longer be necessary, and I still don't see why Concourse E couldn't have just been extended along the path the train currently takes.


User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 881 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4453 times:

As far as MCO goes, I think they are still happy with the old once, no plans on the horizon updating them. As long as they are reliable and working they will not replace them.

Btw, they kinf of became an icon of MCO...


User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6447 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 3 weeks ago) and read 4363 times:

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 3):
Btw, they kinf of became an icon of MCO...

Well, the Bombardier Innovia APM 100 (formerly CX-100) should be an easy upgrade, since it is compatible with most of the existing infrastructure of the Westinghouse/Adtranz C-100.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineRafabozzolla From Brazil, joined Apr 2000, 1213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4288 times:

Quoting OB1504 (Reply 2):
I still don't see why Concourse E couldn't have just been extended along the path the train currently takes.

I could never understand Concourse E design. It seems a waste of money. Why haven't they just built a regular concourse?


User currently offlinePeteinmiami From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 270 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4194 times:

Quoting Rafabozzolla (Reply 5):
I could never understand Concourse E design. It seems a waste of money. Why haven't they just built a regular concourse?

Yes indeed, I guess it was done more to impress than to have a functional value!
Once AA makes the move to North Terminal, concourse E is probably going to be empty, in the future plans for the central terminal renovations, concourse E will be demolished , same as F and G to allow for a linear satellite parallel to the terminal building, but I do not see it happening in the near future!!! So I do not think the train will be replaced, it will be maintained to provide the connection to the satellite, or I will not be surprised if they close it all together and keep just the lower E gates operational. But the answer is No, no new train for the E connector at MIA.


User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8289 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4043 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The satelite at concourse E was great in its day, the concourse H of 1979. But MIA has a problem, does everyone fit into concourses H & J ? Nope, there is lots of gate space in concourses E & F. There is always going to be a need at MIA for teh smaller Latin airline with its one or two 737 a day, they have to go somewhere. The close in E gates, E 8, E 10 and E 11 can handle 747 and 777 with s short walk to customs are of value to AA or other airlines with early arrivals, usually from GIG, GRU or EZE.

User currently offlineCompensateMe From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 1060 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3930 times:

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 4):
Well, the Bombardier Innovia APM 100 (formerly CX-100) should be an easy upgrade, since it is compatible with most of the existing infrastructure of the Westinghouse/Adtranz C-100.

But, alas, it costs money to replace trains. The trains at MCO are reliable, functionable and look modern. I doubt many persons would notice any difference (and probably the ones that would notice are the same ones who care about which brand IFE system is installed in the aircraft they're traveling in). MCO would be silly to invest any money into replacing these trains, especially given the uncertain economy.



Hypocrisy: "US airlines should only buy Boeing... BTW, check out my new Hyundai!"
User currently offlineTLHFLA From United States of America, joined May 2003, 593 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3842 times:

As far as MCO, there were plans to replace the Airside 4 shuttle cars and enhance the guideways for Airsides 1 and 3, according to this article from 2005:

http://www.apmconsulting-llc.com/APMExpressVol2Issue2.pdf

Not sure if the Airside 4 shuttles were ever replaced though...these would have been installed in 1990 when the building was opened.

The Airport CIP plan calls for some enhancements to the stations for the original Airside 1 and 3 shuttles.
http://www.goaa.org/planning/oia_cip.pdf

I seem to recall an article where the original Airside 1 and 3 shuttles were refurbished in the early 90's. I can't find it now, but it had a picture of a crane lifting the refurbished cars onto the guideways at MCO. I know the original 1981 trains had only two cars until around 1990 or so when the third car was added.



Bill in ATL
User currently offlineGoldenshield From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5970 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 3800 times:

Slightly off topic, but what's up with that bridge to nowhere as shown here?

http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=nr4...pd86r33g&scene=3939358&lvl=1&sty=b



Two all beef patties, special sauce, lettuce, cheese, pickles, onions on a sesame seed bun.
User currently offlinefpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 881 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3723 times:

Quoting Goldenshield (Reply 10):
Slightly off topic, but what's up with that bridge to nowhere as shown here?

That was going to be the interconnect for the people mover for the new south terminal if they ever build it.


User currently offlineClipper136 From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 316 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3642 times:

Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 11):
That was going to be the interconnect for the people mover for the new south terminal if they ever build it.

Now will connect the new Rail station and the South Terminal Complex with the North Terminal Complex when built. Rail station to be complete in 2015 or 2016.


User currently offlineOB1504 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 3309 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3591 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 7):
The satelite at concourse E was great in its day, the concourse H of 1979. But MIA has a problem, does everyone fit into concourses H & J ? Nope, there is lots of gate space in concourses E & F. There is always going to be a need at MIA for teh smaller Latin airline with its one or two 737 a day, they have to go somewhere. The close in E gates, E 8, E 10 and E 11 can handle 747 and 777 with s short walk to customs are of value to AA or other airlines with early arrivals, usually from GIG, GRU or EZE.

It's the future of the international satellite terminal (High E) that's currently up in the air, not that of Gates E1 thru E11 (Low E).

By closing the satellite, the airport would see a loss of 8 gates (6 of which are widebody gates, though only 3 of those can handle the larger A340/747/777), but the savings of being able to close an entire, outdated terminal would more than likely compensate for that.

The airport would still have Gates E6, E8, E9, E10, E11, F10, F14, F15, F16, F17, F18, F19, and F23 to handle heavy aircraft, with 8 of those being able to handle the larger widebodies such as the A340/747/777.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
DFW's Automated People Mover posted Wed Jul 30 2003 22:03:53 by Ssides
MIA/MCO-HNL Non-stop Ever? posted Tue May 12 2009 22:58:59 by LemonKitty
DL MD-11s MIA-MCO posted Fri Feb 13 2009 06:54:31 by CodyKDiamond
Why So Few MIA-MCO Flights posted Sun Oct 12 2008 06:07:56 by LY777
Tropical Storm Fay Diversions MIA MCO posted Mon Aug 18 2008 17:39:47 by Crownvic
New LIS-MIA/MCO Charter Service posted Tue Mar 4 2008 12:14:53 by MAH4546
AirTrans - DFW's Original People Mover (website) posted Sat Feb 23 2008 02:27:43 by LoneStarMike
MIA-MCO With DL In The '80s posted Fri Sep 7 2007 10:19:06 by LY777
Recorded People Mover Train Voice At ATL posted Thu Aug 9 2007 18:23:05 by 1337Delta764
YYZ People Mover Ok Start? posted Wed Jul 12 2006 20:41:34 by CayMan