Las Vegas Monorail: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
GreenC bot (talk | contribs)
Line 52:
During testing and commissioning, the monorail suffered several malfunctions that delayed the start of passenger service for almost a year. The most serious of these problems related to parts falling from the monorail to the ground under the tracks.<ref name="guardian"/> After many delays, the finished Las Vegas Monorail opened to the public on July 15, 2004 with the completion and testing of "Phase 1".
 
On September 8, 2004, more problems with falling parts led to the closing of the monorail for nearly four months. It reopened on December 24, 2004. A number of repairs were made to the monorail cars during this shutdown. Each time the monorail system required major engineering changes, it underwent a lengthy "commissioning" process to confirm the effectiveness and safety of the repairs. Officials reported that each day the monorail was down cost the system approximately $85,000 in lost fares.<ref>{{cite web | title=Las Vegas Monorail Is Back on Track | work=Los Angeles Times | date=December 25, 2004 | url=httphttps://articleswww.latimes.com/2004archives/la-xpm-2004-dec/-25/nation/-na-monorail25-story.html | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202030414/http://articles.latimes.com/2004/dec/25/nation/na-monorail25 | archive-date=2017-02-02 | url-status=deadlive | access-date=}}</ref>
 
Transit Systems Management officials cited the successful handling of crowds during the 2005 [[Consumer Electronics Show]] as proof that the system could handle a major convention.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Sofradzija|first=Omar|date=January 8, 2005|title=Conventioneers boost monorail receipts|url=http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Jan-08-Sat-2005/news/25622949.html|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060104182353/http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Jan-08-Sat-2005/news/25622949.html|archive-date=January 4, 2006|website=Las Vegas Review-Journal}}</ref>