Ride Access Pass and Disabled Access - 2024 Discussion

[Skyscraper]

I would say this is why I disagree with the idea of Merlin assigning red RAP automatically to those with neurodiverse conditions which I heard has happened in recent years.

It is indeed automatic which is annoying, although if you ask when collecting your photocard the first time they will change it if they can be sure you can evacuate unassisted.

 

[Ash]

Wasn't part of the Disney problem that wheelchair users were openly advertising themselves "for hire" to people who wanted to "skip the line"?
If so, at least they were trying to share the benefits around!

It just shows the disgusting bigotry and double standards by people.

I don’t believe in discrimination in any form. Negative or positive, the fact people want to financially benefit from the positive discrimination of their disability is abhorrent. And it’s happening everywhere.

The fact society has turned a blind eye to it is even more absurd

 

[imanautie]

Fair points, I may have been hyperbolic on the ease of implementation. It was more in comparison to the suggestions of “magic bands”.

I believe Disney now do video call assessments prior in the US?

I don’t know if that’s the solution but the overarching inclusivity seems only to end up excluding those who need it most. I’d certainly be happy to take part in such a scheme if it was professionally conducted.

As it stands they seem to be putting plasters on a leak which only causes another to burst.



The criteria has been loosened, eligibility is greater than ever.

Disney now also routinely refuse terminally Ill non ambulant people with additional medical needs from DAS...

 

[Vicki]

Yep, Disney have cracked down to the point it's probably easier to say who doesn't get DAS - most people.

I used it on my trip, and found it massively helpful, but as I'm now not likely eligible, I'm reconsidering my options for my next Florida trip. Because I could not handle the queue environments at Disney without it - I'd be done after 4 rides.

Other parks in Florida are now starting to ask for proof (which is causing uproar among people there because why should you have to prove disability?!?) and it's apparently working well. So I'll take my money elsewhere - other parks have better coasters anyway...

On another note, had an interesting experience at Towers the other week - timed out on Galactica, but even after trying the test seat and thinking I was OK, didn't fit. That was annoying. Used the time to get lunch and have a wander, but definitely didn't help how I was feeling after the walk of shame...

Interestingly, as much as I HATE to admit it, I think my RAP will be changing from yellow to red when it renews. There are so many rides I can't access on my own anymore, my sight, particularly my night vision just isn't good enough. Some queues are a struggle and an evac at Scarefest for example would be a real challenge alone. So no more solo trips, which is a shame.

 

[Matt N]

Fair points, I may have been hyperbolic on the ease of implementation. It was more in comparison to the suggestions of “magic bands”.

I believe Disney now do video call assessments prior in the US?

I don’t know if that’s the solution but the overarching inclusivity seems only to end up excluding those who need it most. I’d certainly be happy to take part in such a scheme if it was professionally conducted.

As it stands they seem to be putting plasters on a leak which only causes another to burst.

I think some form of “assessment” sounds like the only realistic way of tightening up eligibility while still helping people who need it, but I think even that isn’t a panacea for all of the problems. For people with fluctuating conditions, an assessment may not reflect their true need at all times; they may need it on the day of the assessment, but not need it on the actual park day, and vice versa.

There’s also the argument that that sort of assessment is demeaning and discriminatory towards disabled people. I’ve heard schools of thought suggesting that that type of assessment for disabled services and access arrangements is immoral and makes disabled people feel discriminated against. This is the sort of process used by the DWP to determine eligibility for government disability benefits, and I’ve often heard people complain that the assessment process for government benefits, such as making people “show” their disability or talk specifically about their needs, is discriminatory and demeaning.

The problem with RAP now is that I think the genie is out of the bottle and can’t be put back in; anything Merlin does will realistically be no more than damage limitation at this point. Any attempt at making eligibility tighter will go down like a lead balloon and attract accusations that the company is being ableist, which is the last thing they want. They’ve set a precedent in terms of eligibility, and that will now be very hard to reverse. Personally, I’m not even certain that eligibility is the issue either.

The one thing I find interesting about the RAP saga is that it seems like a problem that’s pretty much exclusive to UK Merlin parks. I’ve been to a fair few parks now, both in Britain and abroad, and I’ve never seen RAP be such a dominant force anywhere else to the degree that it is in UK Merlin parks. I went to PortAventura recently, and there was little to no RAP there (maybe the odd group coming up the exit on 1 or 2 rides; I hardly saw any RAP all visit). Europa Park similarly had little to no RAP. I’ve never noticed a notable degree of RAP in any of the Florida parks. I’ve never noticed RAP in any non-Merlin UK park. RAP being even vaguely noticeable for the average guest seems to be a very UK Merlin exclusive thing.

 

[flyingguitar]

I think some form of “assessment” sounds like the only realistic way of tightening up eligibility while still helping people who need it, but I think even that isn’t a panacea for all of the problems. For people with fluctuating conditions, an assessment may not reflect their true need at all times; they may need it on the day of the assessment, but not need it on the actual park day, and vice versa.

I think it would limit it and add too much beurocracy, also depending on the assesment it could vary, if it is talk with someone for 20 mins about your disability, someone it could still be exploited as people can hype up their disabilities, or an in person exam could be extremely out of the way and will be discouraging for people to do and both of these methods will exclude people who need it whilst potentially letting in people who don't.

I don't have RAP so I am not sure how hard it is currently, but from reading this thread it seems as though merlin uses a different company to get if someone needs it. this is very smart as a company focusing on it would be able to change and fix problems better than a company who isn't (requiring someone to go through an email tree to get to the RAP team) in addition it shifts the blame from merlin to this company.

The one thing I find interesting about the RAP saga is that it seems like a problem that’s pretty much exclusive to UK Merlin parks. I’ve been to a fair few parks now, both in Britain and abroad, and I’ve never seen RAP be such a dominant force anywhere else to the degree that it is in UK Merlin parks. I went to PortAventura recently, and there was little to no RAP there (maybe the odd group coming up the exit on 1 or 2 rides; I hardly saw any RAP all visit). Europa Park similarly had little to no RAP. I’ve never noticed a notable degree of RAP in any of the Florida parks. I’ve never noticed RAP in any non-Merlin UK park. RAP being even vaguely noticeable for the average guest seems to be a very UK Merlin exclusive thing.

from what I understand at Disney people use fast pass lane for DAS so probably isn't shown that well, I have been to eftling, although it was a really quiet day so I can't comment on that.

To me I think there are a few factors, first is that it isn't too difficult to apply for (and it shouldn't really be I think to keep it fair) but importantly is the MAP crowd, since RAP works for all of Merlins parks as such applying for RAP at the start of the year is an annoying task but will allow "free fast pass" for the year leading to more people deciding to apply, because there is nothing to lose and you can gain a lot.

I think one thing that could help, and I am happy to be wrong but I wonder about differtnt meth of relieasing RAP's, as from reading this it appears the problem is that if MAP users block book all of the days early, there may be none left for anyone else I wonder if either the RAP book requires a MAP booking, or ticket booked, allowing for this practice of block booking to be stopped, alternatively I wonder if they could release RAP bookings as tickets are booked,until a couple days before and then release the rest (if 50% of tickets are booked, 50% are bookable RAP this would reduce the problem of them being fully booked, but it can be confusing and I can think of a few more problems.

 

[Bowser]

Disney now also routinely refuse terminally Ill non ambulant people with additional medical needs from DAS...

On what basis?

I think some form of “assessment” sounds like the only realistic way of tightening up eligibility while still helping people who need it, but I think even that isn’t a panacea for all of the problems. For people with fluctuating conditions, an assessment may not reflect their true need at all times; they may need it on the day of the assessment, but not need it on the actual park day, and vice versa.

There’s also the argument that that sort of assessment is demeaning and discriminatory towards disabled people. I’ve heard schools of thought suggesting that that type of assessment for disabled services and access arrangements is immoral and makes disabled people feel discriminated against. This is the sort of process used by the DWP to determine eligibility for government disability benefits, and I’ve often heard people complain that the assessment process for government benefits, such as making people “show” their disability or talk specifically about their needs, is discriminatory and demeaning.

The problem with RAP now is that I think the genie is out of the bottle and can’t be put back in; anything Merlin does will realistically be no more than damage limitation at this point. Any attempt at making eligibility tighter will go down like a lead balloon and attract accusations that the company is being ableist, which is the last thing they want. They’ve set a precedent in terms of eligibility, and that will now be very hard to reverse. Personally, I’m not even certain that eligibility is the issue either.

The one thing I find interesting about the RAP saga is that it seems like a problem that’s pretty much exclusive to UK Merlin parks. I’ve been to a fair few parks now, both in Britain and abroad, and I’ve never seen RAP be such a dominant force anywhere else to the degree that it is in UK Merlin parks. I went to PortAventura recently, and there was little to no RAP there (maybe the odd group coming up the exit on 1 or 2 rides; I hardly saw any RAP all visit). Europa Park similarly had little to no RAP. I’ve never noticed a notable degree of RAP in any of the Florida parks. I’ve never noticed RAP in any non-Merlin UK park. RAP being even vaguely noticeable for the average guest seems to be a very UK Merlin exclusive thing.

Hard to disagree with the majority of this.

Whilst i am all too familiar with the frustrations of government bureaucracy for the disabled, i do think there is a distinction between what amounts to quality of life or even survival and a trip to a theme park, so the same standard should not necessarily apply to both.

As you say, this is an issue which is almost exclusive to UK theme parks run by Merlin. It does not happen at Paultons or Drayton, it does not happen at Efteling or Plopsaland and so on. As long as the parks continue to be run so poorly with unreliable attractions and multiple hour queues, whilst enticing as many people as possible to visit as many times as possible, a system for the vulnerable that relies on public morality is going to continue to struggle.

Also as a side note, i do think the UK has some of, if not the best accessibility in the world in my experience so whilst we often spend a lot of time venting it's good to take a moment to acknowledge that too.

 

[BarryZola]

A good thing that someone else mentioned would be to take a £10-£20 RAP booking fee. Then when you arrive at the park and are issued with your RAP card they just give you the money back. Don't turn up and you've lost your money. Would stop people block-booking. Not sure it would solve the problem completely, but I think it would help. Sure someone would claim it was discrimination though, when it would actually be helping them in the long run.

 

[rob666]

Just stop block booking, only allow two dates in advance for all.
That gives you the chance to plan your next visits, and you can always book an extra trip in advance.

 

[BarryZola]

To be honest, I think one date is enough (for each park). Visit and then book your next one when you get home. Gives everyone more of a chance. It would probably only upset the lanyard brigade who have made Merlin parks their whole life and personality and have to visit every single week even just to sit in a coffee shop for a couple of hours and not even bother going on rides (which they're absolutely free to do, of course).

 

[Benzin]

In terms of assessments (government wise at least), they need to be done. However what can be really disheartening to those is when you have your phone call assessment, knowing full well your own issues and the results are 0 for no reason. Especially when you've no other choice (and no wonder so many struggled after the changes to UC).

Bookings is tricky. Because plans do change last minute for some, so to have a potential charge hanging over you (especially when say, no such thing is an issue for abled visitors) would potentially be an issue along discrimination lines. Limiting them could have same problems if you don't also do it for everyone else. Also screws things up if you're doing an overnight stay and maybe want 2 days in the park (which most I'm sure would do).

Basically, the horse has bolted and left the gate open for the capybara to follow suit. Needs almost a full blown reform to make to suitable for those who need it, and the company would need to stand firm over those who would kick up a fuss if Timmy can't get his free Fastrack anymore.

 

[Bowser]

The solution is to fix the parks. If people know they can get on all the rides they want with reasonable queue times then for many RAP is either no longer required or desired.

I don’t see Merlin making any changes for 2025. Beyond the unexplained capacity increase during the summer, the system does seem to be functioning well on-site so really only the booking system needs amending:

- Create online amendments
- Withhold capacity for on the day release
- Modify booking limit per person

 

[BarryZola]

Limiting them could have same problems if you don't also do it for everyone else. Also screws things up if you're doing an overnight stay and maybe want 2 days in the park (which most I'm sure would do).

Good point. I didn't consider that. Maybe just guarantee booking access either side of any on-site hotel stays? More incentive to stay at the Resort. But yeah, on reflection, maybe make it a max of 2 bookings for everyone like Rob said.

 

[Skyscraper]

Also screws things up if you're doing an overnight stay and maybe want 2 days in the park (which most I'm sure would do).

They really should hold a block of RAPs back for hotel guests. Back in august the group in front of me at Admissions had only booked RAP for their first day, and had to be added to the waitlist for their second.

 

[Smiley]

Wow - this has got crazyfest. The simple thing is to take the "queue" out of queueing. Virtual queues. More time for peeps to spend money on drinks/food/merch.

Once you take the "double bubble" out of RAP (virtual queueing whilst physically queueing elsewhere) the benefit is gone. Let RAP be for RAP users, not abusers

 

[flyingguitar]

Wow - this has got crazyfest. The simple thing is to take the "queue" out of queueing. Virtual queues. More time for peeps to spend money on drinks/food/merch.

Once you take the "double bubble" out of RAP (virtual queueing whilst physically queueing elsewhere) the benefit is gone. Let RAP be for RAP users, not abusers

yeah, but queue times would go through the roof, see mandril mayhem, tron etc volcano bay used virtual queue and when I went all the queues were insainly long, you would get less done.

 

[Matt N]

Wow - this has got crazyfest. The simple thing is to take the "queue" out of queueing. Virtual queues. More time for peeps to spend money on drinks/food/merch.

Once you take the "double bubble" out of RAP (virtual queueing whilst physically queueing elsewhere) the benefit is gone. Let RAP be for RAP users, not abusers

Wholesale virtual queueing is itself far from free of problems, though, and would necessitate a considerable rethink of park design to even have the slightest chance of working successfully.

The thing it boils down to is that most (if not all) theme parks are designed to account for the fact that a considerable percentage of guests are in queues. When you take guests out of the major ride queues, you need somewhere else to put them, and the vast majority of parks do not have enough additional space to successfully absorb everyone displaced from queues. Even at parks with more "non-queue" entertainment than most, such as the Disney and Universal parks and Europa Park, they have never made the long-term leap to 100% virtual queueing simply because it wouldn't work.

Virtual queueing technology has existed for years, and given that, there must be a reason why no theme park has yet implemented wholesale virtual queueing on any kind of long-term basis. The trials that parks have done have proven that the "queueless theme park", while a utopia in concept, does not work that way in execution. Thorpe Park briefly trialled it about 10 years ago, and it was disastrous. Walibi Holland trialled it during COVID, and it was disastrous. Even in Volcano Bay, a waterpark designed bespokely with virtual queueing in mind, it is not free of issues.

Some of the key problems I would cite with virtual queueing are:

• As mentioned above, it displaces people from queues and those people need somewhere else to go. Most parks do not have this "somewhere else" in sufficient quantities to successfully absorb everyone who would otherwise be in a queue.
• It does not allow for any kind of variance in ride throughput or regular operation, and that simply isn't attainable in the real world. Virtual queueing works fine where throughput is meeting targets and no breakdowns or stoppages occur... but as soon as that throughput slips, or the ride breaks down, that all goes to pot and a sizeable physical queue forms.
• It does not offer any kind of deterrent to joining a large queue. A large physical queue offers some deterrent to joining it, which means that crowds disperse more evenly, but with a virtual queue, this deterrent doesn't exist, meaning that the queue times become a lot more lop-sided. Popular attractions end up with massive queues that never subside while half of the rest of the park is walk-on.

Admittedly, virtual queueing would ostensibly be more "inclusive" in that everyone would suffer from the same problems equally, but I don't think it would be a feasible solution. It would not be the touch-all panacea to the RAP issues, and it would introduce a whole host of new ones to the extent where I think we'd quite quickly be calling for regular queueing to return.

 

[Bowser]

As mentioned above, it displaces people from queues and those people need somewhere else to go. Most parks do not have this "somewhere else" in sufficient quantities to successfully absorb everyone who would otherwise be in a queue.

I didn’t actually try it but Efteling were trialling virtual queues for one attraction (DreamFlight) on our visit and supposedly you could only join whilst in a certain range of the attraction.

I’m not sure if that was to deter anyone not on site from abusing the system or if it was literally aimed at people in that specific area of the park.
I did notice it getting very high at one point so if the intention was for people to wait in that part of the park I don’t think it was going to be viable.

Actually this article does seem to confirm you needed to be near the ride in question:

Efteling Introduces Virtual Queue for Droomvlucht Attraction This Summer

Efteling, the iconic Dutch theme park, is updating the park experience with the introduction of a virtual queue for its popular Droomvlucht attraction. This summer, park goers can skip the long lin…

airmagique.net

Should add that the regular queue was always available too.

A park like Efteling is probably more suitable than any other in the world for this to work as they have the space, range of attractions/facilities and general reliability… so if they can’t get it to work then I think that says a lot!

Will be interesting to see if it’s something they pursue.

 

[rob666]

Wholesale virtual queueing is itself far from free of problems, though, and would necessitate a considerable rethink of park design to even have the slightest chance of working successfully.

The thing it boils down to is that most (if not all) theme parks are designed to account for the fact that a considerable percentage of guests are in queues. When you take guests out of the major ride queues, you need somewhere else to put them, and the vast majority of parks do not have enough additional space to successfully absorb everyone displaced from queues. Even at parks with more "non-queue" entertainment than most, such as the Disney and Universal parks and Europa Park, they have never made the long-term leap to 100% virtual queueing simply because it wouldn't work.

Virtual queueing technology has existed for years, and given that, there must be a reason why no theme park has yet implemented wholesale virtual queueing on any kind of long-term basis. The trials that parks have done have proven that the "queueless theme park", while a utopia in concept, does not work that way in execution. Thorpe Park briefly trialled it about 10 years ago, and it was disastrous. Walibi Holland trialled it during COVID, and it was disastrous. Even in Volcano Bay, a waterpark designed bespokely with virtual queueing in mind, it is not free of issues.

Some of the key problems I would cite with virtual queueing are:

• As mentioned above, it displaces people from queues and those people need somewhere else to go. Most parks do not have this "somewhere else" in sufficient quantities to successfully absorb everyone who would otherwise be in a queue.
• It does not allow for any kind of variance in ride throughput or regular operation, and that simply isn't attainable in the real world. Virtual queueing works fine where throughput is meeting targets and no breakdowns or stoppages occur... but as soon as that throughput slips, or the ride breaks down, that all goes to pot and a sizeable physical queue forms.
• It does not offer any kind of deterrent to joining a large queue. A large physical queue offers some deterrent to joining it, which means that crowds disperse more evenly, but with a virtual queue, this deterrent doesn't exist, meaning that the queue times become a lot more lop-sided. Popular attractions end up with massive queues that never subside while half of the rest of the park is walk-on.

Admittedly, virtual queueing would ostensibly be more "inclusive" in that everyone would suffer from the same problems equally, but I don't think it would be a feasible solution. It would not be the touch-all panacea to the RAP issues, and it would introduce a whole host of new ones to the extent where I think we'd quite quickly be calling for regular queueing to return.

I remember Thorpe doing "Virtual queue for all" once, I think it lasted a whole couple of days.
It works fine until the first ride breakdown, then collapses after a few hours, if I recall correctly.
The technology isn't cheap, and they can avoid the cost with sad wristbands and scraps of paper...so they do.

 

[Benzin]

So you implement all Virtual Queues at Towers.

What do the guests do whilst they wait?

Could watch a show? Oh wait only entertainment is CBeebies Land shows (or currently Oktoberfest).

Wander the Gardens? Only for able-bodied people sorry.

Guess it's the Arcades then. Only now everyone is in them so they're packed.

A Virtual Queue only system can only work if the park is designed for it. Towers (and Thorpe, which was an utter disaster when they tried it) are certainly not; Efteling have struggled to implement it on any scale (Python a few years ago didn’t do well). And as mentioned, Volcano Bay (granted a waterpark) that was built with it fully in mind had to change tact.

Again, an overcomplicated solution to the problem that doesn't really fix anything.