• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Ride Access Pass and Disabled Access - 2024 Discussion

Booking accessible tickets at gigs and football can be a right arse too. Some venues require you to ring up, need to ring up Palace everytime we want to get the wheelchair ticket. And those only have a set amount of spaces so yeah.
 
Just to play devil's advocate. It's not really the same situation. At Towers, the amount of RAP riders you can get onto a ride is pretty much unlimited as long as they're willing to stand in a big enough queue. At gigs or at the footy there is an actual limited number of physical seats for each event.
 
BarryZola said:
Just to play devil's advocate. It's not really the same situation. At Towers, the amount of RAP riders you can get onto a ride is pretty much unlimited as long as they're willing to stand in a big enough queue. At gigs or at the footy there is an actual limited number of physical seats for each event.
Click to expand...

There is a still a limit to how many people can physically be cycled through a ride on any day, the same as a stadium has a maximum number of people that can be let in.

The discussion here is how much of that capacity is given to RAP users, just as a stadium would decide how much of their capacity would be given to accessible areas. In both scenarios there is a cap.
 
Last edited:
It's way too boring to get into any further, but again, it's not the same. The RAP system used to be uncapped and although the queues got way too long sometimes, people were still able to queue on the day and eventually get on the ride in 98% of scenarios. In a football stadium there may be 50 seats allocated for disabled use. As soon as those are booked/filled it's physically impossible for anyone else to use them. That's an unavoidable cap. I wasn't really commenting on the wider issue, only the comparisons with football and gigs. My point stands that they are not the same. It's fact.
 
BarryZola said:
It's way too boring to get into any further, but again, it's not the same. The RAP system used to be uncapped and although the queues got way too long sometimes, people were still able to queue on the day and eventually get on the ride in 98% of scenarios. In a football stadium there may be 50 seats allocated for disabled use. As soon as those are booked/filled it's physically impossible for anyone else to use them. That's an unavoidable cap. I wasn't really commenting on the wider issue, only the comparisons with football and gigs. My point stands that they are not the same. It's fact.
Click to expand...
there is a limit though, not a physical limit (although you could argue that for instance having e.g 1 disabled seat is too little and sue)

I haven't used RAP, but from what I saw once you hit like June / July till November, RAP was extremely long for people who struggle to queue (I have also seen it where it was longer than the main queue) that cap means that RAP remains usable for people who require short queue times (which is its job)

the problem is there is a limit to capacity of a ride, and then that can be extended to the capacity of RAP, you can't dedicate 90% of the capacity of a ride to RAP because that isn't practical so where is the line, once that is decided that will naturally require a cap on RAP to prevent RAP from having to queue.

thinking about it there is also a practical limit, the time cards of RAP require someone to fill them out this takes a reasonable amount of time, directly limiting the capacity

I recall before the cap the wicker man RAP queue would stretch to the main entrance regularly, this year I haven't even seen more than 2 groups queueing for RAP
 
Actually there is an argument that aligns with stadium and theatres etc, rides are mostly seated. In many cases it could be justified to only have so many RAP guests on each cycle as too many could slow down evacuation in the event of an emergency. This is the same reason stadiums put limits on. You could argue all stadiums should make all seats 100% accessible, but they have two arguments against this:

1) Commercial impact.
2) Evacuation times.

Theme parks can make the same arguments.

So although in theory the limit is the rides capacity (so long as you say a big FU to every other guest on park), I suspect theme parks would argue that for safe operation there is a limit.

Discrimination law expects “reasonable adjustment”, the court would have to decide what is reasonable but I doubt a court would say “at the exclusion of all others and with risk of delayed evacuation” to be considered reasonable.

This persons case will almost certainly fail, but let’s see.
 
Dave said:
Discrimination law expects “reasonable adjustment”, the court would have to decide what is reasonable but I doubt a court would say “at the exclusion of all others and with risk of delayed evacuation” to be considered reasonable.
Click to expand...
Yes, this

it is a very easy path to go down:

The rides have a limited capacity, it is reasonable that only a part of this capacity is dedicated to RAP users (otherwise no one else could ride the ride).

due to the limited throughput of guests on queues, a limited number of RAP guests can be allowed in, as adding too many would mean they need to queue, defeating the reason of RAP. thus a reasonable adjustment is to limit RAP guests as to prevent long RAP queues from forming.
Even if 100% of the capacity was dedicated to RAP they would still need to limit numbers of RAP as they would end out forming a queue.

2 very reasonable (I would argue) changes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top