• 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 Systems and Disabled Access (pre 2024)

Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Controversial post incoming...

Maybe they could have certain days of the week when RAP is available, and on other days everyone has to queue as normal. Something like RAP is available on Mon/Wed/Fri/Sun and on the other days everyone would queue as normal. Also, on days where the RAP queues are long, after someone has waited for 50 minutes in a RAP queue, a manager would come along and revoke that person's RAP entitlement as they obviously CAN queue for long periods of time (unless being wheelchair bound etc stops them from using the normal queue and stuff like that).

Or you know, just have a strict timed service where ride hosts are consistent, strict and confident when enforcing such a thing.
 
Sambiasso said:
In my experience Nemmy, Galatica, Thirteen are always back row rides. Oblivion is always front row, seats 1 & 2 nearest the RAP entrance. The rest of the rides we get seated whichever airgate we're placed in.
Click to expand...
And Rita too. It's for evacuation purposes (back row would be lowest on the lift hill in the event of a stop, for example).
 
Sambiasso said:
We never normally get back row Rita, on Thurs was row 2. Maybe because we only go on quiet days, not sure.
Click to expand...
That's interesting to know as I might ride it for the first time this year at Scarefest, and would rather avoid the back row lol.
 
BarryZola said:
Controversial post incoming...

Maybe they could have certain days of the week when RAP is available, and on other days everyone has to queue as normal. Something like RAP is available on Mon/Wed/Fri/Sun and on the other days everyone would queue as normal. Also, on days where the RAP queues are long, after someone has waited for 50 minutes in a RAP queue, a manager would come along and revoke that person's RAP entitlement as they obviously CAN queue for long periods of time (unless being wheelchair bound etc stops them from using the normal queue and stuff like that).

Or you know, just have a strict timed service where ride hosts are consistent, strict and confident when enforcing such a thing.
Click to expand...
This would hurt too many peoples feelings of course, but I pretty much agree with this
 
Some ridiculous posts in this thread to be honest. Literally in the travellers day thread we were talking about non refusal of entry being discrimination, myself included, quite rightly put that specific poster in the correct picture. Surely the same rules have to apply here? Suggesting it should only be used on certain days is indirectly suggesting that RAP users should only visit on certain days, and therefore, indirectly discriminating.
 
I wasn't suggesting that I actually wanted them to implement it. It was more of a thinking out loud talking point that I knew would be picked up on. Obviously it's 2022 and places like Towers would never dream of doing something like I mentioned. No-one needs to majorly get their knickers in a twist about it. Being dead serious though, they do need to implement a timed system and every member of staff needs to strictly enforce it, EVERY SINGLE TIME. Otherwise, it's the non-disabled guest who is being discriminated against.
 
Just out of interest I have been running some scenarios to get some objective data.

If we take an extreme look at Nemesis - assuming that back row is filled every train with RAP.

That is 12.5% of the riders. With an average queue time of 18m according to Queue-Times the inconvenience of the RAP guests adds 2m and 15s to that main queue time. This is of course completely ignoring the fact that those people have virtual queued for, lets be fair and balanced, an amount of time which may or may not be fully represntive of the queue they did not use.

If we asked RAP users to queue in the main queue in this scenario, the average main queue wait would be exactly the same. All we have done is physically moved the location that the people sat in that back row came from.

When we consider what we are really debating is the time-efficiency of using RAP, not that 2m 15s. Even if we made a really over the top arguement that RAP gets 2x the ride count. Its adding just over a minute to a main queue of Nemi.

I would make the suggestion that there is a bit of emotion-led subjectivity at play generally.

Please keep in mind this is quite an extreme look at it. Other rides like Galactica is 1 row every 2 trains. Smiler yesterday was doing about 20-25 main queue, any frast track that arrived (5-10) then one (2-4) RAP group into the station.

I am sure there are plenty of whataboutisms that can be thrown at this, but if you consider a world where those RAP users are just in the main queue. It makes virtually no difference. Its a rounding error.

RAP.jpg
 
D4n said:
Nemesis was running with 2 rows of RAP on every ride yesterday afternoon 😙
Click to expand...
Told you there would be some whataboutism. Totally fair though yesterday was very odd RAP wise. Never seen anything like it. Can only assume many like us were aiming at the quiet spell between summer and scarefest.
 
NickB said:
Just out of interest I have been running some scenarios to get some objective data.

If we take an extreme look at Nemesis - assuming that back row is filled every train with RAP.

That is 12.5% of the riders. With an average queue time of 18m according to Queue-Times the inconvenience of the RAP guests adds 2m and 15s to that main queue time. This is of course completely ignoring the fact that those people have virtual queued for, lets be fair and balanced, an amount of time which may or may not be fully represntive of the queue they did not use.

If we asked RAP users to queue in the main queue in this scenario, the average main queue wait would be exactly the same. All we have done is physically moved the location that the people sat in that back row came from.

When we consider what we are really debating is the time-efficiency of using RAP, not that 2m 15s. Even if we made a really over the top arguement that RAP gets 2x the ride count. Its adding just over a minute to a main queue of Nemi.

I would make the suggestion that there is a bit of emotion-led subjectivity at play generally.

Please keep in mind this is quite an extreme look at it. Other rides like Galactica is 1 row every 2 trains. Smiler yesterday was doing about 20-25 main queue, any frast track that arrived (5-10) then one (2-4) RAP group into the station.

I am sure there are plenty of whataboutisms that can be thrown at this, but if you consider a world where those RAP users are just in the main queue. It makes virtually no difference. Its a rounding error.

RAP.jpg
Click to expand...
Disclaimer: This post turned out a lot longer than I expected. If you struggle with long posts, there is a TL;DR at the bottom that summarises my basic points into a more concise block of text.
There are a couple of things I would say in response to your post. I’ll split it up into two separate points to make it easier to read.

Different RAP Allocations For Different Rides
The first thing I’d say is that Nemesis, from my experience, often has one of the lowest RAP (and by extension FT) allocations of any major ride. This is likely in part due to higher throughput, but for whatever reason, the ride never seems to allocate more than 1/8 of capacity to RAP, from my experience.

By comparison; on my most recent visit, RMT was doing 20%, and Spinball was doing a full 1/3. I’ve also seen Thirteen doing about 20% in the past (the back 2 rows, far more often than not, seem to be left exclusively for RAP). So Nemesis is one of the examples where RAP affects the main queue least; this is likely in large part due to high throughput, but it being a less popular ride than some others on park (Smiler and Wicker Man) could also play a role. The fact that Nemesis is an extreme thrill ride aimed at older guests (a lower percentage of whom are likely to need RAP) could also play a role.

To counter your Nemesis case study, I’ll refer to Spinball Whizzer as an example. On my most recent visit, the ride was operating a perfect 3-way split between main queue, RAP and FT, therefore 1/3, or 33%, of capacity was being allocated towards RAP. I calculated that the ride throughput was 623pph, therefore the main queue throughput, RAP queue throughput, and FT queue throughput were all around 208pph (to the nearest person, though; the actual answer to 623/3 is 207 2/3, but you can’t have fractions of people, so I’ll round). According to my trip report from the day, I waited around 45 minutes for Spinball in this queue, therefore the queue contained around 155.75 people. If RAP was removed from the equation, the main queue throughput would have been 415pph to the nearest person and the queue would have taken 22.5 minutes. If FT were also removed from the equation and all the throughput came from the main queue, the main queue throughput would be 623pph and the queue would have taken 15 minutes. That’s not an insignificant difference.

I appreciate that that is quite an extreme case study. I’ll throw in two slightly less extreme examples for balance.

Runaway Mine Train was allocating 20%, or 1/5, of capacity towards RAP on the same visit, and roughly the same percentage was being allocated to FT. I calculated that the ride throughput was 597pph, therefore the main queue throughput was 358pph (to the nearest whole person). According to my trip report from the day, I waited around 45 minutes for RMT in this queue, therefore there were approximately 268.65 people in this queue. If RAP were removed from the equation, the main queue throughput would be 478pph (to the nearest whole person), and the queue would have taken 33.75 minutes. If FT were removed from the equation too, the main queue throughput would be 597pph, and the queue would have taken 27 minutes. That is a fair old difference; while not as drastic as Spinball, taking RAP out of the equation would result in a main queue that is 11.25 minutes shorter.

As my final example, Nemesis was allocating 12.5%, or 1/8, of capacity towards RAP on my last visit. Assuming roughly the same percentage was being allocated towards FT, that means that the main queue was accounting for 75%, or 3/4, of the total ride throughput. I calculated that Nemesis’ throughput was 1,172pph, therefore the main queue throughput was 879pph. According to my trip report, I waited approximately 45 minutes for Nemesis that day, therefore there were around 659.25 people in the queue. If RAP were removed from the equation, the main queue throughput would be 1,026pph (to the nearest whole person), and the queue would have taken approximately 38.6 minutes. If FT were removed from the equation too, the main queue throughput would have been 1,172pph and the queue would have taken approximately 33.8 minutes. Yes, this difference isn’t too drastic, but it is definitely a difference; 6.4 minutes may not be much, but it could be the difference between being able to get in the queue for a final ride at ride close and missing that final ride because the queue for the previous one took too long. And this is the difference on a ride which, from my experience at least, has one of the highest percentages of total throughput allocated towards the main queue.

I apologise, as I know these aren’t perfect measurements, and I also know that I ramble on a bit here, but my point is; these non-main queues do matter in terms of their effect upon the main queue. Even the lowest allocation will have an effect if the queue is even vaguely sizeable.

Let me now move onto my second counter response…
The Psychology Of Queueing
You say that moving people out of the RAP queue (and by extension the FT queue) will achieve nothing other than making the main queue longer, therefore the actual main queue time won’t change. I won’t argue with that; you still have the same number of guests wanting to ride regardless of which queue they’re coming from, so I agree that getting rid of RAP and FT alone would achieve very little in terms of actually reducing the main queue time because these guests will simply join the back of the main queue, therefore making the main queue longer in length and changing nothing in terms of queue time.

However, there is one key thing that I would say having 100% of throughput coming from the main queue would improve. That is the speed at which the main queue would move.

Now I can hear you saying “What difference would the speed at which the queue moves make, Matt? The queue will still take the same amount of time, so the speed at which it moves is a moot point!”. I know you probably think I’m insane for suggesting that the speed makes a difference, but hear me out for a second.

Let me cite this article from queue-it.com, which talks about the 6 rules of queueing psychology according to experts: https://queue-it.com/blog/psychology-of-queuing/

The rule that is relevant here is that unoccupied queueing time feels longer than occupied queueing time. If the queue moves more slowly due to a greater percentage of throughput allocated towards RAP and FT, then guests will have a greater percentage of their queueing time being unoccupied, which exacerbates a perception that the queue is long, whereas if more of the throughput is given to the main queue, more of guests’ time is occupied with moving forward in the queue, therefore the queue is perceived as shorter and guests have a more positive feeling towards it.

This also feeds into another principle; beating expectations makes people happy (https://www.vonage.nz/resources/articles/the-psychology-of-queuing/). If guests are greeted with a 45 minute queue with a throughput of 1,500pph that looks huge, then they will feel happy upon leaving because the queue was shorter than they’d imagined (“That massive queue only took 45 minutes; it felt like we never stopped moving!”). On the other hand, if guests are greeted with a 45 minute queue with a throughput of 300pph that looks small, then they will feel unhappy because the queue was longer than they’d imagined (“Ugh, that tiny little queue took 45 minutes; it felt like we never moved!”). In queue psychology terms, the actual queue time is relatively academic; perception is everything, particularly when it comes to the quality of day out that guests have; a fast moving queue will give guests a more positive feeling and trick them into thinking that the queue is shorter than it actually is, while a slow moving queue will give guests a more negative feeling and trick them into thinking that the queue is longer than it actually is.

I’d wager that this is why Europa Park has such a good reputation on the topic of ride queues; their major ride queues are not that much shorter than those of your average theme park, but due to a combination of ride throughputs that are throttled to their absolute maximum and the vast, vast majority of throughput coming from the main queue, the queues move more quickly and give guests a more positive perception of them due to having their expectations beaten and having relatively little unoccupied time.

As we’re on the topic of RAP/FT, I would also bring up another principle of queueing psychology that the experts of queue-it.com talk about in their article; unfair waiting feels longer than fair waiting. Now for clarity, I’m not saying that RAP users not having to queue is unfair. I am not saying that at all; RAP is a necessity for some, and I fully understand why some people need to skip the queues. However, to your average guest, a 100% first come first served system where everyone queues equitably and the entire throughput of the ride is sourced from one queue is likely to feel fairer than a priority-based system where the ride throughput is sourced from multiple different queues. If a guest is waiting in a queue where the ride’s entire throughput is sourced from that one queue, they will likely perceive it as more fair, and thus quicker, than if they’re in a queue that constantly gets overtaken by RAP, FT, and other similar “extra” queues. If a queue is constantly being stopped to let FT and RAP users in, then the main queue guests are likely to feel a bit cheesed off (“Why do all of those other people get to skip the queue and go on before me?”) and will likely perceive the main queue to be longer than it is.

I realise that I’m rambling a lot here, so I’ll summarise. My basic point is; with queueing, the actual queue time is fairly irrelevant to the quality of guests’ experience. Perception is everything, and that is a large part of the issue that this thread centres around. A 45 minute queue that moves quicker and is perceived as fairer will give guests a far more positive perception than a 45 minute queue that moves more slowly and is perceived as more unfair. To some, a large percentage of throughput being allocated towards RAP and FT could be perceived as “unfair” and will make the queues move more slowly, therefore making the queues feel slower than they actually are and generally giving guests a more negative impression.

In conclusion…
I apologise if anything I’ve said has touched a nerve. For clarity, I do not support the removal or pairing back of RAP; I think it’s an absolute necessity for some, and removing it or scaling it back substantially would ostracise the disabled community in a way that I, and I’m sure many others, would not personally support. I’d far rather parks that are inclusive to all and have RAP than parks that ostracise certain groups and don’t have RAP. I was simply trying to explain some of the reasons why it’s perceived as having such an effect, and also why the effect that RAP in its current form has does matter even if its effect does not appear that big on the surface.

I apologise if this comes across confrontational or offensive. That certainly wasn’t my intent; I simply wanted to air some of my thoughts and raise a few points in response to your post. I am very sorry if I’ve made you feel in any way offended or if I’ve said anything wrong or hurtful.

TL;DR: In response to your post, I would raise two counter points.

The first is that Nemesis has a lower RAP allocation than most rides on park, and that the effect upon the main queues is notable in most cases. On some of the rides with higher allocation, taking it out of the equation would lower queue times by as much as 50%. Even on Nemesis, it would lower queue times by about 14%, which is not insignificant.

The second is that the quantity of RAP will alter guests’ perception of a queue, even if the amount of time it takes is the same. Guests will perceive queues that move more quickly and are “fairer” to take less time than queues that move more slowly and are less “fair”, and queues that are perceived as quicker will give guests a more positive experience.
 
Matt N said:
Lots of stuff...
Click to expand...
I don't think we are really saying different things all that much to be frank.

I took nemesis as it was the worst of the examples I could personally measure. We don't do Spinball, never been into BDSM. Minetrain we just have to avoid because even at that level of RAP it's just too over subscribed.

I totally get the psychology of a moving queue, which is what I was alluding to along the lines of it being emotion led and subjective. It's about perception, not about objective reality. And tell me if I am wrong, I don't think you are claiming otherwise, give or take some minor adjustments.
 
Tbh the impact of Rap is entirely dependent on the dispatch frequency.

All RAP customers are entitled to bring in total 4 people on the ride 1+3

Example

If nemesis dispatches every 60 seconds its getting 4 Rap on a minute

If RMT dispatches every 4 minutes that rap queue will likely be 4x as long if every RAP holder on park wants to ride both rides as a group of 4.

So if 2 rap groups at once on RMT it doesn't really have a big impact on the overall capacity % wise as it has 48 seats?

However then go to spinball, Rap can take up a whole dispatch and mix that with fast track and the main queue your looking at 33% RAP, 33% FT and 33% main queue. It all becomes to farcical the main queue hardly moves RAP gets a long wait etc
 
Going to apply for my new Ride Access Pass this afternoon as my current one expires at the end of October. I'm dreading it though as the process has changed. You now have to explain in detail why find queueing difficult and such. You don't just upload a PIP/DLA form like previously. My mum still seems to think it's a free Fastrack, when I keep trying to explain how it works. She seems to think that having a disability automatically entitles you to a pass, which is NOT the case.

The problem with me is I don't always need to use it. I can walk any distance and use steps (I'm classed as ambulant), so if a queue is short I am able to use it. It's just when a queue is long I may struggle, although myself I know that I'm better at queueing than I was when I was younger (for example I have a smartphone now, I'm more sociable with people and I love watching rides go around). I can go on rides on my own too.

For that reason I hate using it as I feel like I'm abusing the system, even though I sometimes genuinely need to use it. And I feel pressured into using it sometimes.
 
Skyscraper said:
Going to apply for my new Ride Access Pass this afternoon as my current one expires at the end of October. I'm dreading it though as the process has changed. You now have to explain in detail why find queueing difficult and such. You don't just upload a PIP/DLA form like previously. My mum still seems to think it's a free Fastrack, when I keep trying to explain how it works. She seems to think that having a disability automatically entitles you to a pass, which is NOT the case.

The problem with me is I don't always need to use it. I can walk any distance and use steps (I'm classed as ambulant), so if a queue is short I am able to use it. It's just when a queue is long I may struggle, although myself I know that I'm better at queueing than I was when I was younger (for example I have a smartphone now, I'm more sociable with people and I love watching rides go around). I can go on rides on my own too.

For that reason I hate using it as I feel like I'm abusing the system, even though I sometimes genuinely need to use it. And I feel pressured into using it sometimes.
Click to expand...
A doctor's letter (paid for) may help with this.

It's a tough one, I would agree they need to crack down on RAP but are towers/Merlin staff best placed to make a decision about a persons needs?

I believe it's an online form so they may at least have somebody with a level of knowledge looking at applications.
 
Status
This topic has been locked. No further replies can be posted.
Top