DAS changes coming WDW May 20/ DL June 18, 2024

[jo-jo]

I’m curious why some people are denied but still get several passes a day.

 

[jennab]

I’m curious why some people are denied but still get several passes a day.

I don’t think anyone knows. It seems to be random, or maybe people are getting them but not saying anything? I mean that would be smart, don’t say anything, otherwise it will lead to people calling just to get free LLs

 

[jo-jo]

I don’t think anyone knows. It seems to be random, or maybe people are getting them but not saying anything? I mean that would be smart, don’t say anything, otherwise it will lead to people calling just to get free LLs

Maybe it’s their issues hits 5 out of 7 boxes. Not enough for a DAS pass, but CM feels they will need some help. Others only checked two out of 7 boxes.

I’m sad we weren’t granted any. We don’t go on many rides anymore. Going for two weeks and planning 5 or 6 park days , a few mostly rest with going in just for fanstamic or Christmas processional, and a few flat out rest days.

 

[jennab]

Maybe it’s their issues hits 5 out of 7 boxes. Not enough for a DAS pass, but CM feels they will need some help. Others only checked two out of 7 boxes.

I’m sad we weren’t granted any. We don’t go on many rides anymore. Going for two weeks and planning 5 or 6 park days , a few mostly rest with going in just for fanstamic or Christmas processional, and a few flat out rest days.

If you are only going for a few park days why not do LLMP on some of them? That way you can get the rides you want, or if they aren’t rides with morally long wait times you may not even need LLMP. I find if we go to the park before early entry we can get a lot done in the first 1.5-2hrs.

 

[jo-jo]

If you are only going for a few park days why not do LLMP on some of them? That way you can get the rides you want, or if they aren’t rides with morally long wait times you may not even need LLMP. I find if we go to the park before early entry we can get a lot done in the first 1.5-2hrs.

We are doing LL, but so wish we can go on a few rides twice over. Early for us would be 9- 9:30 am. DH needs time to get moving. This isn't being lazy, I can walk back and forth unloading groceries a couples time before DH is even out of the car.

We do plan on seeing if say Buzz is 20 mins, go on the rides, then use the LL. We bought the LL, cause we don't just want to be caught lines being too long. Some say parks are slow, then you see pictures with 7 million people.

 

[jennab]

Interesting read about standby lines being much shorter than previously. He goes over a number of factors but comes to the conclusion the the DAS changes have the most impact in reducing waits.

https://www.disneytouristblog.com/s...9XpTn8djzePpz9ev5E_aem_FavDshA2h6TGhxfKkkaaag

 

[StarCruzer]

Interesting read about standby lines being much shorter than previously. He goes over a number of factors but comes to the conclusion the the DAS changes have the most impact in reducing waits.

https://www.disneytouristblog.com/s...9XpTn8djzePpz9ev5E_aem_FavDshA2h6TGhxfKkkaaag

One of the most surprising facts from this I didn't know was that during a court case against Disney, they revealed that DAS users on an average were able to experience 45% more attractions than non-DAS guests. That really isn't in the spirit of offering accomodations that create an experience equivalent to non-disabled guests.

 

[Genie+]

One of the most surprising facts from this I didn't know was that during a court case against Disney, they revealed that DAS users on an average were able to experience 45% more attractions than non-DAS guests. That really isn't in the spirit of offering accommodations that create an experience equivalent to non-disabled guests.

The crazy thing about experiencing 45% more attractions on average is many disabled and their parties still were unable to experience as many attractions as the average nonDAS. People pushing the system hard were going well beyond that +45% to balance that down to 45% overall average.

DAS requests/usage continued increasing year on year, and then allegedly tripled thru post-pandemic years after FP+ was gone.

Toy Story Midway, Radiator Racers and other rides were also used as examples in that court case. The suit also mentioned:

“At that time, approximately 3.3% of guests at Disney used a GAC pass, yet the percentage of guests on the most popular rides who had a GAC pass and entered through the FastPass line was significantly higher than 3.3%…

…For example, guests with a GAC pass were riding Toy Story Mania an average of ten times more than guests who did not have a GAC pass. GAC guests were riding Toy Story Mania on average two to three times a day, whereas guests without a GAC had only a 0.3 chance of getting on the ride even once.”

DAS requests continued increasing year on year that by 2023/2024 DAS parties were multiple times that of the 3.3% cited back in GAC days.

 

[Keladry84]

One of the most surprising facts from this I didn't know was that during a court case against Disney, they revealed that DAS users on an average were able to experience 45% more attractions than non-DAS guests. That really isn't in the spirit of offering accomodations that create an experience equivalent to non-disabled guests.

Just to note: the court case statistic was for GAC, which had different rules and ways to access the attraction than DAS. We can’t extrapolate the statistic to equate to DAS users experiences or average attraction access. DAS may have been similar, more, or less. We can’t know as Disney hasn’t released any statistics for the use before the recent changes.

 

[jennab]

Just to note: the court case statistic was for GAC, which had different rules and ways to access the attraction than DAS. We can’t extrapolate the statistic to equate to DAS users experiences or average attraction access. DAS may have been similar, more, or less. We can’t know as Disney hasn’t released any statistics for the use before the recent changes.

I thought it was written somewhere that they said DAS had xx times higher people than GAC did? I’m remembering the number 8, bit maybe I’m just making that up. I swore I read it somewhere. I’ll have to look later and see if I can find it.

 

[Lsdolphin]

The crazy thing about experiencing 45% more attractions on average is many disabled and their parties still were unable to experience as many attractions as the average nonDAS. People pushing the system hard were going well beyond that +45% to balance that down to 45% overall average.

DAS requests/usage continued increasing year on year, and then allegedly tripled thru post-pandemic years after FP+ was gone.

Toy Story Midway, Radiator Racers and other rides were also used as examples in that court case. The suit also mentioned:

“At that time, approximately 3.3% of guests at Disney used a GAC pass, yet the percentage of guests on the most popular rides who had a GAC pass and entered through the FastPass line was significantly higher than 3.3%…

…For example, guests with a GAC pass were riding Toy Story Mania an average of ten times more than guests who did not have a GAC pass. GAC guests were riding Toy Story Mania on average two to three times a day, whereas guests without a GAC had only a 0.3 chance of getting on the ride even once.”

DAS requests continued increasing year on year that by 2023/2024 DAS parties were multiple times that of the 3.3% cited back in GAC days.

I suspect that the reason some DAS guests were riding TSM multiple times was that other than the shows there weren’t any other rides they could go on due to disability.

 

[StarCruzer]

The crazy thing about experiencing 45% more attractions on average is many disabled and their parties still were unable to experience as many attractions as the average nonDAS. People pushing the system hard were going well beyond that +45% to balance that down to 45% overall average.

DAS requests/usage continued increasing year on year, and then allegedly tripled thru post-pandemic years after FP+ was gone.

Toy Story Midway, Radiator Racers and other rides were also used as examples in that court case. The suit also mentioned:

“At that time, approximately 3.3% of guests at Disney used a GAC pass, yet the percentage of guests on the most popular rides who had a GAC pass and entered through the FastPass line was significantly higher than 3.3%…

…For example, guests with a GAC pass were riding Toy Story Mania an average of ten times more than guests who did not have a GAC pass. GAC guests were riding Toy Story Mania on average two to three times a day, whereas guests without a GAC had only a 0.3 chance of getting on the ride even once.”

DAS requests continued increasing year on year that by 2023/2024 DAS parties were multiple times that of the 3.3% cited back in GAC days.

This is a great point too. Averages can be tricky things!

I was able to get approval for my disability this year, and I actually can't help but wonder if some of the process involves looking at past DAS use. We've never gone in a group larger than 3, never done re-rides, and probably maxed out at 5 rides per park.

I thought it was written somewhere that they said DAS had xx times higher people than GAC did? I’m remembering the number 8, bit maybe I’m just making that up. I swore I read it somewhere. I’ll have to look later and see if I can find it.

I would guess that DAS numbers exceeded GAC numbers, since social media really bumped awareness of the program and approval was easier to get with influencer supplied "scripts".

 

[theMoreDisneytheBetter]

I suspect that the reason some DAS guests were riding TSM multiple times was that other than the shows there weren’t any other rides they could go on due to disability.

Or it’s a really good ride and fun to repeat.

Looking at the list of rides there it’s hard to argue that it is the *only* ride that some DAS guests can access. They may not like/want to ride other rides, but that’s not the same thing.

 

[Keladry84]

I suspect that the reason some DAS guests were riding TSM multiple times was that other than the shows there weren’t any other rides they could go on due to disability.

At the time of the lawsuit/study, TSM was brand-new and I think was kind of "the" ride everyone wanted. With the GAC, guests didn't need to wait the standby line time and could just enter the lightning lane at any time (at least from what I read - I've never used GAC), which would be part of how the proportion got so skewed. DAS requires people to wait the standby time so it can't be looped as quickly

 

[Genie+]

I suspect that the reason some DAS guests were riding TSM multiple times was that other than the shows there weren’t any other rides they could go on due to disability.

And I think that’s why the suit mentioned rides across the spectrum having noteworthy impact as well, like radiator springs and space mtn, etc.

No matter the cause, the result was average non-DAS party was only able to ride once per 3 Hollywood Studios visits. It was an immensely popular ride for all. Not many people were skipping it because they didn’t want to ride.

 

[Keladry84]

I thought it was written somewhere that they said DAS had xx times higher people than GAC did? I’m remembering the number 8, bit maybe I’m just making that up. I swore I read it somewhere. I’ll have to look later and see if I can find it.

I think the 8 comes from an estimate that 8% of park goers before the change this summer had DAS. I don't think that was an official Disney statistic/announcement, so take it with a grain of salt. There's also been some some numbers thrown about that DAS use increased 3x from Covid up until this summer, so a large more recent increase up until a couple of months ago.

None of these are official - only Disney knows the actual number/percentage, and I don't think anything for sure exact regarding DAS has been published since the court case - which the way GAC worked was different so using those numbers for estimates today are like comparing apples and oranges. Everything we have is just conjecture. If there does happen to be a court case from the changes, Disney does almost certainly have data to back up their decision processes, and we'll have new data to know for sure.

My own take reading between the lines:
- with GAC the problem was that it allowed people to loop rides with immediate access to lightning lane, allowing a very small number of people to repeatedly take up a majority of access to the ride. Thus the change to DAS requiring the standby wait time. Instead of looping a 2 hour wait ride multiple times in that 2 hours, now they could only ride it 1x in 2 hours, effectively reducing the strain on the system by each GAC user by 4 or 5 times (or however many times one could loop the ride during the current posted standby wait).

- with DAS, the problem is the recent popularity and uptake of the program, with the number of people using it overwhelming the system. So not a small minority taking up a large portion of ride capacity, but a larger and larger percentage of the visitors utilizing it, which the way the lightning lanes are built can't be sustained and still function. Thus tightening the requirements and reducing the number of people allowed with the DAS person.

If we do ever get to see the DAS statistics, I don't think they will be the same as the quoted ones from the GAC/lawsuit - the problem is different. But I do think they will be just as shocking when we see how it was effecting park operations.

It really is kind of a case of no easy or right answer. I think Disney really does want to give support to each person to the extent that they need, but when so many need that help, it becomes impossible because the whole system crashes down. I'm really glad I'm not the person who has to be making the decisions on who does or doesn't qualify and why.

 

[jennab]

I think the 8 comes from an estimate that 8% of park goers before the change this summer had DAS. I don't think that was an official Disney statistic/announcement, so take it with a grain of salt. There's also been some some numbers thrown about that DAS use increased 3x from Covid up until this summer, so a large more recent increase up until a couple of months ago.

None of these are official - only Disney knows the actual number/percentage, and I don't think anything for sure exact regarding DAS has been published since the court case - which the way GAC worked was different so using those numbers for estimates today are like comparing apples and oranges. Everything we have is just conjecture. If there does happen to be a court case from the changes, Disney does almost certainly have data to back up their decision processes, and we'll have new data to know for sure.

My own take reading between the lines:
- with GAC the problem was that it allowed people to loop rides with immediate access to lightning lane, allowing a very small number of people to repeatedly take up a majority of access to the ride. Thus the change to DAS requiring the standby wait time. Instead of looping a 2 hour wait ride multiple times in that 2 hours, now they could only ride it 1x in 2 hours, effectively reducing the strain on the system by each GAC user by 4 or 5 times (or however many times one could loop the ride during the current posted standby wait).

- with DAS, the problem is the recent popularity and uptake of the program, with the number of people using it overwhelming the system. So not a small minority taking up a large portion of ride capacity, but a larger and larger percentage of the visitors utilizing it, which the way the lightning lanes are built can't be sustained and still function. Thus tightening the requirements and reducing the number of people allowed with the DAS person.

If we do ever get to see the DAS statistics, I don't think they will be the same as the quoted ones from the GAC/lawsuit - the problem is different. But I do think they will be just as shocking when we see how it was effecting park operations.

It really is kind of a case of no easy or right answer. I think Disney really does want to give support to each person to the extent that they need, but when so many need that help, it becomes impossible because the whole system crashes down. I'm really glad I'm not the person who has to be making the decisions on who does or doesn't qualify and why.

Agreed. No matter which way they went about it there are downsides. Leave it as it was and Disney suffers from standby guest dissatisfaction and people buying LL dissatisfaction, plus a portion of DAS users when LL were longer than they should be. I think it just got to the point there were too many people on DAS. Most were probably people with legitimate disabilities too.

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

I think it’s telling that the traffic on this thread has slowed way down since the initial announcement. The same thing happened with GAC went away. It seems (anecdotally) like things are settling in to the new normal.

 

[Philsfan77]

Deleted

 

[Philsfan77]

Just to note: the court case statistic was for GAC, which had different rules and ways to access the attraction than DAS. We can’t extrapolate the statistic to equate to DAS users experiences or average attraction access. DAS may have been similar, more, or less. We can’t know as Disney hasn’t released any statistics for the use before the recent changes.

Circling Back here:

The original poster is correct and quoted directly from the court case. There are ultimately 2 sets of numbers out there.

The 3.3% of guests being GAC and GAC guests using 11% of queue space on Space Mountain, 13% on Splash, and 30% on Toy Story mania is from the GAC study. Based on that study, they concluded that guests riding Toy Story Mania were riding 10 times more than non GAC guests.

The second set up numbers that you are responding two was strictly DAS related as they used that information and those data points to argue DAS was more than efficient for A.L. and that the accommodations he was requesting were above and beyond the scope of ADA.

That study was conducted and the data points were that a DAS user on Average could experience 45% more attractions than those without DAS.

Mr. Laval, as well as a current Disney industrial engineer, testified about a "Tester Study" in which testers used certain ride passes—DAS, FastPasses, or readmission passes—to experience as many attractions as possible during a three-day period. The results showed that testers with DAS experienced, on average, 45% more attractions than those without DAS."

"As a result, Mr. Laval concluded that the Tester Study showed that guests with a DAS can experience more rides and attractions—as the evidence showed, at least 4 or 5—with much less waiting than guests who do not have a DAS card."

They then took those data points and conducted 2 more studies as it relates to DAS specifically (one based on giving a DAS holder 3 additional anytime entry passes - guessing this was done since the family was asking for 10), and one based on increasing the total number of DAS guests by 1% if more people became eligible - started to abuse this new system. That study showed that if they have 3 additional anytime entry passes the wait time for a ride like 7 dwarves mine train for a non DAS guest would go from an average of 69 minutes at the time to an average of 108 minutes at the time. The 1% increase in DAS users at the time of the study would move the number from 69 minutes to 124 minutes for a non DAS user to wait for 7 dwarves mine train.

Basically their argument was GAC wasn't working and they provided that data...they then also showed how much more DAS users were already accomplishing based on a study under the new DAS system (which was conducted in 2015) since 7 dwarves mine train was never open/operational under the old GAC system, to show the impacts of the current system on regular guests as well as what could happen to the system if it became overused even by 1% and used that data as to why they couldn't provide A.L. with the accommodations he was requesting in addition to DAS.

In summary the DAS numbers were used in that case against A.L. as were the GAC numbers. If we are to believe those numbers based on what the estimated wait times would look like with even a 1% increase as it relates to non-DAS guests...we can certainly understand why a change was needed when they put out a data point that DAS usage has increased by 3 times the amount coming out of the shutdown.