New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[homerdance]

No, I did not. I don’t know what you’re finding so hard to understand. The operational problems caused by DAS are because it is a virtual queue system. There are other virtual queue systems in use that could also be targeted for reduction instead of just the one intended for those with disabilities.

What’s even more problematic is that they set the return times for the DAS VQ relative to the posted wait time, which only takes into account the physical queue and does not include any of the VQs in use (DAS/g+/d23/guided tours/other skip the lines) in the posted wait time.

When there are 50 people in the physical line, and 50 in the VQ, the posted wait time should be based on the 100 number vs the 50. But currently it is done solely on physical queue + “knowledge “

 

[flynnibus]

What’s even more problematic is that they set the return times for the DAS VQ relative to the posted wait time, which only takes into account the physical queue and does not include any of the VQs in use (DAS/g+/d23/guided tours/other skip the lines) in the posted wait time.

Not so - your posted standby time does include impact from the high priority queue (LL, G+, etc). But it's not as precise because the ratio of LL to standby can flucuate based on spikes on the LL queue which is more dynamic.

 

[Touchdown]

We have our first typical day at MK. 1:30 Tues May 28

 

[TrojanUSC]

What’s even more problematic is that they set the return times for the DAS VQ relative to the posted wait time, which only takes into account the physical queue and does not include any of the VQs in use (DAS/g+/d23/guided tours/other skip the lines) in the posted wait time.

When there are 50 people in the physical line, and 50 in the VQ, the posted wait time should be based on the 100 number vs the 50. But currently it is done solely on physical queue + “knowledge “

Completely wrong. The actual and posted wait time at any given attraction would be substantially less if there was no LL/G+ open. If 80-90% of the attraction's capacity is going towards the Lightning Lane, then standby comes to a crawl and that's reflecting in what's posted.

 

[TrojanUSC]

We have our first typical day at MK. 1:30 Tues May 28View attachment 787999View attachment 788000

I'd be far more curious as to what these changes do to Lightning Lane.

 

[Purduevian]

Didn’t these numbers get disproven?

So relevant day for what I will call Legacy DAS:

• ~10% of people had DAS minimum
• Average party size is ~3
• DAS users can take ~80% of an attractions LL on rides like HM
• Standard ride capacity is ~80% LL 20% Standby

So Legacy DAS on a ride like HM could take (.8*.8) ~64% of a rides capacity by (.1*3) 30% of the guests.

I came up with 30% of guests using 64% of ride capacity for HM while trying to stay as conservative as possible for legacy DAS.

 

[homerdance]

Exiting a line out the back of the queue is not “pushing past people.” I mean, I get this is semantics, but people were worried that other people in the line would get annoyed/start fights over people “pushing past them.” That connotates people pushing past others towards the front of the line. Nobody is going to start an issue over someone trying to exit the line by walking backwards.

exiting a standby ride queue is a challenge. Most do not have ways to exit mid queue, and there never used to be any CMs in the queue area.

We have had to exit many a standby queue, and it is frustrating and stressful. ECVs, elderly, groups not paying attention are all obstacles. It’s a challenge and can be nearly impossible to do “quickly “

 

[lazyboy97o]

What’s even more problematic is that they set the return times for the DAS VQ relative to the posted wait time, which only takes into account the physical queue and does not include any of the VQs in use (DAS/g+/d23/guided tours/other skip the lines) in the posted wait time.

When there are 50 people in the physical line, and 50 in the VQ, the posted wait time should be based on the 100 number vs the 50. But currently it is done solely on physical queue + “knowledge “

Exactly. Disney has all sorts of instruments tracking their queues. They have a very good idea of how many people are in a queue and how quickly it is moving. They could more dynamically change waits to account for things like a slowdown in cycling, DAS requests or an influx of Lightning Lanes users.

 

[ConfettiCupcake]

I'd be far more curious as to what these changes do to Lightning Lane.

Same. I think visible changes in standby is the absolute best case, very optimistic scenario.

I want to know if the LL returns are shorter and more stable, if availability is better throughout the day, or both. It’s probably still too early anyways.

 

[lazyboy97o]

We have had to exit many a standby queue, and it is frustrating and stressful. ECVs, elderly, groups not paying attention are all obstacles. It’s a challenge and can be nearly impossible to do “quickly “

I’m sure there won’t be any issues with a 30” wide ECV passing another 30” wide ECV in a 44” wide queue.

 

[DrummerAlly]

Has anyone's kiddo with Level 1 autism been approved under the new system?

 

[homerdance]

Not so - your posted standby time does include impact from the high priority queue (LL, G+, etc). But it's not as precise because the ratio of LL to standby can flucuate based on spikes on the LL queue which is more dynamic.

Unless this has changed, posted wait times have always been set at the ride itself with no input in any VQ information. While some extra time is “cooked in” it is just a guess and not based on real numbers. So when people claim “unaccounted for” DAS users causing fluctuations in LL waits it really is just Disneys unwillingness to use all the tools available to provide real information.

The only thing that should cause the wait times to be different vs what is posted is slowness in loading. The technology exists that Disney could get near exact numbers of people in standby lines plus add the known VQ’s to get a much better wait time and alleviate the extended LL queues.

 

[Disney Glimpses]

Some anecdotal reading between the lines (with conversations people I know who I expected would be approved), it seems like Disney is only offering this to pass to folks who visit the parks for a couple of hours, ride a few things and then head out. And DAS is their only way to accomplish this for this particular person. The criteria appears to be much, much tighter than I expected.

Simply having a diagnosis of autism isn't nearly enough. If you are with a group of people and can wait elsewhere, that's what they will ask you to do and then meet up with your party when you get a text that they are boarding soon.

 

[flynnibus]

Same. I think visible changes in standby is the absolute best case, very optimistic scenario.

I want to know if the LL returns are shorter and more stable, if availability is better throughout the day, or both. It’s probably still too early anyways.

Honestly this is a futile exercise because externally it's nearly impossible for us to know how the various 'inputs' are changing. Attempts to just monitor LL waits is a NET change, but you don't know how many things actually changed to cause that net result.

We don't know how many LL or G+ reservations are being offered... we don't really know if that is being increased.. or if any changes here are offsetting or causing their own changes in waits. Folks would have to try to deduce this imperfectly by watching availability and redemptions at rides.. and try to reach a generalization.

We can't readily monitor merge point behavior in most attractions

LL wait times aren't reported externally - making data aggregation harder

So while there can be huge changes to DAS usage of LL lanes... besides monitoring LL checking (like len did before), just monitoring the LL queues is not that conclusive to the source. (a reduction in DAS load could easily be offset by additional G+ or LL sales or operational changes).

We don't know how many changes are actually behind an observed change in the wait times.

What we will know is what the NET result is.. not necessarily what the change is directly attributable to.

It will be interesting to see if the overall result settles... but those trying to pin the change on a singular cause are going to be on weak standing without a ton more observations not readily available from Disney public data.

 

[flynnibus]

Unless this has changed, posted wait times have always been set at the ride itself with no input in any VQ information. While some extra time is “cooked in” it is just a guess and not based on real numbers.

Wait times for standby ALWAYS have accounted for the high priority queue... because the ratio between LL and standby is always present. The standby estimes are already based on losing a percentage to the LL because this is a constant. If they didn't, they would be woefully under estimating all the time because nearly 3/4 of the attraction capacity is not going to standby.

I think what you are trying to say is the estimate isn't accounting for CHANGES in the VQs... which what would matter is when the ratio between LL and standby changes. The size of the LL queue doesn't matter as long as it's got people in it... what matters is the ratio used at merge. And when LL backs up, they increase the ratio of LL to standby which would delay standby waits.. which is not accounted for. But such changes are usually meant to be short lived...

So when people claim “unaccounted for” DAS users causing fluctuations in LL waits it really is just Disneys unwillingness to use all the tools available to provide real information.

Again, it's the ratio at merge that changes standby waits. A change that is dynamic and relatively short lived.

The wait time only has true meaning when you first get into line. The wait time for people behind you is meaningless in most regards. So the only place for Disney to radically improve that is during the period of time the merge ratio is changed, they could update how they are estimating standby. But unless you are entering the line during that time... such an improvement wouldn't mean anything to you.

The only thing that should cause the wait times to be different vs what is posted is slowness in loading.

No, the merge ratio also impacts the wait time for someone entering the queue.

The technology exists that Disney could get near exact numbers of people in standby lines plus add the known VQ’s to get a much better wait time and alleviate the extended LL queues.

Disney knows how many VQ slots are not yet redeemed and their WINDOW when they can be redeemed, but do not know when that person will enter the line... and honestly the scheduled VQs are not the problem. A scheduled VQ load would be predictable... and hence easily to account for as a steady constant. The problem is all the UNSCHEDULED people joining a LL queue and when they do so in waves.

 

[homerdance]

Completely wrong. The actual and posted wait time at any given attraction would be substantially less if there was no LL/G+ open. If 80-90% of the attraction's capacity is going towards the Lightning Lane, then standby comes to a crawl and that's reflecting in what's posted.

The reality is that the “extra” time is a static number made up by the ride ops with no input from real numbers of people actually in the VQ. Of course if the only people getting on the ride are the people in line the waits would be less. That’s not what I am saying.

Granted, ops should know the number of G+ slots being reserved so that number should be static(ish) but the addition of DAS as a variable number throws off the posted wait times.
Which is where the real number should drive the change. Which would mean that the people who try to select a ride would see a higher wait and a longer return time and thus reduce the crazy LL back ups which happen.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Well I recall walking into Disneyland a few years back and an adult was walking down Mainstreet with what looked like an Irish wolfhound. The 'therapy pets" thing started to get way out of hand. You need a dog to help because you are visually impaired. Absolutely fine and encouraged. Heck if you are a veteran and suffering PTSD. Sure. But people were bringing their dogs just because they liked having their dogs with them, which is interesting because what if someone has a fear or allergies to a dog, which many people do. How does one "impairment " trump another?

There are differences between service dogs and emotional support pets. Service dogs have a lot of specific training. They are not supposed to be pet by strangers while wearing vests, for ex. Service dogs aren't just intended for people who are blind, but also - for ex - for people who have epilepsy. (The link has more examples).

Emotional support animals are a wholly separate thing and there do need to be distinctions drawn between the two. They are vastly different.

 

[homerdance]

Wait times for standby ALWAYS have accounted for the high priority queue... because the ratio between LL and standby is always present. The standby estimes are already based on losing a percentage to the LL because this is a constant. If they didn't, they would be woefully under estimating all the time because nearly 3/4 of the attraction capacity is not going to standby.

I think what you are trying to say is the estimate isn't accounting for CHANGES in the VQs... which what would matter is when the ratio between LL and standby changes. The size of the LL queue doesn't matter as long as it's got people in it... what matters is the ratio used at merge. And when LL backs up, they increase the ratio of LL to standby which would delay standby waits.. which is not accounted for. But such changes are usually meant to be short lived...


Again, it's the ratio at merge that changes standby waits. A change that is dynamic and relatively short lived.

The wait time only has true meaning when you first get into line. The wait time for people behind you is meaningless in most regards. So the only place for Disney to radically improve that is during the period of time the merge ratio is changed, they could update how they are estimating standby. But unless you are entering the line during that time... such an improvement wouldn't mean anything to you.



No, the merge ratio also impacts the wait time for someone entering the queue.

Disney knows how many VQ slots are not yet redeemed and their WINDOW when they can be redeemed, but do not know when that person will enter the line... and honestly the scheduled VQs are not the problem. A scheduled VQ load would be predictable... and hence easily to account for as a steady constant. The problem is all the UNSCHEDULED people joining a LL queue and when they do so in waves.

But…. DAS returns are solely based on the POSTED wait time. If the wait time increased as it should with more people in the VQ, which should then necessitate a higher merge, the increased wait would spread out the returns for DAS.

 

[Comped]

Some anecdotal reading between the lines (with conversations people I know who I expected would be approved), it seems like Disney is only offering this to pass to folks who visit the parks for a couple of hours, ride a few things and then head out. And DAS is their only way to accomplish this for this particular person. The criteria appears to be much, much tighter than I expected.

Simply having a diagnosis of autism isn't nearly enough. If you are with a group of people and can wait elsewhere, that's what they will ask you to do and then meet up with your party when you get a text that they are boarding soon.

I've not heard the "folks who visit the parks for a couple of hours, ride a few things and then head out" bit be a factor in anyone getting approved (or not). That sounds like a very hard thing to quantify, and likely to align more with annual passholders than guests who come once a year or less...

 

[flynnibus]

But…. DAS returns are solely based on the POSTED wait time. If the wait time increased as it should with more people in the VQ, which should then necessitate a higher merge, the increased wait would spread out the returns for DAS.

Now you're pointing about a topic that is more about the frequency of when an update should be done... and less about what the estimate is based on.

Assigning a DAS return time doesn't increase standby wait... it increases LL queue wait at some point in the future.

Only when the LL/standby merge ratio changes does the standby wait ever change due to someone being given a DAS/return time.

The problem is the more overcrowded the LL is... the more frequently that merge ratio 'relief value' is used... causing a spike in standby waits. And the overcrowding is hard to predict.

If it's an attraction that sustains such loads on the LL - then they would change the merge ratio more long term.. and the standby estimate would reflect that capacity.