Mount Snow Improvements

[arik]

Really? Maybe. Just wondering what your thoughts are? Just to be clear, I'm not critical, just curious.

I like the summit local's short lines, and have never had a problem on the express. Also I worry about the crowd at the summit with 2 express lifts running on a saturday might be like times square on skiis, which scares me. On the other hand I totally understand the need to plan ahead as the GSE is 23 years old and runs a lot.

I agree with you, having the new express off load at a higher spot could make the summit less crowded as people won't have to climb up to canyon and also can ski down easier to TNF via plummet.

So after thinking about it I change my "maybe" to a wholehearted YES.

 

[Newpylong]

How is that odd at all? Right in the proposal they say the area is underutilized due to the long slow ride of the lift. That is why they want to replace it...

If I'm not mistaken, wasn't the Sunbrook quad closed a couple of days a week this season alternativing with the Bear Trap lift?

Seems odd that they want to replace a 'part time' lift with a detachable.

 

[Newpylong]

Really? Maybe. Just wondering what your thoughts are? Just to be clear, I'm not critical, just curious.

I like the summit local's short lines, and have never had a problem on the express. Also I worry about the crowd at the summit with 2 express lifts running on a saturday might be like times square on skiis, which scares me. On the other hand I totally understand the need to plan ahead as the GSE is 23 years old and runs a lot.

I agree with you, having the new express off load at a higher spot could make the summit less crowded as people won't have to climb up to canyon and also can ski down easier to TNF via plummet.

So after thinking about it I change my "maybe" to a wholehearted YES.

I wouldn't be worried at all. Even on the busiest of days the only run off the Summit that is gridlock is Long John. They did the studies, the uphill capacity increase will not substantially harm the skiing experience...

 

[deadheadskier]

How is that odd at all? Right in the proposal they say the area is underutilized due to the long slow ride of the lift. That is why they want to replace it...

If you haven't skied there since the first Reagan Administration and the only knowledge of the lift/terrain is that which you read here that stated this winter that the lift only ran part time; it would seem odd to replace with a detachable. Further, reading this thread it's stated that the ride is 10 minutes........I ski Ragged, I'd be thrilled if the Spear Mountain triple was 'only' ten minutes.

Usually, not always, but usually lifts that are upgraded to detachables are ones that have high traffic / long lift lines and greater uphill capacity is needed. That's all I'm saying.

 

[RISkier]

One reason Long John needs to be widened is that when the Sundance chair isn't running, everybody who wants to ski Sun Bowl, Ridge or Uncle's has to go down one or the other green run to get to them.

And as I recall it's the main way to get to Carinthia from the front face, isn't it? Heavy traffic with skiers of all ability levels. I try to avoid it as much as possible but it's pretty much the only way to get to a lot of terrain.

 

[catskills]

A six pack detachable gives area management lots of options to manage the uphill capacity to what ever works. If they need to decrease uphill capacity take chairs off the lift and increase the TIME between chairs. If they think they can increase capacity, then they can add chairs and decrease the TIME between chairs. The shortest time between chairs can not be less than 6 seconds. A six pack can be a real people mover at 10 chairs per minute, 600 chairs per hour and 600 x 6 = 3600 uphill capacity per hour. Both fixed grip quad and detachable HSQ also have 6 seconds between chairs or 600 chairs per hour, which is 600 x 4 = 2400 capacity per hour. The fixed grip quads have a lot more stops which decreases uphill capacity compared to the detachable HSQ

A detachable high speed six pack has the potential for 50 percent more capacity than a QUAD. (3600-2400) / 2400 = 0.5 . That is a hell of a lot more people being delivered to the top of Mt Snow. Early season Dec 1-20 could have some significant trail over crowding with limited number of trails open and poor quality over used snow conditions.

 

[Glenn]

.

Do you think that they can and/or will cut any more trails over on Sunbrook once they have more water and a fast, reliable way up? Frankly, its cool over there to take a few cruisers....but I tend not to spend too much time over on Sunbrook..and it doesn't really have much to do with that lift.

I don't think so...but I'm not 100% sure. IIRC, Tim Boyd mentioned that's Forest Service land. He had stated that even replacing the lift there, and moving the original footprint could be a big challenge.

 

[jaytrem]

I don't think so...but I'm not 100% sure. IIRC, Tim Boyd mentioned that's Forest Service land. He had stated that even replacing the lift there, and moving the original footprint could be a big challenge.

This map (also on the USFS site) shows the proposed trail expansions in yellow....

http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/25913_FSPLT1_018396.pdf

So in Sunbrook it shows a new trail from the top of SunDANCE lift to the bottom of SunBROOK. There doesn't appear to be too much rooom left in the current permit boundry for much else in Sunbrook, especially if they decide to widen anything.

 

[roark]

This map (also on the USFS site) shows the proposed trail expansions in yellow....

http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/25913_FSPLT1_018396.pdf

Ooof, not a fan of the proposed trails. Especially destroying the Trials and Claim Jumper.

 

[jaytrem]

Ooof, not a fan of the proposed trails. Especially destroying the Trials and Claim Jumper.

Yeah, I agree. The others seem okay though.

They also eventually want to widen Overbrook. Apparently they plan to put a lift near Canyon that would be shorter, I guess like the original Canyon lift. Would in theory be good for beginners, but sucks that they're going to mess with another trail that has some character.

 

[drjeff]

This map (also on the USFS site) shows the proposed trail expansions in yellow....

http://a123.g.akamai.net/7/123/1155...ai.com/11558/www/nepa/25913_FSPLT1_018396.pdf

So in Sunbrook it shows a new trail from the top of SunDANCE lift to the bottom of SunBROOK. There doesn't appear to be too much rooom left in the current permit boundry for much else in Sunbrook, especially if they decide to widen anything.

I wouldn't put a ton of faith in that map, as it was the PRE Peak Resorts plan for trail work at Mount Snow. And as Glenn said correctly, at past passholders meetings, when talk of new trails has come up, the explanation is that since *most* of the trails at Mount Snow are on US Forest Service land, they need approval from them to do pretty much anything tree wise, and as of late, the Forst service has been basically of the nature that if you want to cut say 10 acres of new trail, then you need to return 10 acres of existing trail to it's "natural state" (that's why over the last few years, they've "given back" the skier's right 2nd entrace to South Bowl and the old top of Overbrook from basically the top of Ripcord down to just above the top of Canyon Quad - that had to occur when they combined Upper Canyon/Upper Choke to make what is now Cascade)

 

[jaytrem]

I wouldn't put a ton of faith in that map, as it was the PRE Peak Resorts plan for trail work at Mount Snow. And as Glenn said correctly, at past passholders meetings, when talk of new trails has come up, the explanation is that since *most* of the trails at Mount Snow are on US Forest Service land, they need approval from them to do pretty much anything tree wise, and as of late, the Forst service has been basically of the nature that if you want to cut say 10 acres of new trail, then you need to return 10 acres of existing trail to it's "natural state" (that's why over the last few years, they've "given back" the skier's right 2nd entrace to South Bowl and the old top of Overbrook from basically the top of Ripcord down to just above the top of Canyon Quad - that had to occur when they combined Upper Canyon/Upper Choke to make what is now Cascade)

So then to widen Long John I assume they make have to do the same. That could be interesting. Anyway, if they want to add to Sunbrook I don't think they much for other options. In order to get any sustained pitch past Big Dipper you need to get out a descent distance on the Ridge Trail. Been years since I've been out there, does make for some nice slackcountry, and with some thinning could be more user freindly. Then again it is outside the current permit boundry, so probably nothing happening there. Should be an interesting couple years coming up. We'll see if they can recapture some of the business they've lost over the years. This year I've actually decided not to get a Mount Snow pass for the first time in about 20 years or so. Since I own a house there I figure I'll set aside $400 for Mount Snow skiing and see how I do with all the other discounts they offer. The rest of the savings I'll spread around to some of the smaller areas. I'll see how it goes and maybe buy a pass for 2011-2012, but it should be fun being a free agent for a year.

 

[drjeff]

So then to widen Long John I assume they make have to do the same. That could be interesting. .

The widening of Long John is apparently subjectively enough of a different situation to the USFS they can widen without having to give anything back. When they "created" what is now Cascade that was a slightly different situation so the give back was needed - makes no sense to me either

 

[Newpylong]

Yeah, I agree. The others seem okay though.

They also eventually want to widen Overbrook. Apparently they plan to put a lift near Canyon that would be shorter, I guess like the original Canyon lift. Would in theory be good for beginners, but sucks that they're going to mess with another trail that has some character.

The new lift will not be anywhere near as long as the old Canyon double which was I believe around 4K feet long. That said, lower Overbrook is a sweet trail but would definitely benefit from snowmaking. The water bars and lower el. make it tough to open unless there is a huge dump. I don't remember them saying anything about widening it but I could be wrong... This map and others floating around like it are from the ASC era and I believe there will be a lot of changes when snowmaking expansion begins.

 

[jaytrem]

The widening of Long John is apparently subjectively enough of a different situation to the USFS they can widen without having to give anything back. When they "created" what is now Cascade that was a slightly different situation so the give back was needed - makes no sense to me either

Makes perfect sense to me, but I'm a government employee.

 

[jaytrem]

The new lift will not be anywhere near as long as the old Canyon double which was I believe around 4K feet long. That said, lower Overbrook is a sweet trail but would definitely benefit from snowmaking. The water bars and lower el. make it tough to open unless there is a huge dump. I don't remember them saying anything about widening it but I could be wrong... This map and others floating around like it are from the ASC era and I believe there will be a lot of changes when snowmaking expansion begins.

From the "Mount Snow Fan Club"...

"you are correct it would be a lift that would be to access some more beginner terrain at the bottom of Roller Coaster, and Overbrook which would get some widening love."

I actually replied with a comment about them needed to rename the place Okemo South if they want to keep ruining any trail that have any character. They deleted it though, guess they weren't in the mood for negative feedback. I'm still upset about what Plummet did to Jaws and PDF, so I get a bit grumpy when it comes to changing any of the few remaining "character" trails.

 

[Newpylong]

I guess I was wrong, hah.

I hear ya, I can't stand Okemo-fication. I guess we will have to wait and see to see just what happens. I can't see why the bottom of that would need any more widening...

From the "Mount Snow Fan Club"...

"you are correct it would be a lift that would be to access some more beginner terrain at the bottom of Roller Coaster, and Overbrook which would get some widening love."

I actually replied with a comment about them needed to rename the place Okemo South if they want to keep ruining any trail that have any character. They deleted it though, guess they weren't in the mood for negative feedback. I'm still upset about what Plummet did to Jaws and PDF, so I get a bit grumpy when it comes to changing any of the few remaining "character" trails.

 

[MommaBear]

... They deleted it though, guess they weren't in the mood for negative feedback.

Or they are mad you didn't renew your pass. :wink:

 

[jaytrem]

Or they are mad you didn't renew your pass. :wink:

I gotta say, it does feel weird after all these years. I'll miss the days where I could go take 10 quick runs if I had something else to do that day. Now if I'm going to plunk down the $$$ for a day ticket I'll make sure I get a full day in. Guess it will cut down on my rainy day skiing too. At least I'll get to add some Mt Snow tickets to my lift ticket collection, and maybe even some long sought after CT tickets. Sundown is definitely on the list for a Sunday Mount Snow replacement day. Should increase my Magic days too, very excited about that.