Stenger and Quiros Ousted from Management of Jay Peak and Burke

BenedictGomez · May 23, 2016

thetrailboss said:
there is a design mistake with the Tram that meant that it was carrying more weight than it was designed to handle

Is that a problem?

the tram had been carrying too much weight at once since 1966, due to a mistake in the original operating manual.

So it's even less efficient than we previously thought.

Someone, please put a dagger into this thing's heart and run a quad instead, with a short double to the top.

BenedictGomez · May 23, 2016

The other interesting tidbit from that article is that yet another complete failure by a State of Vermont regulatory agency to "regulate" has been uncovered.

halfpintvt · May 23, 2016

Vt Digger Article says that the Burke Hotel will open Sept. 1st!
http://vtdigger.org/2016/05/23/burke-mountain-hotel-to-open-sept-1/

LONGBOARDR · May 23, 2016

thetrailboss said:
Here's an article outlining what needs to be done with the Tram: electrical upgrades and repair/replacement of the carriages. Apparently there is a design mistake with the Tram that meant that it was carrying more weight than it was designed to handle. Last year Doppelmayr informed Jay and they reduced capacity.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2016/05/23/jay-peaks-tram-overhauled/84596778/

The left tram car (left of operators shack) has reduced capacity ~45 people due to the water tank beneath the car that hauls water to the Sky Haus

steamboat1 · May 23, 2016

thetrailboss said:
Apparently there is a design mistake with the Tram that meant that it was carrying more weight than it was designed to handle. Last year Doppelmayr informed Jay and they reduced capacity.

I wonder if anything like this was ever applied to figuring ski lift capacity.

http://www.boattest.com/view-news/4488_new-uscg-weight-rules-for-passenger-vessels

from_the_NEK · May 23, 2016

halfpintvt said:
Vt Digger Article says that the Burke Hotel will open Sept. 1st!
http://vtdigger.org/2016/05/23/burke-mountain-hotel-to-open-sept-1/

That is good news.

I found the last sentence in that article interesting. To me the quote “We will treat PeakCM separately and deal with them fairly,” sounds like Mr Goldberg may be a bit skeptical of PeakCM's involvement in all of these projects.

steamboat1 · May 23, 2016

from_the_NEK said:
That is good news.

I found the last sentence in that article interesting. To me the quote “We will treat PeakCM separately and deal with them fairly,” sounds like Mr Goldberg may be a bit skeptical of PeakCM's involvement in all of these projects.

In the article Goldberg claims Peak is owed $3.5m, Davis (Peak) claims they are owed $4.5m)

tumbler · May 23, 2016

steamboat1 said:
In the article Goldberg claims Peak is owed $3.5m, Davis (Peak) claims they are owed $4.5m)

I bet the 1M difference is the retainge that is being held. Often missed at the first glance.

tumbler · May 23, 2016

I also cannot believe that the contractors got that far in the hole without stopping work.

thetrailboss · May 23, 2016

LONGBOARDR said:
The left tram car (left of operators shack) has reduced capacity ~45 people due to the water tank beneath the car that hauls water to the Sky Haus

Ah, so was that the "design" issue?

gregnye · May 23, 2016

Doesn't the Cannon Tram hold 70 people? (Well 69+ the operator?). If it must still be a tram why can't they upgrade it to use bigger cabins like the Cannon tram?

Edit: (Ok I just looked it up--the Cannon Tram apparently can hold 80 people per car but when its winter and passengers have skis its 70)

from_the_NEK · May 23, 2016

gregnye said:
Doesn't the Cannon Tram hold 70 people? (Well 69+ the operator?). If it must still be a tram why can't they upgrade it to use bigger cabins like the Cannon tram?

Edit: (Ok I just looked it up--the Cannon Tram apparently can hold 80 people per car but when its winter and passengers have skis its 70)

The rest of the infrastructure (bays, towers, haul lines, motors, etc) isn't designed for that size car. If anything Jay would need smaller cars or, as tehy have already started doing, put fewer people in the existing ones.

thetrailboss · May 23, 2016

gregnye said:
Doesn't the Cannon Tram hold 70 people? (Well 69+ the operator?). If it must still be a tram why can't they upgrade it to use bigger cabins like the Cannon tram?

Edit: (Ok I just looked it up--the Cannon Tram apparently can hold 80 people per car but when its winter and passengers have skis its 70)

The two are completely different designs about 15 years apart in age.

The Jay Tram was built in the mid-1960's and designed for the capacity of about 50 folks I think.

The Cannon Tram was built in 1980 and has a higher capacity (it is newer technology).

In order to increase capacity they'd probably have to replace a lot of hardware and probably do a whole new Tram. Certainly not unprecedented. Look at Jackson Hole.

octopus · May 23, 2016

so the tram has been overloaded since 1966 because of an error in the operators manual? shouldn't that fall on whoever made the operator manual?

thetrailboss · May 23, 2016

octopus said:
so the tram has been overloaded since 1966 because of an error in the operators manual? shouldn't that fall on whoever made the operator manual?

Exactly.

Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

BenedictGomez · May 24, 2016

octopus said:
so the tram has been overloaded since 1966 because of an error in the operators manual? shouldn't that fall on whoever made the operator manual?

It's a failure on both parties really, but what's amazing to me is that nobody discovered this 50 years? I guess I'm just too trusting, but I thought people are supposed to be on top of this sort of thing, as it seems to me this would be a very basic aspect of safety monitoring.

The issue makes me wonder if this is an innovative Doppelmayr revenue play, or if this was only discovered by Doppelmayr after Jay first initiated a request for some work/estimate.

MEtoVTSkier · May 24, 2016

Or possibly the standards have changed? People are heavier nowadays, than they used to be.

JPTracker · May 24, 2016

LONGBOARDR said:
The left tram car (left of operators shack) has reduced capacity ~45 people due to the water tank beneath the car that hauls water to the Sky Haus

Its actually the weight of the tank is equivalent to 15 people. If they remove the tank then it would hold 60 people. If there is water in the tank then no one is allowed in the tram.

BenedictGomez · May 24, 2016

MEtoVTSkier said:
Or possibly the standards have changed? People are heavier nowadays, than they used to be.

My interpretation of the article, unless it's written incorrectly, is that the Jay Tram has been operating over its' rated weight capacity for 50 years.

thetrailboss · May 24, 2016

BenedictGomez said:
My interpretation of the article, unless it's written incorrectly, is that the Jay Tram has been operating over its' rated weight capacity for 50 years.

Right. In part because the manufacturer failed to take into consideration the water tank on one of the Cabins.

Stenger and Quiros Ousted from Management of Jay Peak and Burke

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Member

New member

Active member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Member

Active member

Moderator

Member

Moderator

Well-known member

Active member

Member

Well-known member

Moderator

Similar threads