Attitash snowmaking - October 6th!

[wa-loaf]

:lol: I need to ski.

I sit through four hours of lecture on snowmaking every week. I'm not just pulling this stuff out of my @ss. Different snowmakers have different theories on when to use what equipment. But there are some fundamental numbers and facts of science that cannot be argued.

Actually I find it pretty interesting, but I there is a certain point where my eyes glaze over. :-D

 

[BushMogulMaster]

Actually I find it pretty interesting, but I there is a certain point where my eyes glaze over. :-D

I'm not gonna lie... I can't get enough of it. I truly love the science of snowmaking. How many people can really earn college credit studying the chemistry and physics of snowmaking, and earn additional credit for making snow in snowmaking lab? I love studying Ski Area Operations!

Of course, I love all of the other facets of mountain ops just as much. But I happen to be studying snowmaking right now.

 

[millerm277]

Isn't that the truth! They're making out here, but I haven't had a chance to get up to Loveland or A-Basin to have a look. I feel like I should just pick up and leave right now, just to see some snowmaking!

I assume you know about http://www.skiloveland.com/snowmaking/snowmakingphotos.aspx (And it's looking quite nice there).

 

[BushMogulMaster]

I assume you know about http://www.skiloveland.com/snowmaking/snowmakingphotos.aspx (And it's looking quite nice there).

Yep. Check it daily. And pictures are great... but I'd love to see it and hear it and feel it!

 

[snowman]

Thanks for the backup there. Let me just add a few other thoughts. A/W guns make snow better at marginal temps because of a concept called "supercooling." This happens when compressed air is released from the nozzle and it expands significantly. Air coming out of the gun at 48 degrees F can supercool to below 10 degrees, even if the ambient temperature is mid 20s. This allows the water to cool, and assuming there are enough high temp nucleators in the water, it will freeze. Fan guns cannot take advantage of this supercooling. And no, most fan guns won't produce any more snow in marginal temps either. You can usually only open either a couple of nozzles (on large nozzle guns) or one ring (on many-nozzled guns).

ACTUALLY, lol, the supercooling only works because of the amount of air you put into the gun. The more air you put into it, the higher the pressure in the mixing chamber, the more it expands when it exits and the greater the supercooling effect. You can also "seed" this operation with agents like snowmax which increase the nuculi spewed out the gun increasing productivity.

Now on to arguing over who I'm supporting. It's actually really simple why a AW mixing chamber gun produces way more snow than any other type of gun at any temperature....the nozzles are huge! You're dealing with one gigantic nozzle...some of which you can literally shove your whole hand in. Most low E guns have high temp nozzles that you literally have to clean out with a needle. Fist vs. 4-12 pin pricks on a low E gun. Think about it! Some low E guns are just getting stupid to the point of useless. One local hill got some last year that were literally just like pissing in the wind due to their "efficiency". It's one thing to be air efficient, and it's another to be 30 feet in the air spewing out such a fine mist that any hint of wind just takes it all 2 towns over. That's not efficient. Sure the water per air content is better than any other gun... but if your crews are out there manning the thing for 8 days to get the production a ratnick will do in one....are you really being efficient? All the extra labor and fuel burnt running the ATV's and sleds up and down the hill to check on the things combined with way more of the production being taken by the wind makes them about as inefficient a gun as I've ever seen. The fan guns are the same way. They have rings or heads with needle prick nozzles to nozzles that are about the size of a framing nail head. They generally have more water output than low E guns at any temp because they have way more nozzles of a similar size to a low E tower meaning much more water volume is being output. Still, if you take all those nozzles and add them up they're still not the dimension of a fist on all but the largest of units. This means OLD, LOW TECH AW mixing chamber guns win a production shootout with most any gun at any temp.

Your arguments are getting confused between production efficiency and production period. Typically, production vs. power cost in rough terms: 28-48F: AW guns win because nothing else works, 20-28F:fan guns win, 15-20F: Fan guns and DECENT low E towers with big nozzles tie, 15F and below: DECENT low E towers and Ratnick style guns tie . Power cost no object: AW mixing chamer guns win at every temperature for maximum production. Power, labor, infrastucture, incidental operating cost and gun cost considered: 28-48F AW mixers win, 20-28F Fan guns win, 20F and under I say Ratnicks win. I think the love affair with Low E towers is fading due to the pissing in the wind factor. You need to have a crapload of them in fixed locations at a resort with consistently low temperatures and a consistent lack of wind to make them pay. In the real world the last 2 factors simply just don't exist. The volume of the plume you can spit out, the wetness of the plume you can produce and the height you're kicking it out at with a high volume Ratnick simply keeps twice as much of your production on the trail and out of the woods because it creates it's own micro-climate which takes a heavy wind to influence it. Your labor costs also lower dramatically because you get the same job done 4-10 times faster. The purchase cost is also similar to a low E tower making them much more efficient entry cost wise. The low E guns simply don't create a micro-climate on anything near the same scale and the one they do manage to create is 30 to 40 feet off the ground allowing the wind to take what you've produced when the snow falls out of that micro-climate at the 25 foot level.

 

[threecy]

You can make snow with fan guns above 28 F - they key is they need to be started at or below 28 WB. I've first hand seen Wizzards produce snow in near 40 degree temps (thank you low humidity!).

Yes, an SMI gun is going to use 29+ amps on 480. You get a Polecat running on single digit weather and you're going to see some tremendous snow - and huge piles too! Not only that, but add in the optional oscillators, Wizzard heaters, etc. and you have a better gun. Super Wizzards are great for deicing - turn off the water, point it down, and look out! A lot easier than running around with a turkey burner.

Get into the single digits and below and you run a huge risk, regardless of what gun you use - pipeline freezing! Freezing a pipeline and your loop is likely out of business until the grass is growing again!

Headcos made a tremendous amount of snow, but the quality wasn't as great, more power was needed, they weren't easy to transport, they required more water pressure to run decently, and they were known to break down all the time.

Personally, I have never made snow with a Ratnik, so I can't comment on that. I can say that there's a reason SMI is leading the way in fan gun technology - and a reason that areas who can afford the guns are indeed buying them. Peak, for instance, certainly isn't installing Polecats and Super Polecats because they're looking for the cheapest install - they're for the best system they can afford. SMI.

 

[snowman]

The cost to install fans is a lot lower if you have no snowmaking system to begin with as well. Running the power line costs a lot less than running a second pipe and buying compressors, dryers and hoses. Adding a power line to a trail with 2 pipes already and not running compressors you already have installed eats into the actual "savings" fan guns promise big time. I imagine a lot of the infrastructure at the various ASC resorts is shot however, so you can "save" money by starting over from scratch on some trails with pipes that need replacing and not bothing to replace blown compressors.

 

[snowman]

73F and raining on Saturday at Attitash. Good luck with that snowmaking! lol lol lol

 

[BushMogulMaster]

ACTUALLY, lol, the supercooling only works because of the amount of air you put into the gun. The more air you put into it, the higher the pressure in the mixing chamber, the more it expands when it exits and the greater the supercooling effect. You can also "seed" this operation with agents like snowmax which increase the nuculi spewed out the gun increasing productivity.

Snowmax is ONLY effective if your water is pure or full of very low temp nucleators. The snow crystal forms around the highest temp nucleator in the water droplet. More often than not, water taken from rivers, streams, non-stagnant ponds, etc. have plenty of high temp nucleators. Snowmax (at $80/bag to treat 100000 gallons) is a waste of money. Have a look at Aspen's case study sometime.

Drift is completely different. It's a surficant (reduces surface tension). It would be somewhat effective in any snowmaking system, but it is NOT a nucleator.

Supercooling works because any time air is compressed, it heats. When it expands, it cools dramatically. So in a marginal/high temp snowmaking environment, the internal mix a/w gun can freeze more droplets of snow than fan guns.

Now on to arguing over who I'm supporting. It's actually really simple why a AW mixing chamber gun produces way more snow than any other type of gun at any temperature....the nozzles are huge! You're dealing with one gigantic nozzle...some of which you can literally shove your whole hand in. Most low E guns have high temp nozzles that you literally have to clean out with a needle. Fist vs. 4-12 pin pricks on a low E gun. Think about it! Some low E guns are just getting stupid to the point of useless. One local hill got some last year that were literally just like pissing in the wind due to their "efficiency". It's one thing to be air efficient, and it's another to be 30 feet in the air spewing out such a fine mist that any hint of wind just takes it all 2 towns over. That's not efficient. Sure the water per air content is better than any other gun... but if your crews are out there manning the thing for 8 days to get the production a ratnick will do in one....are you really being efficient? All the extra labor and fuel burnt running the ATV's and sleds up and down the hill to check on the things combined with way more of the production being taken by the wind makes them about as inefficient a gun as I've ever seen. The fan guns are the same way. They have rings or heads with needle prick nozzles to nozzles that are about the size of a framing nail head. They generally have more water output than low E guns at any temp because they have way more nozzles of a similar size to a low E tower meaning much more water volume is being output. Still, if you take all those nozzles and add them up they're still not the dimension of a fist on all but the largest of units. This means OLD, LOW TECH AW mixing chamber guns win a production shootout with most any gun at any temp.

I think I said a lot of that with a few less details.

Your arguments are getting confused between production efficiency and production period. Typically, production vs. power cost in rough terms: 28-48F: AW guns win because nothing else works, 20-28F:fan guns win, 15-20F: Fan guns and DECENT low E towers with big nozzles tie, 15F and below: DECENT low E towers and Ratnick style guns tie . Power cost no object: AW mixing chamer guns win at every temperature for maximum production. Power, labor, infrastucture, incidental operating cost and gun cost considered: 28-48F AW mixers win, 20-28F Fan guns win, 20F and under I say Ratnicks win. I think the love affair with Low E towers is fading due to the pissing in the wind factor. You need to have a crapload of them in fixed locations at a resort with consistently low temperatures and a consistent lack of wind to make them pay. In the real world the last 2 factors simply just don't exist. The volume of the plume you can spit out, the wetness of the plume you can produce and the height you're kicking it out at with a high volume Ratnick simply keeps twice as much of your production on the trail and out of the woods because it creates it's own micro-climate which takes a heavy wind to influence it. Your labor costs also lower dramatically because you get the same job done 4-10 times faster. The purchase cost is also similar to a low E tower making them much more efficient entry cost wise. The low E guns simply don't create a micro-climate on anything near the same scale and the one they do manage to create is 30 to 40 feet off the ground allowing the wind to take what you've produced when the snow falls out of that micro-climate at the 25 foot level.

Any snowgun creates a micro-climate in the plume. Yes, the scales are different. But any plume has its own micro-climate, in which the temperature, the rh, etc. are significantly different than the ambient climate

Wind is certainly an issue with any tower mounted gun. But that longer hang time is fantastic on a still night. The longer the hang time, the drier the snow.

You just kind of made the point I was making, though: internal mix a/w (chamber style, as you call them) are the largest producers of snow product. That's all I was getting at from my original post. But still... I enjoy the round table snowmaking discussion!

You can make snow with fan guns above 28 F - they key is they need to be started at or below 28 WB. I've first hand seen Wizzards produce snow in near 40 degree temps (thank you low humidity!).

Yes, an SMI gun is going to use 29+ amps on 480. You get a Polecat running on single digit weather and you're going to see some tremendous snow - and huge piles too! Not only that, but add in the optional oscillators, Wizzard heaters, etc. and you have a better gun. Super Wizzards are great for deicing - turn off the water, point it down, and look out! A lot easier than running around with a turkey burner.

Get into the single digits and below and you run a huge risk, regardless of what gun you use - pipeline freezing! Freezing a pipeline and your loop is likely out of business until the grass is growing again!

Headcos made a tremendous amount of snow, but the quality wasn't as great, more power was needed, they weren't easy to transport, they required more water pressure to run decently, and they were known to break down all the time.

Personally, I have never made snow with a Ratnik, so I can't comment on that. I can say that there's a reason SMI is leading the way in fan gun technology - and a reason that areas who can afford the guns are indeed buying them. Peak, for instance, certainly isn't installing Polecats and Super Polecats because they're looking for the cheapest install - they're for the best system they can afford. SMI.

Ratnik also offers an oscillating gun. That's definitely good for mid winter when you want to make a wide dispersal of product. But for early season, them big 'ol piles are good! Self insulating!

I agree that you get huge piles. But the fact is, high-volume a/w guns simply can blow more gallons per minute. That generally means more snow. Yes, yes... the size of the droplet is certainly a factor (generally 200-500 microns). But the bigger high-volume a/w guns are shooting droplets on the upper end of that range.

As for freezing pipelines: that's why many air and water pipes are now around 12' below ground. They are below frost line. The bigger concern is guns freezing and water hydrants with bad needle valves (leading to a frozen hydrant).

The cost to install fans is a lot lower if you have no snowmaking system to begin with as well. Running the power line costs a lot less than running a second pipe and buying compressors, dryers and hoses. Adding a power line to a trail with 2 pipes already and not running compressors you already have installed eats into the actual "savings" fan guns promise big time. I imagine a lot of the infrastructure at the various ASC resorts is shot however, so you can "save" money by starting over from scratch on some trails with pipes that need replacing and not bothing to replace blown compressors.

The install cost is absolutely cheaper. Compressors run 50% of the cost of an a/w system. Not to mention the extra piping, the aftercoolers, more hydrants, more valves, etc. However, in the long run, the a/w system is cost effective. You'll replace your whole fleet of $20,000+ fan guns once or twice before my compressors or cast iron a/w guns fail. So if you need a quick cheap install of a couple of guns, sure, fans are cheaper. If you're looking for long lasting value, an a/w system is often a better choice (not to mention much more portable, gun-wise).

But really, the fact is: the best snowmaking systems in the world are an intelligent combination of both technologies. They each have their pluses and minuses.

 

[snowman]

Wind is certainly an issue with any tower mounted gun. But that longer hang time is fantastic on a still night. The longer the hang time, the drier the snow.

Yes, but most eastern resorts get about 6 such nights a year which is why I think these technology is fatally flawed.

You just kind of made the point I was making, though: internal mix a/w (chamber style, as you call them) are the largest producers of snow product. That's all I was getting at from my original post. But still... I enjoy the round table snowmaking discussion!

I wasn't really disagreeing with anything YOU had to say, I was more editing..lol

As for freezing pipelines: that's why many air and water pipes are now around 12' below ground. They are below frost line. The bigger concern is guns freezing and water hydrants with bad needle valves (leading to a frozen hydrant).

There's pros and cons to this too. Burrying pipes costs big$. If you get a pipe burst underground you have to dig the thing up...leaving that line down for days. If a pipe bursts above ground you just cut the bad section out and you're off to the races in a few hours. If you get a freeze up above ground a warm spell (which we also get alot) will cure that before the next cold spell comes. If your line freezes up underground it's frozen for the winter.

You'll replace your whole fleet of $20,000+ fan guns once or twice before my compressors or cast iron a/w guns fail.

Ehhhh.....you can change out parts on fan guns pretty easily. It's also something you can do without much technical knowledge. Rebuilding a compressor is a different story. A couple fan guns can be in the shop being refurbed by your snowmaking crew while they're in on there warm up breaks during runs vs. hiring heavy duty mechanics to rebuild a compressor at $1000's of dollars in just labor costs. If you're a small operation with only a compressor or 2... having one of your fan guns go down is a lot better than having your compressor go down as well.

But really, the fact is: the best snowmaking systems in the world are an intelligent combination of both technologies. They each have their pluses and minuses.

Agreed, like adding fan guns to the base area and beginner slopes to increase capacity instead of adding another compressor or miles and miles of power line.

We're really talking about 3 technologies though. Low E, Heavy A/W and Fan. Then there are water sticks. Like Threecy, I can't comment on them because I've never seen them working, but I'm going to assume they're worse than typical LOW E's which I'm already stating suck.

Ratnick Skygiant II+II's

Ratnik Skygiant II + II's are the best low E's by far. The only low E LISTED to be better is the top of the line HKD, but they simply just don't produce like the skygiants II + II's at any temperature. That has a lot to do with the fact the II+II is 6 feet (the 12 footers are pictured above...but must ops buy the shorter 6 or 8's and use them like snow giants) off the ground while the HKD is 30 feet off the ground. At 6 feet off the ground the micro-climate does not get undermined by the wind and no snow gets taken away by the wind. You can then use the Sky-Giant II+II in much the same manner you use a snow giant. They only produce half as much snow as a snow giant 5, but they use only 1/6 as much compressed air to make the same amount of snow. On top of that, at 10-14F you can turn the air off! They are then MORE efficient than a fan gun and make the same amount of snow as a super polecat. I think the Skygiant II+II is the best way to make snow right now period. The snow giant 5's use too much energy and make so much snow so fast your guns burry themselves in too fast. The Skygiant II+II is the perfect balance of everything. They also make a single head Skygiant II, which is supposed to produce 1/2 as much but your piles usually end up looking like 1/4 as much because the micro-climate is too small again and the pissing in the wind effect kicks back in, so I don't like it either.

 

[threecy]

Burying pipe can certainly be a problem - once that pipeline is frozen, there is next to no chance of thawing it that winter. A brief warm up isn't going to thaw an above ground pipeline, however you do have a chance to take the turkey burners to it and loosen it up, then blast it out the return. Having the ability to replace bad pipe midwinter, as well as to cut off a frozen section and put in a temporary return for the rest of the season (very few pipeline freezes encompass the entire line - you can usually catch it before you lose the whole thing).

I'm not sure what you mean about replacing fan guns twice over...very few fan guns are replaced because they break - rather, they're replaced when superior technology comes out. In fact, there a lot of Polecats out there that are two decades old - old SMI Highlands with the Polecat conversion. The parts are relatively easily swapped out - water bars, compressors, nozzles, filters, etc.

Installing fan guns isn't as simple as stringing wire - it's not like you can just tie in a wire at the circuit breaker in the base lodge and be done. You have to put a lot of infrastructure in place - it takes a lot to operate 10 - 20 30 amp guns on a line, nevermind a whole mountain.

 

[BushMogulMaster]

Yes, but most eastern resorts get about 6 such nights a year which is why I think these technology is fatally flawed.

Very true, but tower guns with adjustable heights can easily be lowered to, say, 15 feet instead of 25. This will definitely effect snow quality, but you can still blow decent snow. I think it's a little presumptive to call it flawed. Perhaps inefficient in a New England setting would be a better way to describe it.

I wasn't really disagreeing with anything YOU had to say, I was more editing..lol

Refining, refining...

There's pros and cons to this too. Burrying pipes costs big$. If you get a pipe burst underground you have to dig the thing up...leaving that line down for days. If a pipe bursts above ground you just cut the bad section out and you're off to the races in a few hours. If you get a freeze up above ground a warm spell (which we also get alot) will cure that before the next cold spell comes. If your line freezes up underground it's frozen for the winter.

Yeah, trenching 12' for a buried line is expensive for sure. But the long run payoff is huge. If you're burying ductile iron pipe, it's simply not gonna blow unless you put 6000000000psi through it. Its not affected by electrolysis like steel pipe is, and it's coated inside with a cement slurry to both reduce friction and prevent rusting. That stuff's down there for good, and it's below frost line so it is NOT gonna freeze unless there happens to be a 2 month stretch of constant below 0 temps.

Ehhhh.....you can change out parts on fan guns pretty easily. It's also something you can do without much technical knowledge. Rebuilding a compressor is a different story. A couple fan guns can be in the shop being refurbed by your snowmaking crew while they're in on there warm up breaks during runs vs. hiring heavy duty mechanics to rebuild a compressor at $1000's of dollars in just labor costs. If you're a small operation with only a compressor or 2... having one of your fan guns go down is a lot better than having your compressor go down as well.

I can't argue with much of that. But you have to start considering all of the maintenance differences. What do you do if your big cast iron a/w gun quits working for some reason? You smack it and get the ice out. Whoooptidoooooo. Worst case, you throw it under your arm and go grab another one. If a fan gun goes out for some reason, you've gotta get a groomer to yank it over to the control or maintenance building. You've got to diagnose the problem, find and/or order the necessary replacement part, install the part, get a groomer to take it back out, and try again.

The compressors would definitely be a pain. But they are in a controlled environment. You will not likely have many problems with a centrifugal compressor over a many year period. Older rotary compressors may present a bit of a challenge. But here again, how long have they already been in service?

Agreed, like adding fan guns to the base area and beginner slopes to increase capacity instead of adding another compressor or miles and miles of power line.

Definitely

We're really talking about 3 technologies though. Low E, Heavy A/W and Fan. Then there are water sticks. Like Threecy, I can't comment on them because I've never seen them working, but I'm going to assume they're worse than typical LOW E's which I'm already stating suck.

Okay, so 3. But standard Low E guns are still a/w guns. They just use less of the "a" part. The Waterstick is just and airless small-nozzle tower gun. They're ok, but require Snowmax in almost every situation because they need extremely high temp nucleators to even think about making snow. We have one here at the college. I'll fill you in more after I make some snow with it next month.

Ratnick Skygiant II+II's

Ratnik Skygiant II + II's are the best low E's by far. The only low E LISTED to be better is the top of the line HKD, but they simply just don't produce like the skygiants II + II's at any temperature. That has a lot to do with the fact the II+II is 6 feet (the 12 footers are pictured above...but must ops buy the shorter 6 or 8's and use them like snow giants) off the ground while the HKD is 30 feet off the ground. At 6 feet off the ground the micro-climate does not get undermined by the wind and no snow gets taken away by the wind. You can then use the Sky-Giant II+II in much the same manner you use a snow giant. They only produce half as much snow as a snow giant 5, but they use only 1/6 as much compressed air to make the same amount of snow. On top of that, at 10-14F you can turn the air off! They are then MORE efficient than a fan gun and make the same amount of snow as a super polecat. I think the Skygiant II+II is the best way to make snow right now period. The snow giant 5's use too much energy and make so much snow so fast your guns burry themselves in too fast. The Skygiant II+II is the perfect balance of everything. They also make a single head Skygiant II, which is supposed to produce 1/2 as much but your piles usually end up looking like 1/4 as much because the micro-climate is too small again and the pissing in the wind effect kicks back in, so I don't like it either.

No doubt. Skygiant II+II is a heck of a gun, both production and efficiency wise.

Burying pipe can certainly be a problem - once that pipeline is frozen, there is next to no chance of thawing it that winter. A brief warm up isn't going to thaw an above ground pipeline, however you do have a chance to take the turkey burners to it and loosen it up, then blast it out the return. Having the ability to replace bad pipe midwinter, as well as to cut off a frozen section and put in a temporary return for the rest of the season (very few pipeline freezes encompass the entire line - you can usually catch it
before you lose the whole thing).

See above.

I'm not sure what you mean about replacing fan guns twice over...very few fan guns are replaced because they break - rather, they're replaced when superior technology comes out. In fact, there a lot of Polecats out there that are two decades old - old SMI Highlands with the Polecat conversion. The parts are relatively easily swapped out - water bars, compressors, nozzles, filters, etc.

I didn't say they'd break. A/W gun technology hasn't changed much in 20 years, aside from the dawn of Low E guns. The Ratnik Snowgiants are essentially the same now as they were in 1990. So while fan gun technology continues to change rapidly, the guns will be replaced. Also, the maintenance fact as I mentioned above. If you don't replace, you'll spend almost as much on parts, maintenance, and labor as you would have on a new gun.

Installing fan guns isn't as simple as stringing wire - it's not like you can just tie in a wire at the circuit breaker in the base lodge and be done. You have to put a lot of infrastructure in place - it takes a lot to operate 10 - 20 30 amp guns on a line, nevermind a whole mountain.

I don't think anyone said it was simple. But it's not as labor or time intensive as laying thousands of feet of pipe and installing compressors, etc.

 

[2knees]

It all depends on the amount of dynamic head involved,

LOL

carry on.

 

[threecy]

I don't think anyone said it was simple. But it's not as labor or time intensive as laying thousands of feet of pipe and installing compressors, etc.

Again, you're not just stringing wire. Electricians aren't cheap - especially linemen. You need to install utility poles, protect splices, put in boxes with pigtails at every hydrant, transformers, etc. A maintenance crew is going to have people who can do fill welds, etc. - whether they weld in the base area, then drag the pipe, or have the welding machine on a tractor and do it on site. Regardless, that salary will be at the low ski area rate. A lineman, on the other hand, is going to be a lot more expensive - and hard to find on an ad-hoc basis.

 

[BushMogulMaster]

Again, you're not just stringing wire. Electricians aren't cheap - especially linemen. You need to install utility poles, protect splices, put in boxes with pigtails at every hydrant, transformers, etc. A maintenance crew is going to have people who can do fill welds, etc. - whether they weld in the base area, then drag the pipe, or have the welding machine on a tractor and do it on site. Regardless, that salary will be at the low ski area rate. A lineman, on the other hand, is going to be a lot more expensive - and hard to find on an ad-hoc basis.

I understand all of this thoroughly. However, a standard centrifugal compressor you'll find in an a/w system will run around $100,000. And you'll likely need several. Initial install cost is simply higher for an a/w system. Also consider laying pipe: you've gotta run the equipment, pay the operators, pay workers to take care of trench shoring (or pay operators more for sloping), installing compressors is no walk in the park, not to mention all of the electrical work involved in the compressor building: you'll likely be running 4160 now. That's some serious high voltage. You need a 4160v transformer installed, the wiring run to the building, and then the internal wiring for the compressors.

I'm personally more of an a/w advocate. I still think it's more cost effective in the long run. But the implementation cost is through the roof for any decent sized system.

 

[BushMogulMaster]

LOL

carry on.

Oh grow up, for heaven's sake! Sexual jokes coming out of a snowmaking discussion :roll:

Total dynamic head simply refers to the total vertical a water pump must be capable of, factoring suction/lift head, discharge head, and friction loss (from piping run). And then there's Net Positive. But that's not too big of a deal.

Please don't comment about suction head................. :wink:

 

[Hawkshot99]

I am trying to read this, but its getting pretty hard to follow.

Just go make the snow already!

 

[BushMogulMaster]

I am trying to read this, but its getting pretty hard to follow.

Just go make the snow already!

It's an entire branch of science, and an entire branch of art. Hard to follow if you're reading our posts, yes. You'd get it if we were actually explaining it in an instructional way.

 

[WWF-VT]

From an Attitash email:

Snowmaking System Demo - 10/6-7

THE SNOWMAKING DEMO
This, my friends will be something to see - I can show you pictures, I can show you video of
our guys testing the snowmaking system, but to really appreciate the power, you'll want to
see it for yourself. We're going to light up the guns near the base of Bear Peak for a few minutes during Oktoberfest on Saturday and Sunday, twice each day. It will make you want to ski on the spot...

Email should read:

Come on up to Attitash this weekend. It's going to be sunny and 75 degrees! If you get too warm we'll be ready to cool you down by turning on two giant sprinklers twice a day at Bear Peak....

 

[snowman]

Very true, but tower guns with adjustable heights can easily be lowered to, say, 15 feet instead of 25. This will definitely effect snow quality, but you can still blow decent snow. I think it's a little presumptive to call it flawed. Perhaps inefficient in a New England setting would be a better way to describe it.

Well....they do work...somewhat...there are just guns that sit lower to the ground that work way better for a similar amount of money (my precious Sky giant II + II). I have no idea why everyone ran out to buy HKD towers. You would think at the expenditure people would shop around and demo all the varieties for a year. I've seen them running side by side and there is no comparison, even on windless days!

Yeah, trenching 12' for a buried line is expensive for sure. But the long run payoff is huge. If you're burying ductile iron pipe, it's simply not gonna blow unless you put 6000000000psi through it. Its not affected by electrolysis like steel pipe is, and it's coated inside with a cement slurry to both reduce friction and prevent rusting. That stuff's down there for good, and it's below frost line so it is NOT gonna freeze unless there happens to be a 2 month stretch of constant below 0 temps.

Why are excavators a familiar site at ski resorts in winter then? The pipes do blow out a lot.

I can't argue with much of that. But you have to start considering all of the maintenance differences. What do you do if your big cast iron a/w gun quits working for some reason? You smack it and get the ice out. Whoooptidoooooo. Worst case, you throw it under your arm and go grab another one. If a fan gun goes out for some reason, you've gotta get a groomer to yank it over to the control or maintenance building. You've got to diagnose the problem, find and/or order the necessary replacement part, install the part, get a groomer to take it back out, and try again.

+

The compressors would definitely be a pain. But they are in a controlled environment. You will not likely have many problems with a centrifugal compressor over a many year period. Older rotary compressors may present a bit of a challenge. But here again, how long have they already been in service?

The biggest advantage in my mind with fan guns is that you only ever lose one at once though. If your compressor goes out at a mom and pop hill and you only have a 1 month window a year where you can make decent snow it could be season ending. That and the fact your crew can actually repair the fan guns quickly and easily and it doesn't cost the sun, the moon and the stars to keep a stock of parts on hand. If you have a hill that can afford 2 + big compressors, A/W is definately the way to go.

Okay, so 3. But standard Low E guns are still a/w guns. They just use less of the "a" part.

Using your argument, fan guns are A/W guns too! It's not like they don't have the compressed air on board! A lot of these pole cat installs run on air from an A/W line system anyway! There ARE 3 very distinct types of snowguns as the Chamber mix and Low E exterrnal mix create snow in a very different manner. The Low E's are actually closer to fan guns than they are chamber mix guns because the fan's and the LOW E's both create snow using the same principals, the fans just have a fan to churn and throw it!

No doubt. Skygiant II+II is a heck of a gun, both production and efficiency wise.

You would have to be stupid to buy anything else unless you're running a small operation.