Attitash Summit Triple Problems 2018-2019

[MEtoVTSkier]

After further searching...

Approximately 3900'

Act 250

 

[machski]

Agreed

I wonder how many fixed grip chairs over about maybe 4k length have been installed anywhere in North America in the past 20 years or so. Unless it's specifically for expert level terrain and limiting capacity like a Castle Rock, I just don't recall such a new FG install. People just don't want to spend 10+ minutes on a chair.

I guess the "new" Magic quad would qualify

Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

The longest brand new fixed grip I am aware of installed in New England recently is Spruce at SR, about 4366' in length. And that serves mostly intermediate and up terrain.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[deadheadskier]

Good call. It does have a carpet load though, so that helps shorten the ride time by about 20%.

Even a carpet load lift of 6200 feet is still going to be a long ass ride time.





Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[thetrailboss]

That is not going to happen at 6200 feet long.

Will the NFS/WMNF allow them to install a HSQ with a higher capacity?

 

[MEtoVTSkier]

Will the NFS/WMNF allow them to install a HSQ with a higher capacity?

All depends on whose pockets get lined...

Realistically though, just adjust the number of/spacing of carriers to get desired capacity.

 

[thetrailboss]

Realistically though, just adjust the number of/spacing of carriers to get desired capacity.

I was wondering if that would be the solution.

 

[SkiingInABlueDream]

All depends on whose pockets get lined...

Realistically though, just adjust the number of/spacing of carriers to get desired capacity.

Chair spacing doesn't help ride time. People expect fast lifts these days, outside of the Magic type crowd. Attitash will continue to decline without a fast summit lift. Vail knows this and will either make it happen or cut their losses and sell the place.

 

[MEtoVTSkier]

Chair spacing doesn't help ride time. People expect fast lifts these days, outside of the Magic type crowd. Attitash will continue to decline without a fast summit lift. Vail knows this and will either make it happen or cut their losses and sell the place.

Ride time is pretty much a fixed number. A set distance X a max line speed of 1100fpm. (At least until 1200fpm detaches become standard)theTrailBoss was questioning slope capacity vs lift capacity.

 

[SkiingInABlueDream]

Ride time is pretty much a fixed number. A set distance X a max line speed of 1100fpm. (At least until 1200fpm detaches become standard)theTrailBoss was questioning slope capacity vs lift capacity.

What I meant is that a detachable lift instead of a fixed grip (even a quicker, conveyor loading fg) is what's needed in place of the current triple to satisfy current expectations. Whether other factors exist that make it impossible to put a detachable chair there is a separate issue. But IMO a detachable summit lift is necessary to stop a slow sinking.

 

[EPB]

What I meant is that a detachable lift instead of a fixed grip (even a quicker, conveyor loading fg) is what's needed in place of the current triple to satisfy current expectations. Whether other factors exist that make it impossible to put a detachable chair there is a separate issue. But IMO a detachable summit lift is necessary to stop a slow sinking.

I was a regular at Attitash for the ASC years and some of the Peak years. The rumour was that ASC had the permits for a HSQ that lapsed somewhere in the 2008 range. The hope (at least by some of the ski patrollers) was that the triple could be re-installed from near the upper bride to/from Bear Peak to the summit (whether that was the summit of Little Attitash or just near the current summit, I no longer remember).

Sent from my VS988 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[thetrailboss]

Ride time is pretty much a fixed number. A set distance X a max line speed of 1100fpm. (At least until 1200fpm detaches become standard)theTrailBoss was questioning slope capacity vs lift capacity.

Right. I think that they want to avoid having to expand terrain to handle more traffic because that triggers NFS review and that would be hard.

With Vermont Act 250, if the project is not "new" but instead a replacement of an existing lift then permitting is not needed. That is of course focusing on the construction impacts on the land.

 

[thetrailboss]

What I meant is that a detachable lift instead of a fixed grip (even a quicker, conveyor loading fg) is what's needed in place of the current triple to satisfy current expectations. Whether other factors exist that make it impossible to put a detachable chair there is a separate issue. But IMO a detachable summit lift is necessary to stop a slow sinking.

I agree that a HS lift of some type would be warranted there. I think that the permitting required may be a stumbling block and create more delays, especially if the plan is to expand terrain off the top to handle more traffic.

 

[thetrailboss]

What I meant is that a detachable lift instead of a fixed grip (even a quicker, conveyor loading fg) is what's needed in place of the current triple to satisfy current expectations. Whether other factors exist that make it impossible to put a detachable chair there is a separate issue. But IMO a detachable summit lift is necessary to stop a slow sinking.

I agree that a HS lift of some type would be warranted there. I think that the permitting required may be a stumbling block and create more delays, especially if the plan is to expand terrain off the top to handle more traffic.

 

[SkiingInABlueDream]

interesting points. I'm going to back pedal a bit. "slow sinking" might be an overstatement. *If* Attitash is currently sinking (separate issue) it's not because it lacks a fast ride to the summit. An unreliable lift, maybe is a cause, but not a slow lift IMO. I agree there's not enough trail capacity on the upper half of the mtn to absorb the traffic a high capacity lift could produce. If they can't cut more trails, then maybe the best solution is an FG chair running from mid mountain to summit. (Maybe put the bottom terminal just a bit below the Yankee top? I kind of think the Bear crossover would be too low; it'd still be a long ride.) Anyway Im commenting way more than I should given how few days I've actually skied there. [emoji38]But the last time I did, it was obvious that the mountain doesn't ski properly with such a timewise-long ride to the top.

 

[machski]

Good call. It does have a carpet load though, so that helps shorten the ride time by about 20%.

Even a carpet load lift of 6200 feet is still going to be a long ass ride time.





Sent from my XT1635-01 using AlpineZone mobile app

True, although it wasn't running full speed the first two seasons because the unload was too flat. They regraded that this season, the pitch on the unload ramp is vastly increased allowing you to unload it easily at full speed

Sent from my Pixel 3 using AlpineZone mobile app

 

[xlr8r]

interesting points. I'm going to back pedal a bit. "slow sinking" might be an overstatement. *If* Attitash is currently sinking (separate issue) it's not because it lacks a fast ride to the summit. An unreliable lift, maybe is a cause, but not a slow lift IMO. I agree there's not enough trail capacity on the upper half of the mtn to absorb the traffic a high capacity lift could produce. If they can't cut more trails, then maybe the best solution is an FG chair running from mid mountain to summit. (Maybe put the bottom terminal just a bit below the Yankee top? I kind of think the Bear crossover would be too low; it'd still be a long ride.) Anyway Im commenting way more than I should given how few days I've actually skied there. [emoji38]But the last time I did, it was obvious that the mountain doesn't ski properly with such a timewise-long ride to the top.

While it might not help in advertising or stop the sinking market share, moving the summit triple would help if Vail refuses to replace with a HSQ. The ideal bottom terminal spot IMO would be around the intersection of Upper Highway and the bottom of Tightrope. This would allow lapping of all upper mountain trails except for those off of Saco. This also would have the added benefit of taking traffic off of lower Northwest Passage/Far Out which all these trails tend to funnel into currently. I was at Attitash this week and currently Far Out is the only way don on that side of the mountain and it has been a complete train wreck with way too many people on it beginners through expert.

 

[Newpylong]

They are looking at a straight swap for a HSQ. No fixed grip, no midstation, none of that.

 

[xlr8r]

They are looking at a straight swap for a HSQ. No fixed grip, no midstation, none of that.

Newpylong, do you have some inside info, is this finally going to happen.

 

[thetrailboss]

Newpylong, do you have some inside info, is this finally going to happen.

Ah-ha. Very interesting. I, too, would like to know more.

 

[Newpylong]

Newpylong, do you have some inside info, is this finally going to happen.

Yes It is being seriously looked at. We shall see if they get the money.