AZ Challenge 2009: Chris Nyberg, Killington/Pico

[Highway Star]

Guys, these threads are for AZ challenge questions.

See back a couple pages:

FYI - I'll leave this thread open for discussion, but I'm heading off on vacation starting tomorrow so I won't have time to distill all this down into 10 questions. I'll get at it when I return.

So I think we're good as long as it remains civilized. Thanks Greg!

 

[deadheadskier]

See back a couple pages:



So I think we're good as long as it remains civilized. Thanks Greg!

I had considered splitting off a separate 'discussion' thread and moving non-question posts over there, but figured it would be pretty silly of me considering that I have been one of the ones taking this thread off track. :lol:

At any rate, there are plenty of questions in here, you just have to dig for them.

 

[deadheadskier]

OPEN BITTERSWEET HEADWALL!

when/why was this closed?

 

[icedtea]

when/why was this closed?

Last season they re-configured Bittersweet. They roped off the headwall, which is not hard to poach, I just do not see a reason to have it closed. If they gated it similar to when you enter the "double black" portion of cascade or something should do the trick.

A lot of people were injured on that trail in previous years.

 

[skiadikt]

Just a friendly technical reminder: detachable quads may make an area more trafficked due to increased "desirability" of the fast lift, but they do not necessarily increase capacity. In fact, it is perfectly normal to see a detachable quad with a lower hourly capacity than a neighboring fixed grip. The industry average is 2400 people per hour on a quad, regardless of fixed vs. detachable grip.

i second what geoff says. also capacity isn't necessarily the issue here. if me & my group, geoff & his friends, ice tea & his krewe etc are all getting twice as many runs per hour, the snow surface is going to be trashed much quicker regardless of whether the capacity is the same. also regarding DHS's comment, don't see why mad river & sugarbush are exempt from this. compared to those areas, k has way more lift capacity for the terrain and the last the thing it needs is more capacity (even if it's not real capacity as suggested by bmm).

 

[Slowkemo]

Killington is so big and steep. I would like to see more mellow terrain out there. You know, more stuff that is like possible to ski for those of us that aren't experts.

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

Killington is so big and steep. I would like to see more mellow terrain out there. You know, more stuff that is like possible to ski for those of us that aren't experts.

times 2

 

[Highway Star]

Killington is so big and steep. I would like to see more mellow terrain out there. You know, more stuff that is like possible to ski for those of us that aren't experts.

Try Pico, serious!

(wouldn't be great if they were connected?)

 

[Newpylong]

Those are a lot of good points and there might be some options...

What is they replace the Ram's Head Quad with a Six Pack - and fix the lift line issues at the same time? Would that have enough of an effect on getting people out of that base area? I think this would work if they widened / did some grading and rerouting of Timberline / Horn off the real top of Ram's Head - and added snowmaking to Upper Swirl. That would essentially allow for the same downhill capacity that exists off the current top of the Quad - while leaving Upper Vagabond and Header alone as natural. I can see why they put the current Quad in the way they did - but I think it was short sighted / cheap to cut the top off. It should have been worked into the plan.

With that lift for use, you could remove both of the Snowshed doubles, and install the Quad in it's place. That would allow that lift to become the new main lift (being newer) and allow the current Snowshed quad to be weekend and holiday.

Essentially buying one lift would fix two problems.

That's not the point. Midweek, Snowdon is mostly ignored and it sees less people on weekends than the other lifts. If they put a high speed quad there, the surface would have the snot beat out of it. It's not the speed of the lift or the capacity that impacts the skiing surface, it's how many people ride the lift per day.

The other advantage of the existing quad is that it's always running. It can spin in high winds. It is relatively quick to de-ice. If you put a high speed quad there, it will be closed a lot just like Superstar. You can still navigate the mountain in big wind with the Snowdon quad and the Glades triple. You'd have people parked at Bear getting stranded when there's no way to get back because all the detatchable lifts are on wind hold.

Like I said, I'm totally happy Killington doesn't have the money to replace that lift. The first place Killington should address to fix lift line bottlenecks with extra uphill capacity is the Rams Head high speed quad. That is invariably the worst lift line on the mountain and the people using the lift are the premium day ticket people. I'd run a second high speed quad up to the top of Rams Head. That would be big bang for the buck since it opens up some new intermediate acres. The other thing that's needed far more than a Snowdon upgrade is a second high speed lift to get people out of Snowshed. The people here are focused on the advanced terrain. The big spenders with kids who book lodging through the Killington 800 number and buy full price day tickets start their life at Snowshed and Rams Head. The experience there right now is awful.

 

[deadheadskier]

I thought the primary issue of not running the Ramshead Quad to the top is wind and the fear that the lift would be shut down frequently. As Ramshead is a 'learning' area of the mountain, having a lift that shuts frequently wouldn't be advised.

 

[Geoff]

I thought the primary issue of not running the Ramshead Quad to the top is wind and the fear that the lift would be shut down frequently. As Ramshead is a 'learning' area of the mountain, having a lift that shuts frequently wouldn't be advised.

That's why I'd run a 2nd high speed quad up to the top of Rams Head. Midweek, when you only need one lift, you run the longer one unless wind forces you to run the shorter one. Killington is very short on low-intermediate terrain and Rams Head is the one place where they can easily add more.

If the Texas people do rape & pillage the Killington basin area, the resort will need far more capacity at Snowshed since much of the main Killington parking lot capacity will vaporize. Most people are going to want to ride a Snowshed lift to get to the rest of the resort rather than Rams Head which basically goes nowhere other than the Snowdon quad.

 

[Highway Star]

Those are a lot of good points and there might be some options...

What is they replace the Ram's Head Quad with a Six Pack - and fix the lift line issues at the same time? Would that have enough of an effect on getting people out of that base area? I think this would work if they widened / did some grading and rerouting of Timberline / Horn off the real top of Ram's Head - and added snowmaking to Upper Swirl. That would essentially allow for the same downhill capacity that exists off the current top of the Quad - while leaving Upper Vagabond and Header alone as natural. I can see why they put the current Quad in the way they did - but I think it was short sighted / cheap to cut the top off. It should have been worked into the plan.

With that lift for use, you could remove both of the Snowshed doubles, and install the Quad in it's place. That would allow that lift to become the new main lift (being newer) and allow the current Snowshed quad to be weekend and holiday.

Essentially buying one lift would fix two problems.

I thought the primary issue of not running the Ramshead Quad to the top is wind and the fear that the lift would be shut down frequently. As Ramshead is a 'learning' area of the mountain, having a lift that shuts frequently wouldn't be advised.

That's why I'd run a 2nd high speed quad up to the top of Rams Head. Midweek, when you only need one lift, you run the longer one unless wind forces you to run the shorter one. Killington is very short on low-intermediate terrain and Rams Head is the one place where they can easily add more.

If the Texas people do rape & pillage the Killington basin area, the resort will need far more capacity at Snowshed since much of the main Killington parking lot capacity will vaporize. Most people are going to want to ride a Snowshed lift to get to the rest of the resort rather than Rams Head which basically goes nowhere other than the Snowdon quad.

All interesting ideas, but.......

- the current Rams Head trail configuration could not realisticly support more lift capacity. Middle Header is already crowded enough on weekends with beginners on it.

- the top of Rams Head, is too steep for beginners, even with signifigant trail widening and grading. Plus they would not enjoy being exposed to the wind at the top.

- the full interconnect plan calls for 4 lifts, two of which combined bring you from futher down the access road, up to the top of the ridge. Plus new trails. Please see the map I posted several pages ago. Will this ever happen?....err. See map here:

http://www.killingtonzone.com/albums/album184/ICbasictow.jpg

- The most realistic and immediate solution is to fix the absurd lift corral configuration, and make sure chairs go up full when it's busy. The could put an entrance on the south side of the maze, opposite where it is now, and a enrance on the north side. Or anything. Please.

 

[RootDKJ]

I'll give HS a point for his last post. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing chairs go up with less than 4 people on it when it's super busy.

 

[Geoff]

I'll give HS a point for his last post. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing chairs go up with less than 4 people on it when it's super busy.

The only way to enforce that is to start yanking tickets and passes of kids who refuse to load as 4. That probably accounts for half on the empty seats I see when there's a big lift line. The Jamacian liftie making minimum wage isn't going to give a rat's ass. The way people repel boarders on Killington's 8-seater gondolas is even worse.

 

[mister moose]

Killington already has 2 gondolas, and 5 HSQ lifts; Skye Peak, Needles, Superstar, Snowshed, Rams Head. I really don't think adding another HSQ in replacement of an exisitng lift is going to drive more people to the mountain. I don't even think the ROI on the new Skye Peak lift is going to be that good.

People are going to come for good value, good snow conditions, and good times. None of that has HSQ witten on it.

If I was running Killington I'd be fixing a myriad of other issues, not spending another 5.7 Million on the next HSQ. Killington needs to be a leader again, and the HSQ count just doesn't carry the same weight as season length, customer service, vibe, snow surface reliability, and well trained capable employees.

So back on topic, here's my question:

What is Killington doing this year to decrease the recovery time on both lifts and trails after a rain freeze event?

 

[GrilledSteezeSandwich]

I'll give HS a point for his last post. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing chairs go up with less than 4 people on it when it's super busy.

The liftline guys at Killington are good at scanning tickets but not good at organizing foursomes..they need to hire the guy from Blue mountain who organizes groups of 6 and keeps the VIP line in check!!!!

 

[Highway Star]

Killington already has 2 gondolas, and 5 HSQ lifts; Skye Peak, Needles, Superstar, Snowshed, Rams Head. I really don't think adding another HSQ in replacement of an exisitng lift is going to drive more people to the mountain. I don't even think the ROI on the new Skye Peak lift is going to be that good.

People are going to come for good value, good snow conditions, and good times. None of that has HSQ witten on it.

If I was running Killington I'd be fixing a myriad of other issues, not spending another 5.7 Million on the next HSQ. Killington needs to be a leader again, and the HSQ count just doesn't carry the same weight as season length, customer service, vibe, snow surface reliability, and well trained capable employees.

............Or a Killington-Pico Interconnect!!!

 

[RootDKJ]

The liftline guys at Killington are good at scanning tickets but not good at organizing foursomes..they need to hire the guy from Blue mountain who organizes groups of 6 and keeps the VIP line in check!!!!

That's what I was thinking, but didn't feel like typing it out on my crackberry.

 

[Newpylong]

Point 1 is probably very true without adding more trails.

Point 2 is not true. Swirl and Timerbline/Horn are virtually flat off the top. If widened they would be no more difficult than anything off the current Quad. Families negotiated the summit for year's with little to no snowmaking and much narrower trails.

Only Upper Header has any resemblance of a pitch - Vagabond as well.

All interesting ideas, but.......

- the current Rams Head trail configuration could not realisticly support more lift capacity. Middle Header is already crowded enough on weekends with beginners on it.

- the top of Rams Head, is too steep for beginners, even with signifigant trail widening and grading. Plus they would not enjoy being exposed to the wind at the top.

- the full interconnect plan calls for 4 lifts, two of which combined bring you from futher down the access road, up to the top of the ridge. Plus new trails. Please see the map I posted several pages ago. Will this ever happen?....err. See map here:

http://www.killingtonzone.com/albums/album184/ICbasictow.jpg

- The most realistic and immediate solution is to fix the absurd lift corral configuration, and make sure chairs go up full when it's busy. The could put an entrance on the south side of the maze, opposite where it is now, and a enrance on the north side. Or anything. Please.

 

[JerseyJoey]

Point 1 is probably very true without adding more trails.

Point 2 is not true. Swirl and Timerbline/Horn are virtually flat off the top. If widened they would be no more difficult than anything off the current Quad. Families negotiated the summit for year's with little to no snowmaking and much narrower trails.

Only Upper Header has any resemblance of a pitch - Vagabond as well.

There was a bunch of other stuff off the top of the old RH double, just wasn't on the trail map, but it was there. A clip here, a snip there, and BAMM, you're back in business.

And for the record, 1/2 of Vagabond is a lot less fun than ALL of Vagabond. I miss that old lift. There were some goods up there.