BenedictGomez
Well-known member
That, yes. The other thing is when a place (presumably) starts a lift in a bit lower than necessary in an odd location to gain vert, but it's long drawn out "lame vert".
-
Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!
You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!
Camelback Lodge & Indoor Water Park
- Thread starter steamboat1
- Start date
That, yes. The other thing is when a place (presumably) starts a lift in a bit lower than necessary in an odd location to gain vert, but it's long drawn out "lame vert".
I don't think any ski area purposely starts a lift at a location lower than necessary to improve their "stats." I don't think they'd get a ROI in more skier visits by clearing further trail and lift acreage just to improve Vert numbers. Yes, "Fantasy Ski Area numbers" are important, hence the even more egregious inflation of trail number stats than vertical drop at many areas. For the most part, I think ski areas start lifts low requiring a long run out because the terminus has good access and flat acreage for a base lodge and associated parking or for real estate development.
mbedle
Well-known member
As far as camelback goes, Alex asked me what sub peak I was talking about. What I was thinking is, if they do put a lift in to the east, its top terminal would most likely be east of the Stevenson Express. That area of the ridge is lower than where the Stevenson Express terminates.
The run out question is a tough one to answer. As BG said, I think some resorts may do that to gain extra vertical. But, DHS has a good point with putting the lift bottom terminals on something more flat to make access, standing in line and the base lodge closer. Plus, what we consider run outs (and a waste), beginners and kids may find pretty fun. Vertical feet exaggeration appears to be more common in the smaller ski areas. The number of trails that resorts report is strictly a marketing scheme and most, if not all, ski areas exaggerate, split trail in half at crossovers or name little connector trails. Stowe basically doubled their number of trails by dividing the upper and lower mountain in half and renaming the bottom runs "Lower ...".
The run out question is a tough one to answer. As BG said, I think some resorts may do that to gain extra vertical. But, DHS has a good point with putting the lift bottom terminals on something more flat to make access, standing in line and the base lodge closer. Plus, what we consider run outs (and a waste), beginners and kids may find pretty fun. Vertical feet exaggeration appears to be more common in the smaller ski areas. The number of trails that resorts report is strictly a marketing scheme and most, if not all, ski areas exaggerate, split trail in half at crossovers or name little connector trails. Stowe basically doubled their number of trails by dividing the upper and lower mountain in half and renaming the bottom runs "Lower ...".
4aprice
Well-known member
You guys need to go up there and take a look at the area I'm talking about. It is not a particularly flat run out area. Many people go over and ski it now when conditions permit. Be it 1000 or 900 something it would increase the vertical drop, (Vertical Drop is one of the most overated stats in skiing IMO, Its all about terrain to me) provide some longer runs and be good addition. But its all just talk as of now. One thing I do believe is that they have the rights granted to them by the State of Pennsylvania to do it so it is hopefully more then a pipe dream.
Alex
Lake Hopatcong, NJ
Alex
Lake Hopatcong, NJ
mbedle
Well-known member
Alex, I'm not trying to be confrontational on this and any expansion in PA is good expansion, especially if its expert terrain. I do agree with you that vertical drop is overrated, but it does play well with ski resort marketing (especially in PA), which increases revenue and hopefully provides money for expansion of terrain (or water parks....). And I am sure you have a better understanding of what this area looks like (I haven't skied Camelback in years), so if I'm off base, my bad!
What I was trying to explain is that it is unlikely that Camelback would install a lift from the new base area all the way up to the current peak elevation at the resort (which I originally assumed was the Stevenson Express (1991 ftamsl), but is actually the Sullivan Express (2044 ftamsl)). If they did install the lift to terminate near the top of Steveson, you would need to travel across a very initially flat section at the top of the mountain. You would basically be following nile mile in that area, before you got to the steep portion east of the mountain. Kind of like a run out, but in reverse. You are correct that if they did install a lift east of the Stevenson Express lift, it would be the best and longest expert terrain at camelback (and many other PA resorts), with a good 680 foot vertical drop, with all being expert. I could picture the base of the lift ending at the confluences of Pocono Creek and the tributary they use for their snowmaking pond. I'm not sure if they own the property that the condos are on (Ridge and Evergreen Drive). One thing I did find odd, is when I took the elevations over near this new area, they came in only slightly lower than the elevation at the base of the Stevenson lift (1,260 ftamsl and new area is at 1,132 ftamsl). From looking at google, I would have bet that it would have been much lower.
What I was trying to explain is that it is unlikely that Camelback would install a lift from the new base area all the way up to the current peak elevation at the resort (which I originally assumed was the Stevenson Express (1991 ftamsl), but is actually the Sullivan Express (2044 ftamsl)). If they did install the lift to terminate near the top of Steveson, you would need to travel across a very initially flat section at the top of the mountain. You would basically be following nile mile in that area, before you got to the steep portion east of the mountain. Kind of like a run out, but in reverse. You are correct that if they did install a lift east of the Stevenson Express lift, it would be the best and longest expert terrain at camelback (and many other PA resorts), with a good 680 foot vertical drop, with all being expert. I could picture the base of the lift ending at the confluences of Pocono Creek and the tributary they use for their snowmaking pond. I'm not sure if they own the property that the condos are on (Ridge and Evergreen Drive). One thing I did find odd, is when I took the elevations over near this new area, they came in only slightly lower than the elevation at the base of the Stevenson lift (1,260 ftamsl and new area is at 1,132 ftamsl). From looking at google, I would have bet that it would have been much lower.
Similar threads
