• 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!

Jay this weekend

bdfreetuna

New member
Joined
Jan 12, 2012
Messages
4,300
Points
0
Location
keep the faith
I used to take the Tram as much as possible before I really knew the mountain, I thought it was cool and generally like to go to "the top".

Plan to be at Jay in a couple weekends and hope to take the Tram then as I like to ski Valhalla and Pumphouse especially in the spring. I'll wait until late in the day to do this probably.
 

Jcb890

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
1,740
Points
0
Location
Central MA
It also sounds like the cost of the alternative is just too much. I think people here see the multi million dollar price tag for the tram outfit and balk, but 8-12 million for a lift alternative is just ridiculous.
Why?
If you take the low end of $8 M, that's only $2 M more than than the $6 M which was spent just on repairs. Not a new lift, just repairs.

I have no idea what it generally costs in repairs from season-to-season or over the life of a lift, but I would randomly guess a Tram is more expensive to service over the life of the lift. That could be wrong, but I heard about how big of a deal it was to get someone from Europe to come repair the Tram when that was all happening.
 

Steve@jpr

Industry Rep
Industry Rep
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
200
Points
0
Location
Vermont
I was quoting an optimal scenario but, you're right, in practice, the load numbers are somewhat closer to your formula. And you're right, the rationale stays more or less unchanged.

What would be the fun in that ? Remains the question as to why so many seem to think that a 60 min wait is worth it, even though you can load the flyer in 5 minutes. To me this is the puzzling one.

On another note, I disagree with the capacity as quoted above. The quoted former 600 pph capacity is based on an uphill time of 6 minutes. At ten trips per hour with the former 60 people capacity you get to 600. Truth is with loading and unloading Jay Peak roughly manages 1 tram every 10 minutes. Loading efficiency in particular is not great. That puts the former capacity at 360 pph and the current one at roughly 240 pph. Doesn't change the rationale for keeping the Tram, which, as a four-season user, I fully support.
 

Steve@jpr

Industry Rep
Industry Rep
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
200
Points
0
Location
Vermont
Right, if you take the lower number (and ignore the reality of being in Receivership which, as BG alluded to, doesn't exactly create an environment where incremental spending (without an roi) is the standard), you might be able to create some level of justification. But investing multiple millions more in a lift that won't get you much more uphill capacity and will only save you a bit on repairs probably isn't a decision that even a well-capitalized resort owner/operator (of which there is roughly, one) would make. I could be wrong though.


Why?
If you take the low end of $8 M, that's only $2 M more than than the $6 M which was spent just on repairs. Not a new lift, just repairs.

I have no idea what it generally costs in repairs from season-to-season or over the life of a lift, but I would randomly guess a Tram is more expensive to service over the life of the lift. That could be wrong, but I heard about how big of a deal it was to get someone from Europe to come repair the Tram when that was all happening.
 

drjeff

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
17,150
Points
38
Location
Brooklyn, CT
Right, if you take the lower number (and ignore the reality of being in Receivership which, as BG alluded to, doesn't exactly create an environment where incremental spending (without an roi) is the standard), you might be able to create some level of justification. But investing multiple millions more in a lift that won't get you much more uphill capacity and will only save you a bit on repairs probably isn't a decision that even a well-capitalized resort owner/operator (of which there is roughly, one) would make. I could be wrong though.

This line hands down wins the ski based intra-web sense of reality award!!! As it usually is, and has been for years when he opens his mouth and/or lets his fingers type away, Steve Wright is one incredibly straight shooter! +100!!
 

BenedictGomez

Active member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,655
Points
38
Location
PRNJ
I think people here see the multi million dollar price tag for the tram outfit and balk, but 8-12 million for a lift alternative is just ridiculous.

Not sure how that number is ascertained, but I think it has to be assuming a gondola or a chondola, because quads dont cost even remotely close to that. And even a quad plus a double (what I think would be the best solution were money not an object) I dont believe would even cost the low-end of that range.
 

BenedictGomez

Active member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,655
Points
38
Location
PRNJ
Plan to be at Jay in a couple weekends and hope to take the Tram then as I like to ski Valhalla and Pumphouse especially in the spring. I'll wait until late in the day to do this probably.

Me too! Maybe it will all work out what with skier visits usually dropping pretty heavily by that time in the calendar. If not, it's another ski season without a tram ride for me.
 

deadheadskier

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 6, 2005
Messages
25,615
Points
38
Location
Southeast NH
Not sure how that number is ascertained, but I think it has to be assuming a gondola or a chondola, because quads dont cost even remotely close to that. And even a quad plus a double (what I think would be the best solution were money not an object) I dont believe would even cost the low-end of that range.

Most recent HSQ installations of that length in New England have been around $6M. Some of the fancy bubble six packs $8M. I could see the cost of removing the Tram being much more expensive than a typical lift bringing the cost of a quad well over $6M. Substitute Gondola for Quad and $12M seems pretty inline with the price of lifts these days. Hell the little Over Easy Gondola at Stowe cost $5.5M
 

Jully

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
2,481
Points
38
Location
Boston, MA
Most recent HSQ installations of that length in New England have been around $6M. Some of the fancy bubble six packs $8M. I could see the cost of removing the Tram being much more expensive than a typical lift bringing the cost of a quad well over $6M. Substitute Gondola for Quad and $12M seems pretty inline with the price of lifts these days. Hell the little Over Easy Gondola at Stowe cost $5.5M

Agreed. Also the terrain at the summit is not exactly the same as the typical HOW's summit terminal. Is that worth an extra 3 or 4 million? Maybe. Coupled with removal and I think it makes a lot of sense.

I don't think a hsq to the top was ever in the running. Summer business and also I know many an average skier who gripes about how cold the flyer is.
 

Savemeasammy

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2013
Messages
2,538
Points
0
Location
S. NH
It boils down this way………...At its former peak capacity, the tram operated at about 600 persons per hour, although lately it has been running at around 350 pph. The summit has limited space for skiers/riders to stage once they exit the tram and there are only two major ways down, Vermonter and Northway. If we were to add significantly to the uphill capacity to the summit we would have significant congestion at the summit itself and the density of people on Vermonter, Northway, and in the glades would become intolerable.


I'm not in the "replace the tram camp", however it should be pointed out that although the tram delivers a relatively small amount of traffic to the summit, what it does do is deliver that traffic in chunks. Yes, it's "busy" when everyone offloads and then puts their skis on, and subsequently skis down together on one of two trails. A chairlift of similar hourly capacity would make the offloading and trail skiing experience less hectic, but I agree completely that it makes no sense to change what is already in place.

I will be up this weekend, and I hope to find a manageable line for the tram once or twice. If not, there is plenty of terrain to keep me and my kid entertained elsewhere!

Steve - do you have any insight into where spectators can view the freeride event?


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone
 

fbrissette

Active member
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
1,586
Points
38
Location
Montreal/Jay Peak
Me too! Maybe it will all work out what with skier visits usually dropping pretty heavily by that time in the calendar. If not, it's another ski season without a tram ride for me.

Let me know if you guys want to meet for a few runs. We could even hit Big Jay since I assume you will have an extra car. Let's just avoid the topic of climate change :cool:. If we ski at tunaspeed we can afford the 1-hour tram wait.
 

Jcb890

New member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
1,740
Points
0
Location
Central MA
Not to beat a dead horse or bring up a sore subject, but wouldn't a non-Tram lift also be less prone to wind holds?
 

gregnye

New member
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
373
Points
0
I always find it weird how people on this site always complain about the tram at Jay, but never the tram at cannon. The Jay tram should never be replaced with another chair--it is truly iconic. That last part where it spans from the Bonnie Peak to the Summit without any towers couldn't possibly be like that with any other lift unless it was a funitel. Insert a chair lift in their and it would have more lift towers.

In fact the tram at Jay is more useful than the one at Cannon, at least during the winter. The one at Cannon is hard to get to (Who likes Banshee extension/Jaspers Hideaway/whatever other trails cannon keeps adding?), only really services DJ Tramline and Kinsman (rarely open), and doesn't span any large gaps. It could 100% just be a chairlift. The one at Jay is set up properly as a main, signature lift. If the bring back the short double from the flyer to the summit I'd be perfectly happy, but there is no need to replace the tram with a chair.
 

BenedictGomez

Active member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,655
Points
38
Location
PRNJ
If the bring back the short double from the flyer to the summit I'd be perfectly happy, but there is no need to replace the tram with a chair.

Well not anymore! But back before they recently made the decision to spend millions of dollars to fix an outdated and inefficient relic with sub-optimal skier capacity there surely was. That was the window-of-opportunity for the tram haters - sadly not to be.

I'd still love to see a short-double installed at some point in the future. Probably will never happen, and certainly cant until the place gets back on its' feet.
 

dlague

Active member
Joined
Nov 7, 2012
Messages
8,789
Points
36
Location
CS, Colorado
I do think a chair lift - does not have to be a HSQ - would make a world of difference. Keep the tram as it has other uses 1) for those who want to take it to ski/snowboard and 2) those tourist that do not partake in downhill activities.

The lift could be a fixed grip with a low profile so windy days would allow for people to still make it up to the summit. Then again Bonnie and Flyer would possibly be closed then too!
 

Jully

Active member
Joined
Dec 13, 2014
Messages
2,481
Points
38
Location
Boston, MA
Two words: rope tow.

I was going to say, a surface lift of some sort seems to be the way to go.

A few years ago a T-Bar was supposed to be installed to the summit of SL imminently... sadly that never came to fruition.
 
Top