Number of Guns at once

[bigbob]

Yeah, but what kind of flow are you putting out each of those Low-E guns???

It's not the number of guns that matters, it's the amount of water you're converting to snow. Regardless of whether it's 10 Hedco World Machines at 750gpm each, or 166 Low E HKD's at 45gpm each, total flow would still be the same at 7500gpm total.

750 GPM, what size line feeds that thirsty SOB? 6"?

 

[Marc]

I've got two guns... one for each of ya.

/it had to be done

 

[BushMogulMaster]

750 GPM, what size line feeds that thirsty SOB? 6"?

They didn't last long, probably for that reason, and several others. They were expensive, huge, power-hungry, and very very thirsty snowguns! Fortunately, they did offer the ability to use fewer nozzles, rather than opening the whole thing up.

 

[Marc]

750 GPM, what size line feeds that thirsty SOB? 6"?

Nah, if I remember my tables right, efficient carrying capacity of a 3.5" line is 750 gpm.

You can get like 2000 gpm out of 5" hose, 1000 gpm out of 4".

That's what we use (5") for some really long supply lays. I've never seen 6" but I imagine it would be way too cumbersome to deal with.

 

[millerm277]

I think there's some mid-mountain stuff, but I don't remember where. Then again, I could be thinking of another mountain altogether.

There is the Glades Pumphouse, but I believe that is solely water pumps. Not sure, the placements are all on KZone in public government filings, if you're really interested...


As for the 750gpm World Machine, Hunter had one in use and in working order as of ~2003 or so... EDIT: That IS hunter's gun in the photo.

 

[RootDKJ]

There is the Glades Pumphouse, but I believe that is solely water pumps. Not sure, the placements are all on KZone in public government filings, if you're really interested...


As for the 750gpm World Machine, Hunter had one in use and in working order as of ~2003 or so... EDIT: That IS hunter's gun in the photo.

That's probably what I'm thinking of.

 

[MarkC]

Yeah, but what kind of flow are you putting out each of those Low-E guns???

It's not the number of guns that matters, it's the amount of water you're converting to snow. Regardless of whether it's 10 Hedco World Machines at 750gpm each, or 166 Low E HKD's at 45gpm each, total flow would still be the same at 7500gpm total.

10 Hedco World Machines running at once is a site i would like to see.

 

[drjeff]

10 Hedco World Machines running at once is a site i would like to see.

Could you imagine if they were all on 1 trail supplied by the same water line! That would be both one awesome sight and one pretty impressive feat of engineering to get all that water both up and then down the hill without blowing out any lines!

 

[vcunning]

As posted on the passholder's site, 111 guns are running this morning at Mount Snow.

 

[drjeff]

As posted on the passholder's site, 111 guns are running this morning at Mount Snow.

And they got into even more details, which relates to this thread perfectly I might add in the caption for their pic of the day!

"Last night we pumped out 3000 gallons per minute
of water to 111 snowmaking guns (66 fans) on
Cascade, Canyon, Long John, and Nitro"

 

[neil]

Actually reading the amount of water used per minute is staggering, and actually makes me feel somewhat shameful from an environmental aspect.

I'll get over it

 

[bvibert]

Good points!

It really does boil down to available water and air that can be delivered to the hill and as the conditions become more favorable it becomes all about the volume of water because as we all know that's what makes the snow.

As an aside, seeing how everyone likes to talk about the snowmaking prowess of the big boys in the Northeast, Killington, Okemo, Sunday RIver, Mt Snow, Etc. Did you know there's a little hill Francestown, NH that literally blows the big guys away in terms of raw snowmaking power per acre? Crotched Mountain can pump up to 6000gpm to it's 100+ fan guns that are spread out over less than a 100 acres of terrain. Compare that to Sunday River who can pump water at a maximum of 9000gpm with more than 8x the terrain the terrain to cover. :roll:

If I remember correctly Sundown has pretty good capacity for their size. I'm not sure on the numbers though.

 

[WJenness]

Actually reading the amount of water used per minute is staggering, and actually makes me feel somewhat shameful from an environmental aspect.

I'll get over it

It'll all melt in the spring and run back down the hill...

<trying to help you get over it>

-w

 

[drjeff]

Actually reading the amount of water used per minute is staggering, and actually makes me feel somewhat shameful from an environmental aspect.

I'll get over it

You gotta remember a couple of things. #1 a good deal of what is being pumped out will eventually end back up in the same watershed from which it was drawn from, sure some evaporates, but then again so does some water as it's just sitting in a pond or flowing down a river/stream

#2 The volume of water being used isn't being drawn immediately from the active stream/river that feeds most systems, but from a storage pond that has built up it's stores pretty much ever since the previous springs run off

#3 The streams/rivers that feed most storage ponds are subject to strict minimal flow levels to protect the natural wildlife where water can't be drawn from them to augment a storage pond if the flow rate is below certain mean low flow levels - generally not an issue across the Northeast the last couple of seasons since we've had generally good amounts of annual precipitation - although this has been an issue across some areas of the West due to the on going drought conditions.

#4 In many cases the natural resource being used (water) in its conversion to snow will allow many more folks to enjoy it than if it just simply kept on flowing downstream towards the ocean - is it totally eco friendly, nope, but is it a mega environmental issue - nope

 

[tjf67]

Yeah, but what kind of flow are you putting out each of those Low-E guns???

It's not the number of guns that matters, it's the amount of water you're converting to snow. Regardless of whether it's 10 Hedco World Machines at 750gpm each, or 166 Low E HKD's at 45gpm each, total flow would still be the same at 7500gpm total.

To me it matters, it gives me a gage. It may be off but if someone can blow 200 guns at once I know they can make trails quick.

 

[bvibert]

To me it matters, it gives me a gage. It may be off but if someone can blow 200 guns at once I know they can make trails quick.

His point is if it's 200 guns with minimal flow they may not make more (or as much) snow as say 100 guns with more flow. The total available flow is a more accurate measure of an area's capability to cover their trails (assuming they have enough guns to fully utilize their capacity).

 

[Chris Sullivan]

A snow gun that has the capacity of 750gpm is useless and that is why Hedco only sold a few and abandon the idea. In the picture you can see that it is only operating at about 10% of its capacity. The conditions required to convert that much water into snow from a single point just does not happen often. The plum will saturate and nucleation will be poor.
Like most things snow-making is situational. If your ski area sees a lot of optimal snow-making conditions then sending more water through individual guns makes sense.
In Connecticut and point even more south we can not depend on optimal conditions so running more guns with less flow to each of them gets us open and it also cuts down on the time it takes to plow trails out.
8 years ago we went to a 100% low –E operation. We get 98 towers and 12 fan guns up and running within 25 minutes of what we determine to be the “go temperature” (early season 28 wet bulb). That covers about 60% of our terrain. This allowed us to equalize and maximize our air water ratio throughout the system. Using100% of available air and water.
Prior to converting to low-E we would run 22-30 air water guns on 10% of our terrain and it would take at least a couple of hours to get them all on line. In this scenario we used 100% of our air and less than 50% of our water. It takes about 3 gallons of water to produce 1 cubic foot of snow. The air is simply part of the production process not part of the finished product.
Back then our normal opening would be one run top to bottom WROD. Now we open with 6 trails wall to wall.
Our low-E guns flow just under 20gpm in marginal snowmaking conditions and can be increased up to 60gpm as conditions improve. They consume between 60-100cfm of air.
Last year we tested a gun that used 5cfm and flowed 44gpm. It was impressive. We did not get to run it until mid January when our water is just above freezing. I will be interested to see how it performs with early season water temps.

 

[Chris Sullivan]

ploom not plum

 

[RootDKJ]

A snow gun that has the capacity of 750gpm is useless and that is why Hedco only sold a few and abandon the idea. In the picture you can see that it is only operating at about 10% of its capacity. The conditions required to convert that much water into snow from a single point just does not happen often. The plum will saturate and nucleation will be poor.
Like most things snow-making is situational. If your ski area sees a lot of optimal snow-making conditions then sending more water through individual guns makes sense.
In Connecticut and point even more south we can not depend on optimal conditions so running more guns with less flow to each of them gets us open and it also cuts down on the time it takes to plow trails out.
8 years ago we went to a 100% low –E operation. We get 98 towers and 12 fan guns up and running within 25 minutes of what we determine to be the “go temperature” (early season 28 wet bulb). That covers about 60% of our terrain. This allowed us to equalize and maximize our air water ratio throughout the system. Using100% of available air and water.
Prior to converting to low-E we would run 22-30 air water guns on 10% of our terrain and it would take at least a couple of hours to get them all on line. In this scenario we used 100% of our air and less than 50% of our water. It takes about 3 gallons of water to produce 1 cubic foot of snow. The air is simply part of the production process not part of the finished product.
Back then our normal opening would be one run top to bottom WROD. Now we open with 6 trails wall to wall.
Our low-E guns flow just under 20gpm in marginal snowmaking conditions and can be increased up to 60gpm as conditions improve. They consume between 60-100cfm of air.
Last year we tested a gun that used 5cfm and flowed 44gpm. It was impressive. We did not get to run it until mid January when our water is just above freezing. I will be interested to see how it performs with early season water temps.

POTD!!!

I'm surprised on the airflow #'s. Some computer fans produce that much (with much less static pressure).

 

[bvibert]

A snow gun that has the capacity of 750gpm is useless and that is why Hedco only sold a few and abandon the idea. In the picture you can see that it is only operating at about 10% of its capacity. The conditions required to convert that much water into snow from a single point just does not happen often. The plum will saturate and nucleation will be poor.
Like most things snow-making is situational. If your ski area sees a lot of optimal snow-making conditions then sending more water through individual guns makes sense.
In Connecticut and point even more south we can not depend on optimal conditions so running more guns with less flow to each of them gets us open and it also cuts down on the time it takes to plow trails out.
8 years ago we went to a 100% low –E operation. We get 98 towers and 12 fan guns up and running within 25 minutes of what we determine to be the “go temperature” (early season 28 wet bulb). That covers about 60% of our terrain. This allowed us to equalize and maximize our air water ratio throughout the system. Using100% of available air and water.
Prior to converting to low-E we would run 22-30 air water guns on 10% of our terrain and it would take at least a couple of hours to get them all on line. In this scenario we used 100% of our air and less than 50% of our water. It takes about 3 gallons of water to produce 1 cubic foot of snow. The air is simply part of the production process not part of the finished product.
Back then our normal opening would be one run top to bottom WROD. Now we open with 6 trails wall to wall.
Our low-E guns flow just under 20gpm in marginal snowmaking conditions and can be increased up to 60gpm as conditions improve. They consume between 60-100cfm of air.
Last year we tested a gun that used 5cfm and flowed 44gpm. It was impressive. We did not get to run it until mid January when our water is just above freezing. I will be interested to see how it performs with early season water temps.

Nice post Chris, thanks for the explanation. You gotta admit though that the big Hedco looks pretty cool! It must be a pretty impressive sight to see it going at full capacity!