Saddleback construction

[deadheadskier]

Given the skier traffic of today, it does indeed seem that a double would be more than enough capacity. I'm sure their decision was based on what they hope for skier traffic 'tomorrow'

 

[riverc0il]

Given the skier traffic of today, it does indeed seem that a double would be more than enough capacity. I'm sure their decision was based on what they hope for skier traffic 'tomorrow'

Indeed. And much like their entire long term development plan, their projected skier and rider use of the summit chairlift is probably overly optimistic. Much as I love Saddleback and hate to say it.

 

[phil]

My thoughts would include:
The Rangeley chair has had an upgrade done to it since i previously skied there in the 70's. Including both new end terminals.
I don't know where the kenebago t-bar came from but the equipment looked as old as the original cupsuptic t-bar, and it may be hard to keep running.
I skied Saddle back new years eve last winter in 10 inches of fresh powder and there was not a line to speak of on the Rangeley chair.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

I disagree. Installing a quad to the summit will decrease traffic patterns on the Rangely Double because more skiers and riders will venture forth to the summit. Thus, a summit chairlift solves two lift issues with one installation. Its not like the summit features super challenging expert terrain. There are a lot of steep cruisers as well as a winding cruiser that are flat as a pancake and any upper intermediate could spend an afternoon on the summit if not for the t-bar that creates trepidation, especially when the sign at the lift shack says expert t-bar riders only.

Ideally, as previously noted, the double really should be a HSQ and serve as the primary people mover on the mountain. But a t-bar replacement will help serve to reduce lift lines on the double. I think they could have put a double instead of a quad chairlift in for the summit. Not sure why they felt they needed a quad?

My sentiments exactly. The quad was overkill, though the t-bar surely needed to be replaced.

 

[dropKickMurphy]

Wow...T-bar to Quad is a big change. I would have figured it would have been a double.

I don't believe there's too much demand for new doubles these days. I'm guessing that it's probably no more expensive to install a quad than a double. Or, it may have involved a longer wait time to order chairs for a double, as they might have to be built to order.

Didn't the new single at MRG end up costing as much as a HSQ would have, due to the custom build?

I read an article on Berry's plans a while back. He said that he has no intent to install any high speed detachable lifts at Saddleback. The intent is to build a larger number of fixed grip lifts over different areas of the mountain. Each one would serve a relatively large number of trails. The idea is not to concentrate a large number of skiers at any point. Instead, they want to spread the skiers out, and keep the number of skiers per trail low.

Personally, l the sound of that very much.

 

[dropKickMurphy]

Wow...T-bar to Quad is a big change. I would have figured it would have been a double.

I don't believe there's too much demand for new doubles these days. I'm guessing that it's probably no more expensive to install a quad than a double. Or, it may have involved a longer wait time to order chairs for a double, as they might have to be built to order.

Didn't the new single at MRG end up costing as much as a HSQ would have, due to the custom build?

I read an article on Berry's plans a while back. He said that he has no intent to install any high speed detachable lifts at Saddleback. The intent is to build a larger number of fixed grip lifts over different areas of the mountain. Each one would serve a relatively large number of trails. The idea is not to concentrate a large number of skiers at any point. Instead, they want to spread the skiers out, and keep the number of skiers per trail low.

 

[Tin Woodsman]

I don't believe there's too much demand for new doubles these days. I'm guessing that it's probably no more expensive to install a quad than a double. Or, it may have involved a longer wait time to order chairs for a double, as they might have to be built to order.

Didn't the new single at MRG end up costing as much as a HSQ would have, due to the custom build?

I read an article on Berry's plans a while back. He said that he has no intent to install any high speed detachable lifts at Saddleback. The intent is to build a larger number of fixed grip lifts over different areas of the mountain. Each one would serve a relatively large number of trails. The idea is not to concentrate a large number of skiers at any point. Instead, they want to spread the skiers out, and keep the number of skiers per trail low.

Personally, l the sound of that very much.

You're off base on a number of points here. First, the single at MRG didn't cost nearly as much as a HSQ. I believe the total was in the $1.7MM range, whereas a HSQ generally costs more than twice that. In fact, the cheapest option would have been to purchase a new double chair, but the Co-op decided to go in a different direction.

Second, while I fully support Mr. Berry's views with respect to spreading people out and not overloading any given portion of the trail network, you need to make exceptions for certain lifts. The Rangeley chair is the only lift directly adjacent to the lodge that is used to move people up the mountain. In addition, it serves the most popular cruising terrain on the hill and provides skiers with the ability to access every other lift on the mountain, both current and future. Finally, it is over 4700 feet long, leading to a roughly 10 minute ride. I would suggest that an exception to the policy is important here, as that lift will be the key trunk lift at Sadelback and will experience longer lines as Saddleback grows its business. Again, the example of Lincoln Peak is instructive here, with high speed lifts only for the main routes out of the base area, with lower capacity, fixed grip lifts higher up (Heaven's Gate, Castlerock, North Lynx), or off to the side (Valley House). That would go a long way towards distributing traffic in the manner that Mr. Berry aspires.

 

[deadheadskier]

You're off base on a number of points here. First, the single at MRG didn't cost nearly as much as a HSQ. I believe the total was in the $1.7MM range, whereas a HSQ generally costs more than twice that. In fact, the cheapest option would have been to purchase a new double chair, but the Co-op decided to go in a different direction.

Second, while I fully support Mr. Berry's views with respect to spreading people out and not overloading any given portion of the trail network, you need to make exceptions for certain lifts. The Rangeley chair is the only lift directly adjacent to the lodge that is used to move people up the mountain. In addition, it serves the most popular cruising terrain on the hill and provides skiers with the ability to access every other lift on the mountain, both current and future. Finally, it is over 4700 feet long, leading to a roughly 10 minute ride. I would suggest that an exception to the policy is important here, as that lift will be the key trunk lift at Sadelback and will experience longer lines as Saddleback grows its business. Again, the example of Lincoln Peak is instructive here, with high speed lifts only for the main routes out of the base area, with lower capacity, fixed grip lifts higher up (Heaven's Gate, Castlerock, North Lynx), or off to the side (Valley House). That would go a long way towards distributing traffic in the manner that Mr. Berry aspires.

....that and....HSQ's are sexy for the second home / condo buying market.

 

[riverc0il]

Didn't the new single at MRG end up costing as much as a HSQ would have, due to the custom build?

Your numbers are way off and unfounded. The rebuild of the MRG Single costed close to the cost of a brand new double. I can not remember if it was the same price or slightly more, but it was certainly within the ball park. Quads cost more than doubles. HSQs cost more than fixed grips.

 

[Telemechanic]

I don't believe there's too much demand for new doubles these days. I'm guessing that it's probably no more expensive to install a quad than a double. Or, it may have involved a longer wait time to order chairs for a double, as they might have to be built to order.

Didn't the new single at MRG end up costing as much as a HSQ would have, due to the custom build?

A quad would have to have a larger HP electric motor and diesel or gas evac engine (and maybe diesel auxilliary), a bigger gearbox, bigger sheave assemblies and heavier duty terminals and tension units compared to a double of the same length. These additions would definitely add up.

Manufacturers keep some chair components in stock for spare parts sales and some are built ahead of time based on contract forcasts but the factories continue to build chairs for new installations throughout the construction season as needed and at least for Doppelmayr CTEC lift parts are usually built in the factory in the same order the contracts are signed.

Two times MRG's $1.7 mil Single seems a bit low for a detachable lift. A detachable Single might be had for $3.4 mil but a quad of that length would probably be in the 4 to 5+ million dollar range.

 

[deadheadskier]

A quad would have to have a larger HP electric motor and diesel or gas evac engine (and maybe diesel auxilliary), a bigger gearbox, bigger sheave assemblies and heavier duty terminals and tension units compared to a double of the same length. These additions would definitely add up.

Manufacturers keep some chair components in stock for spare parts sales and some are built ahead of time based on contract forcasts but the factories continue to build chairs for new installations throughout the construction season as needed and at least for Doppelmayr CTEC lift parts are usually built in the factory in the same order the contracts are signed.

Two times MRG's $1.7 mil Single seems a bit low for a detachable lift. A detachable Single might be had for $3.4 mil but a quad of that length would probably be in the 4 to 5+ million dollar range.

You know what I'd love to see? The business statement for a HSQ install with costs and profit margins. I would be interested to see what the costs are for Helicopters flying in the towers and all else involved. Guess I'm geekish in that way, but I thing it would be cool to see on paper and wrap my mind around the cost/process for an afternoon.

 

[Telemechanic]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to itemize the cost of an entire lift but I'll contribute a couple things for others to think over.

From working with the AMC I know that a small helicopter, think TV eye-in-the-sky, cost about $900 an hour in 2006. Contruction helicopters are bigger so they must cost more. The helicopters capacity is two-plus times greater, it has two pilots and a couple extra people on the ground. Loon's lift project last year used helicopters for something like three full days and three or four partial days.

 

[Johnskiismore]

I'm not knowledgeable enough to itemize the cost of an entire lift but I'll contribute a couple things for others to think over.

From working with the AMC I know that a small helicopter, think TV eye-in-the-sky, cost about $900 an hour in 2006. Contruction helicopters are bigger so they must cost more. The helicopters capacity is two-plus times greater, it has two pilots and a couple extra people on the ground. Loon's lift project last year used helicopters for something like three full days and three or four partial days.

And you can see Telemechanic in action below!

Lift Installation 2007 South Peak