Skilifts.org / SORT Forum

While many popular ski areas and resorts have at least one detachable, what places do you think need one that don't already and why?

Locally I think Lutsen Mountains could use one if not two detachs, and that is part of their master plan, the big question is when...

On the Moose Mountain side of the resort I don't think they really need additional uphill capacity, but the ride is pretty long and the old Yan doubles are showing their age. I am not sure that I am real particular to which one (Bull or Caribou) should be replaced, I think there could be good arguments for either one.

On the Eagle Mountain side the old bridge chair needs to be replaced to handle the late day rush as the chairs on Moose & Mystery close. Even with the old Eagle (Muller) chair running on the weekends, the line at Bridge can grow to 15+ minutes. A double chair just cannot handle the late day rush and if they are going to upgrade, I see no reason they shouldn't make it a detach. Other then money of course

Brian Head.
In a world that increasingly believes in diversity, the same should apply to an area with all Yan lifts. Of course, this has changed with the adding of two D-CTEC triples lately, but hey? Why not add a third element?

Ok, the diversity thing is probably bull crap here. I know that the long eleven-minute ride up Giant Steps pales in comparison to other dinosaur lifts, but it would be nice to put in a little more veritcal--faster. But the real reason BH should get a detach is simply because detachables are way cool.

I agree on the Brianhead front. They would probably only need one on Giant Steps but even just that one would help and really make traffic flow better on the mountain. You could even run a detachable gondola up there instead, since the number of people you need to move isn't that high, and it would add to the aesthetic attraction of the resort. Having said that I love the old Yans there.

I wouldn't want it to happen because I would hate to see Bridger lose its old fashioned charm (which I think it would if it installed a high speed lift) it probably wouldn't be a bad idea to have a main drag high speed lift on the mountain.

Most of the places I've skied already have HS lifts so I don't really know a whole lot more resorts that could do with one.

A-Basin definitely.

Although the early season lift-lines at Exhibition would still be huge, and slope congestion would be even worse, there are still so many ways that A-Basin could benefit from a HSQ. I think that they should put in something like Alta did with Collins and replace Exhibition and Norway. This way, they could keep the top open later in the season and download on the lower section, and in the early season, they could run the lower section separately from the upper section to serve just the lower terrain with snowmaking. Also, they could have the top station end higher. (It's always a pain to skate uphill to get to Montezuma Bowl.) I sure hope they get one soon.

MNSkier, on May 26 2008, 07:17 PM, said:

Totally agree! I think Caribou should be replaced because it reaches higher up on the mountain, or I think that a new lift line should be cut that runs from between the two at the base to the top of the current Caribou, and then the current Caribou can either be used for a mid-mountain access (shortened) or scrapped. Then, more beginner terrain can be added, and the parking lot and small village planned for the base of moose can be realized. As it stands, the amount of beginner terrain at Lutsen in general, and especially on Moose, is simply inadequate, so many skiers unable to ski the steeper lower stretch of the mountain are sort-of screwed...much like River Run at Keystone before Ina's Way.
Then, the Eagle Mountain lift should be removed, a new lift running from the chalet to the top of Koo Koo should be installed, Bridge chair should be replaced with a FGQ or HSQ, the pedestrian area by the ticket office should be filled in with snow and the Ullr lift extended to create a ski-in village. Flapjack, the current beginner area, should be abandoned, and carpets should be installed under the current gondola. The gondola should remain, but should get new terminals, line equipment, cabins (only keep the towers), and should be connected to the chalet on Moose.

skier2, on May 27 2008, 02:39 PM, said:

That gondola simply needs replacement. It wasn't built for the wind on that ridge near the top. Nor was it built for ease of use!

Nor was it built to be operating 40 years later!

Although Mount Bohemia doesn't have the traffic to warrant a HSQ yet, it sure would be nice to shorten the trip on those wicked cold days with the wind whipping about lake superior. But, at the same time the low traffic is part of what makes Bohemia a special place.

Somewhere in the U.P. or anywhere in the midwest. Besides Granite, Spirit, and Cascade, we don't have any.

skier2, on May 27 2008, 02:39 PM, said:

Personally I think 3 lifts are sufficient on moose, and for selfish reasons I think the terrain is more then tame enough. Not trying to be a snob, but if the beginners can't handle moose then they should stay over on Ullr or Mystery until they can ski it.

The rummor is that what ever chair comes out for a HSQ on moose will be moved to serve new runs on the north face of moose, some of which are supposed to open in 2008-9, but will require skiing back to the base of the bull chair until a new chair is installed.

Your comment about a chair from the eagle chalet to the top of the current eagle chair is spot on, in April the word was that a FG triple was in the works for this summer, but since then I have not heard anything more so who knows.

skierdude9450, on May 27 2008, 01:27 PM, said:

It would also be a pain to have to close the lift all the time because of wind up on the ridge

Powder Mountain
Sundance
A-Basin
Loveland
Monarch
Powderhorn
I think even Wolfcreek could stand one..

Wolf Creek and Powder Mountain both have detachables now.

liftmech, on May 27 2008, 08:36 PM, said:

That's true too.... But how much worse would extending the line 20 feet higher be?

Snow King Resort, Jackson Hole WY. Summit needs to be replaced and a detachable would probably get more people to ski there, especially when the village is blown down.

Indian head in Wakefield could use one (i believe one was planed a few years back) as could west mountain in glens falls New York.

MNSkier, on May 27 2008, 06:57 PM, said:

I was aware of all these rumors, but as someone who knows Charles Skinner, they will remain rumors for a few years, likely. He always pushes back all of the plans--really they are wishful thinking until they come to fruition.

dh_lift_op, on May 27 2008, 08:55 PM, said:

there are quite a few more detachable lifts in the midwest: alpine (WI), boyne mt, boyne H, crystal and mt holly. There are a few others depending on where the midwest ends.

Regarding the topic overall, I say keep the fixed grip lifts. Lift tickets stay cheaper and it adds some charm to midwest skiing.

Let me guess, lift #2 should be HSQ at Loveland?? I thought about that too but then discovered you can ride lift #1 and catch the #2 reload and have lift rides shorter than 10 minutes and get a nice warm up run from the top of #1 to mid #2. It is also a benefit that all their lifts are FGs, it seems that people get used to that and don't expect the lifts to slow down for loads and unloads as can happen at those areas which have a mixture. They just need to keep it FGT and not convert to HSQ when it wears out. It seems like FGTs can run faster and stop and slow less than FGQ.