25 replies to this topic

[NHskier13]

What are some of the setups of ski resorts where you kind of wonder why they built it that way, in terms of buildings/trails/lifts etc.
Some of mine include the Six Pack at Ragged.
Originally, the lift was built as a 90 degree load. That was okay except the lift lines (or maze, as I hear it's referred to) are in the opposite direction of where skiers come in. So unless you stay to the right of exhibition, you need to skate across the base area then snake around the line and then ski up to the lift.
Recently, they have changed the lift to inline loading. The line/maze, however, still points in the same direction. Now that the lift is an inline, the maze had a small extension downhill, about 10 feet or so. (so that skiers can do a full 180 degree turn then go into the small straight leading up to the lift) That wouldn't be too bad of a problem if the Elmwood lodge wasn't so close. Now there's a tiny space to squeeze through to get to the line, assuming that you're sharing that path with some skiing traffic.
If the lift was moved uphill, the small path just uphill of tower 3 which can be used for people taking village green to get to the load line would probably be eliminated. However, since the lift would be farther uphill, you could probably fit in a T-shaped line so that skiers from both sides of the mountain could wait in either one without the ones who stayed left of Exhibition (the six pack liftline trail) having to skate back.
I mean, it's not too big of an issue, but it sometimes gets a little annoying after 5 runs left of exhibition and having to skate back to the six.
Here are some photos to give readers a visual:
Looking at the bottom of the six from the base of the spear mountain express:
 Six Pack 2015 Bottom 1.jpg (996.51K)
Number of downloads: 136
What you don't see to the left of the six was on that particular day there was 5 feet of room to snake around the side of the lift, due to the line being close to the lodge. It looks like there is a lot more room, but really, there was a sudden dropoff there and then there was a thin cover of snow on top of the bricks.
Here's the tower which skiers taking village green should cross under to get over to the line. Otherwise you need to skate around. You pretty much lose all of your speed if you went around the right side of the lift, so you need to skate over.
 Six Pack Tower 3 2015.jpg (756.38K)
Number of downloads: 124
On the other hand, what if the six was a counterclockwise lift, with the 90 degree loading (though i'm sure there is a good reason why they made it an inline load, I don't know what it is) most of the skiing traffic wouldn't need to go around the lift, instead they can ski straight into the line.

So anyways, enough with me. What do you think are some of the setups that you think could be fixed, and what do you think should be done?

[DonaldMReif]

I honestly think the Sunshine Express lift at Steamboat would be a bit better if it had inline loading instead of a 90 degree load. At least, that's how it was when I was there four years ago. With inline loading, skiers coming off Lift Line and Tomahawk wouldn't need to ski past the lift and make a 180 turn to get into the line.

Vail actually had a similar situation when it came to the Sourdough Express lift. For its first three seasons, the Sourdough Express lift (a counterclockwise Leitner-Poma high speed quad) had 90 degree loading. The problem was that you could ski directly into the line if coming from the Teacup Express lift via Whiskey Jack, Two Elk Lodge, or the Highline Express lift, but you had to ski past the lift and make 180 turn to enter the line if you chose to travel over from Patrol Headquarters via the Timberline Catwalk. They converted the lift to inline loading the same year that the High Noon Express lift was built, so that skiers traveling over from Patrol Headquarters can ski directly into the lift maze.

Speaking of Vail, the Teacup Express lift's line is not well set up due to its location. Most skier traffic crosses a bridge over a creek to get to the lift. You then basically have to make a 180 degree turn to enter the queue, then another 180 turn to load the lift. In contrast, coming off the bridge, you can ski more or less directly into the line for the Skyline Express lift.

[skier2]

DonaldMReif, on 19 March 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:

I honestly think the Sunshine Express lift at Steamboat would be a bit better if it had inline loading instead of a 90 degree load. At least, that's how it was when I was there four years ago. With inline loading, skiers coming off Lift Line and Tomahawk wouldn't need to ski past the lift and make a 180 turn to get into the line.

Vail actually had a similar situation when it came to the Sourdough Express lift. For its first three seasons, the Sourdough Express lift (a counterclockwise Leitner-Poma high speed quad) had 90 degree loading. The problem was that you could ski directly into the line if coming from the Teacup Express lift via Whiskey Jack, Two Elk Lodge, or the Highline Express lift, but you had to ski past the lift and make 180 turn to enter the line if you chose to travel over from Patrol Headquarters via the Timberline Catwalk. They converted the lift to inline loading the same year that the High Noon Express lift was built, so that skiers traveling over from Patrol Headquarters can ski directly into the lift maze.

Speaking of Vail, the Teacup Express lift's line is not well set up due to its location. Most skier traffic crosses a bridge over a creek to get to the lift. You then basically have to make a 180 degree turn to enter the queue, then another 180 turn to load the lift. In contrast, coming off the bridge, you can ski more or less directly into the line for the Skyline Express lift.

I wish Steamboat had extended Sunshine Express downhill beyond that final ridge that the loading terminal currently sits on. It limits the amount of space available for a queue line.

[DonaldMReif]

So, you wish it started more or less right next to where South Peak starts?

[machskier]

Sugarloaf, the whole lift design is aweful. The only one worth muchone the entire mountain is the newest, Skyline. Superquad is too far away from the base lodge to be the primary lift IMHO. I would like to see whiffletree be the primary lift as it is a good feeder to Skyline and King Pine. King Pine needs to be realigned/lengthened to better catch traffic off of Burnt/Bracket, and who knows what to do with timberline. I'd rather just see a t-bar or poma surface that can be caught coming off skyline/bateau t-bar to access the summit.

[llamborghinii]

If I could design loveland from scratch, I'd make most of the skiable flat area in between chair 2 and chair 4 a parking lot! I'd have chair 2 start at the base of the new parking lot, where the current mid-unload station is. The lodge would be located here as well. That way, from the new parking lot, you could get on chair 6, chair 4, or the truncated Chair 2. They'd need to add a short lift to get from the current base (Chair 1) to those lifts, but I think that would be more appropriate than their current setup.

Maybe I'm just saying this out of my hate and discontent for Chair 2 though.

[DonaldMReif]

The master plan calls for Chair 2 to be split into two lifts, allowing people to ski the terrain on the upper part of the current lift independent of the lower part of the lift.

[ceo]

I've always hated Sugarloaf's base layout. It worked better when the gondola was still there, as the base terminal was right by the base lodge. The Whiffletree quad has made a huge difference, but it's still a slight shlep (but not up a hill like the Double Runners or the Superquad). Of course, the place dates back to when climbing was just something you did a lot of when skiing.

This post has been edited by ceo: 23 March 2015 - 09:58 AM

[floridaskier]

Not sure what PCMR is going to do with the new gondola terminal at the bottom of Silverlode, which is the most congested spot on the mountain. At the moment, to get there from King Con run, there's a gully you have to go down and back up, with slow gates at the bottom. The line on Silverlode spills out of the maze all the way into the Snow Hut ski racks. I would guess they'll have to move a lot of dirt around this summer to make room for the terminal, which is supposed to be in between the Silverlode maze and the Snow Hut, with skiers coming from three directions. Proposal is to locate the new Snow Hut farther away from Silverlode, and flatten out the gully at the bottom of King Con run. Here are pictures of the current setup and the new gondola terminal rendering, showing how little room there is



New gondola terminal rendering: http://www.canyonsre...=en&h=365&w=730

[SkiDaBird]

It is basically impossible to ski between the main mountain and Sundown at Powder Mtn. I feel like putting a lift on the ridge that separates them would solve that connection and get another lift served bowl. Of course, that's currently the most used cat skiing area so it would require a little short term loss for long term gain.

[NHskier13]

I feel as if the maze on White Peaks at Waterville would make more sense if the lines pointed uphill, not toward Quadzilla. Sometimes there are so many people there that if you came from Oblivion or the other Sunnyside trails through Valley Run / Stillness, you cannot ski through the solid wall of humans. That said, as much as I love the White Peaks Quad as it is I feel like when it gets too old they should make it a six or something. The lines on weekdays are still 5 minutes long. (either that or everyone decided to take a day off of work to ski when I was there on a weekday)

[boardski]

One of my biggest issues with Loveland is the lack of division of abilities. Lift 2 is a large cause of this. The lift (Long FGT with 2 midstations) is horrible and the worst thing Loveland ever did was to add the midway unload and encourage first time skiers to ski the Basin side. Consequently, Tango road is a giant cluster with people who are shaky with their skiing traversing edge-to-edge and others trying to maintain speed to slide across the flat areas to get to other lifts or traverse from lift 4 pod to the base or skiing to the base because there is a line at the #2 lift reload and no empty chairs are coming through (Loveland does not send any chairs up empty from the bottom and loads partially loaded chairs at midway which I have never thought was very safe). Loveland used the platter lift more this year which helped a little, although Sunday I noticed all the platters are gone from it (even from the rack in the bottom terminal). Not sure if this is Summer maintenance or if they are removing the lift. The current line for the platter would be the perfect location for the upper section of lift 2 (designated lift 2-B in the master plan) except, of course the upper lift would be extended to the existing top terminal location. The lower section should utilize the current midway RELOAD since this is a flatter area and would make for a more gentle ramp. Since Loveland does not seem to have very deep pockets though, maybe some chairs should be eliminated and spaced further apart on the existing lift 2 to minimize the stops and the slows. Those South chute runs are great but the lift ride up lift 2 is beyond miserable. I have had it take close to 15 minutes from midway to the top. Maybe they could use the existing Yan chairs and towers with a new drive and return terminal for one of the segments. Anything would be better than the current set up. Once the lift is split, intermediate and advanced skiers will be more likely to remain on the upper mountain and the dangerous intersection at the bottom of 6 and current #2 reload should have less traffic also (7 different trails from 3 different fall lines intersect here and, of course, everyone thinks they have right-of-way). Loveland is a very fun mountain, however, it is a shame when one totally inefficient lift keeps it from being as fun as it could be.

This post has been edited by boardski: 23 March 2015 - 07:24 PM

[DonaldMReif]

boardski, on 23 March 2015 - 07:18 PM, said:

One of my biggest issues with Loveland is the lack of division of abilities. Lift 2 is a large cause of this. The lift (Long FGT with 2 midstations) is horrible and the worst thing Loveland ever did was to add the midway unload and encourage first time skiers to ski the Basin side. Consequently, Tango road is a giant cluster with people who are shaky with their skiing traversing edge-to-edge and others trying to maintain speed to slide across the flat areas to get to other lifts or traverse from lift 4 pod to the base or skiing to the base because there is a line at the #2 lift reload and no empty chairs are coming through (Loveland does not send any chairs up empty from the bottom and loads partially loaded chairs at midway which I have never thought was very safe). Loveland used the platter lift more this year which helped a little, although Sunday I noticed all the platters are gone from it (even from the rack in the bottom terminal). Not sure if this is Summer maintenance or if they are removing the lift. The current line for the platter would be the perfect location for the upper section of lift 2 (designated lift 2-B in the master plan) except, of course the upper lift would be extended to the existing top terminal location. The lower section should utilize the current midway RELOAD since this is a flatter area and would make for a more gentle ramp. Since Loveland does not seem to have very deep pockets though, maybe some chairs should be eliminated and spaced further apart on the existing lift 2 to minimize the stops and the slows. Those South chute runs are great but the lift ride up lift 2 is beyond miserable. I have had it take close to 15 minutes from midway to the top. Maybe they could use the existing Yan chairs and towers with a new drive and return terminal for one of the segments. Anything would be better than the current set up. Once the lift is split, intermediate and advanced skiers will be more likely to remain on the upper mountain and the dangerous intersection at the bottom of 6 and current #2 reload should have less traffic also (7 different trails from 3 different fall lines intersect here and, of course, everyone thinks they have right-of-way). Loveland is a very fun mountain, however, it is a shame when one totally inefficient lift keeps it from being as fun as it could be.

I've never been to Loveland, but it looks like the sole alternative to get around Lift #2 for now is to take Lift 1, then take Cat Walk to Excelleration, which appears to be the route you take to travel from Lift 1 to Lift 2's reload. This also provides access to Lift 6, and possibly Lift 4. If you're simply traveling to the pods off Lifts 4 or 6, you're there. If you want to travel to Lift 9 or 8, take Lift 4.

And you say that it's taken, on occasion, upwards of close to 15 minutes (in retrospect, the amount of time it takes to ride Breck's Lift A from bottom to top) to travel the horizontal half mile between the mid-reload and the top, that suggests a lift that stops and slows more often than most high speed six-packs that I've ridden. In fact I think, amongst lifts with midstations, the Peak 8 SuperConnect runs more efficiently than Lift 2, but that may be because its midstation is only for loading, and it has gates that are programmed to send chairs through the bottom terminal empty.

I can agree with you that the platter's line appears to be most ideal for the proposed Lift 2B, though I think the starting location for 2B would be most ideal if it were closer to where Lift 4 starts, so that people could access 2B from Lifts 4, 8, and 9.

This post has been edited by DonaldMReif: 23 March 2015 - 08:37 PM

[DonaldMReif]

I know this is a double post, and I didn't know where else to put this, but, given that there seems to be a consensus that Lift 2 at Loveland has one of the worst set-ups for chairlifts, I wanted to ask: who built the two half-towers used for Lift 2's mid-unload?

Strangely enough, there have been other lifts that have mid-unload and reload stations right next to each other that may be better managed than Lift 2's. For instance, the defunct Chair 1 at Schweitzer was a Riblet double with a mid-unload that was immediately followed by a reload. In 2010, Schweitzer replaced that lift with two Doppelmayr lifts: the lower half was replaced with a high speed quad and the upper half was replaced with a triple chairlift.

I know the master plan calls for Lift 2 to be split into two separate lifts, but an idea I may have floated around years back was, if I could build Loveland from scratch, to replace Lift 2 with a high speed quad, with a mid-load station at the reload, with gates to send some chairs up empty (as is, the lift is about the same length as the Northwoods Express lift, the Outback Express lift and the Kensho SuperChair, slightly longer than the Rocky Mountain SuperChair; most of the time, I think detachable is best for most chairlifts over a mile in length).

This post has been edited by DonaldMReif: 24 March 2015 - 10:57 AM

[NHskier13]

I highly dislike where the learning center at Bretton Woods is located. (Funny how for such a flat mountain they felt the need for a separate learning chairlift. jk I understand why)
Here's the map (lower area to center around the learning center)

Basically, if you take Two Miles Home, Deception Bowl, Water Tank, Perimeter, or Sawyer's Swoop, you need to come down through the learning area. Particularly the trail Almost Home, which is only barely large enough to fit a single snow groomer. Add in the "snowplows" and it's a mess with all the other people heading down Two Miles, Deception, Water Tank, Perimeter, and the Swoop. That said, there's a small hill just above the Learning Center Quad, so if you save your speed you can head up that hill and you'll be on the lower end of Bretton's Wood Terrain Park. But sometimes there's too many people in your way to be speeding along like that, so only when you have the room can you do that.

[snoloco]

I don't like the way that the Mountain Creek Vernon Base area is set up. It has a trail system that funnels down to a single runout which causes mixing of ability levels and too much trail crowding. Plus, they have a cabriolet serving regular terrain which really sucks.

The line where Hunter Mountain installed the Zephyr Express sucks because it is an uphill skate to the lift unless you bomb the trail. The top has a long skate as well. I don't know why they couldn't have installed it in the old Z lift spot which was a far better line.

[DonaldMReif]

boardski, on 23 March 2015 - 07:18 PM, said:

One of my biggest issues with Loveland is the lack of division of abilities. Lift 2 is a large cause of this. The lift (Long FGT with 2 midstations) is horrible and the worst thing Loveland ever did was to add the midway unload and encourage first time skiers to ski the Basin side. Consequently, Tango road is a giant cluster with people who are shaky with their skiing traversing edge-to-edge and others trying to maintain speed to slide across the flat areas to get to other lifts or traverse from lift 4 pod to the base or skiing to the base because there is a line at the #2 lift reload and no empty chairs are coming through (Loveland does not send any chairs up empty from the bottom and loads partially loaded chairs at midway which I have never thought was very safe). Loveland used the platter lift more this year which helped a little, although Sunday I noticed all the platters are gone from it (even from the rack in the bottom terminal). Not sure if this is Summer maintenance or if they are removing the lift. The current line for the platter would be the perfect location for the upper section of lift 2 (designated lift 2-B in the master plan) except, of course the upper lift would be extended to the existing top terminal location. The lower section should utilize the current midway RELOAD since this is a flatter area and would make for a more gentle ramp. Since Loveland does not seem to have very deep pockets though, maybe some chairs should be eliminated and spaced further apart on the existing lift 2 to minimize the stops and the slows. Those South chute runs are great but the lift ride up lift 2 is beyond miserable. I have had it take close to 15 minutes from midway to the top. Maybe they could use the existing Yan chairs and towers with a new drive and return terminal for one of the segments. Anything would be better than the current set up. Once the lift is split, intermediate and advanced skiers will be more likely to remain on the upper mountain and the dangerous intersection at the bottom of 6 and current #2 reload should have less traffic also (7 different trails from 3 different fall lines intersect here and, of course, everyone thinks they have right-of-way). Loveland is a very fun mountain, however, it is a shame when one totally inefficient lift keeps it from being as fun as it could be.

And this year, they're finally doing that: splitting the lift.

[boardski]

DonaldMReif, on 13 September 2015 - 10:47 AM, said:

And this year, they're finally doing that: splitting the lift.

Yay!! I think it should really help things quite a bit at LL. Rumor has it, the lower part of #2 will be running super-slow for beginners and Loveland is planning to discourage beginners from going all the way to the top due to the frequent injuries and people getting in "over their heads" last year. Apparently the ski patrol was run ragged. The only issue I see is increased traffic at lift #1 depending on how slow slow is.

[boardski]

The other bad set up for beginners is Steamboat's base area served by Preview lift. I was trying to teach my Daughter to snowboard over there a couple of years ago and advanced skiers ripped right down the beginner run at high speeds and were angry we were trying to use the hill for learning.

[passengerpigeon]

When I went to Kitzbühel in Austria, one bad setup that I found was the Hahnenkamm gondola out of Kitzbühel village (lift №A1 on this trail map). Firstly, the gondola is located next to the train station in the town of Kitzbühel, which is very convenient first thing in the morning, but quite tiring for anybody who wants to do laps of the famous World Cup terrain served by it, because in order to get back on the lift after finishing a run, you need to pole across the bottom of a learning area and then take your skis off and carry them across a road to the gondola. The second issue with the gondola is the 30 minute lift lines that always build up during peak periods, as it is the only lift out of Kitzbühel town (excluding a few short lifts which you can't access other parts of the resort from) and is used by everybody staying in the fairly large village and all of the people arriving by train.
I think that the best way to solve these problems would be to leave the gondola as it is and install a new chairlift starting near the base of lift T9 and ending right next to the gondola's upper station. People going up in the morning would then be able to either take the conveniently located gondola or walk a short distance to the chairlift if the queue is too long, whereas people who like to ski the gondola-served terrain would be able to make nonstop laps thanks to the chairlift.