Jump to content


Is This a Hall Design, or Riblet?


  • You cannot reply to this topic
7 replies to this topic

#1 snoloco

    Established User

  • Member
  • 444 Posts:
  • Interests:Skiing
    Ski lifts
    Ski areas

Posted 21 October 2016 - 04:46 AM

This is the top return on the Little Whiteface Double at Whiteface, NY. I've never seen it on any other Hall lift. That lift originally replaced a Riblet double, so I thought that it could've possibly been reused, but I haven't seen any other Riblets with that design either.

Posted Image

#2 RibStaThiok

    Established User

  • Member
  • 1,057 Posts:

Posted 21 October 2016 - 10:28 AM

That is a.. custom job. er. something. yeah
Ryan

#3 snoloco

    Established User

  • Member
  • 444 Posts:
  • Interests:Skiing
    Ski lifts
    Ski areas

Posted 21 October 2016 - 12:07 PM

This particular lift, which was originally installed in 1978 has been heavily modified by CTEC in 1989 and then Doppelmayr in 2011 and later 2012. I know that this return existed before the Doppelmayr mods.

#4 liftmech

    lift mechanic

  • Administrator II
  • 5,906 Posts:
  • Interests:Many.

Posted 23 October 2016 - 04:26 AM

Looks like the late 70s-vintage Halls at Monarch sans motor room.
Member, Department of Ancient Technology, Colorado chapter.

#5 _litz

    Established User

  • Member
  • 154 Posts:

Posted 23 October 2016 - 06:48 PM

That has to be the ... strongest ... looking steel structure I've ever seen a bullwheel mounted upon.

That's insane looking.

OTOH, it's definitely not going to topple over like Sunday River's did ...

#6 snoloco

    Established User

  • Member
  • 444 Posts:
  • Interests:Skiing
    Ski lifts
    Ski areas

Posted 24 October 2016 - 11:04 AM

That lift has a very steep final incline and covers a lot of vertical for its length. Maybe that terminal is designed the way it is for that. The Cloudsplitter Gondola (1999 Doppelmayr) has a breakover with 30 sheaves across 3 towers on each side.

#7 _litz

    Established User

  • Member
  • 154 Posts:

Posted 24 October 2016 - 02:27 PM

Perhaps ... it still looks extremely solid, nonetheless.

There's pretty much no way to interpret that structure other than "boy does that look solid and strong"

#8 Andy1962

    Established User

  • Member
  • 209 Posts:

Posted 24 October 2016 - 03:51 PM

View Post_litz, on 24 October 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

Perhaps ... it still looks extremely solid, nonetheless.

There's pretty much no way to interpret that structure other than "boy does that look solid and strong"



While it is true that the top terminal needs to be solid and strong above ground, the below ground portion also needs to be substantial AND well attached to the underlying base rock. Others have found out (to their peril) in the last few years that some terminals and towers installed in the 80's and 90's were not bolted down quite as well as the owners might have liked (or suspected the day before the equipment fell over). One only needs to come see how much cement that gets buried for new ski lift tower footing installations where the entire hill is sand and gravel. very impressive.





1 User(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users