Longest High Speed Quad in the World
Started by Jonni, May 29 2005 08:50 AM
70 replies to this topic
#62
Posted 19 June 2005 - 06:41 PM
I just had an idea for a longer system. If you had a midstation, you could use two completly isolated rope loops, and that way you don't need a single rope that is obscenly long! Since the chairs are offline at the midstation anyway, they just pass through from one line to the next.
-Iain
-Iain
#64
Posted 19 June 2005 - 09:08 PM
Mammoth doesn't have that for length, its for maximum use. If it were the other way around they would have to close the lift whenever it got windy and so they have the option to just run one if thats all they need. Panorama is fairly short with only a 7 minute or so combined ride time. I know I have been there several times when just the lower section is open due to weather up at the top.
Zack
#65
Posted 19 June 2005 - 09:15 PM
i don't see how its worth riding the lower gondola if the top is closed. I see it as too much of a hastle to take my skis off, and would rather ride chair 1 up if thats as high as I can go. If I can ride all the way up to the top, I love being able to relax.
You say that these were the first types of midstations used. Do they now prefer to use one continuous rope, even if it turns, like this one:
midstation.jpg (436.04K)
Number of downloads: 40
SkiBachelor, on Jun 19 2005, 08:22 PM, said:
Those were actually the first types of mid stations used. The Whistler Village Gondola has this setup along with the gondola at Mammoth.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
You say that these were the first types of midstations used. Do they now prefer to use one continuous rope, even if it turns, like this one:
midstation.jpg (436.04K)
Number of downloads: 40
<!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->-Christian<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast" target="_blank">http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast</a>
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast" target="_blank">http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast</a>
#67
Posted 19 June 2005 - 09:22 PM
I'm asking which way is preferred, two separate ropes like mammoth or one rope like that lift?
<!--coloro:red--><span style="color:red"><!--/coloro-->-Christian<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast" target="_blank">http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast</a>
<a href="http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast" target="_blank">http://www.myspace.com/the_skiing_beast</a>
#70
Posted 20 June 2005 - 05:38 PM
Here's a basic example:
You build a lift with a midstation and two separate drives/ropes. You can operate it one of three ways. One, probably the most common method, is to run carriers off the lower section onto the upper by means of a straight conveyor section. There are the normal accel/decel tyre banks on both ends, and a chain or single-speed tyre bank to move the carriers from one section to the other. Two and three are to run either the lower or the upper section separately. This is done by switching a section of rail at the junction so that the two sections can function independently (with a 'normal' contour to return the carriers back up or down.) One could probably operate both sections simultaneously but independently in the case of wind up high, allowing a slower speed on the upper section.
You build a lift with a midstation and two separate drives/ropes. You can operate it one of three ways. One, probably the most common method, is to run carriers off the lower section onto the upper by means of a straight conveyor section. There are the normal accel/decel tyre banks on both ends, and a chain or single-speed tyre bank to move the carriers from one section to the other. Two and three are to run either the lower or the upper section separately. This is done by switching a section of rail at the junction so that the two sections can function independently (with a 'normal' contour to return the carriers back up or down.) One could probably operate both sections simultaneously but independently in the case of wind up high, allowing a slower speed on the upper section.
Member, Department of Ancient Technology, Colorado chapter.
#71
Posted 29 June 2005 - 08:41 AM
Some older gondolas worked like that; the one I'm familiar with was the one at Sugarloaf. However, it could only run the lower section independently, in case it was too windy to run the top section. Both drives were in the midstation. When the gondola was decommissioned in the late 90's, before the Timberline chair was built, they turned around the turnaround track in the midstation and ran the top section alone for a season or two to maintain summit access.
1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users











