12 replies to this topic

[Termin8or]

Greetings to all.

I am interested your opinion on the cost of deferred maintenance on lifts. We are entering our budgeting process at our resort and I am being asked to reduce my labor and operating budget for Lift Maintenance. In a recent conversation I was told that one ski area (I missed which area it was) had $20 million in deferred maintenance for their lifts. So my question to you is, what are the costs associated with deferred maintenance on a ski lift? The obvious answer to me is the possible cost in a life. A failure of a lift could easily cost the life of a guest, operator or mechanic but what are the other areas that may be affected? Is there a way to estimate the cost to catch up to the level that you are supposed to be at?

Your thoughts and comments will be greatly appreciated.

[Kicking Horse]

Greetings,

You should never cut costs by deferring maintenance on any machine.

If the ski area is looking at cuttings costs tell them to look elsewhere. Think about this, I have a lift that I'm a op on. If it's 100% loaded there are 574 persons loaded on that lift at any time. If Lift mech were to deferr some of the maintaince on this machine those 574 lifes are put at risk. If you cant afford to do the maintaince on the lift(s) dont run them.

[shoemanII]

show this to the bean-counters

Attached File(s)

•  northpeak.after.jpg (489.92K)
  Number of downloads: 153

[Termin8or]

I realize this point. Our main lift fully loaded is 280 on the line, my crew is fully aware of the implications of the chance for injury or death due to a lift failure. We are not looking to defer any maintenance on a single lift, however given our crew size of 4 mechanics and 2 electricians (I count myself as one of the electricians and as the department head of 2 departments I do not spend a lot of time in the field) to maintain 2 high speed quads, 3 Riblet doubles and 2 magic carpets, some items are going to be put on the back burner. We are highly selective of these items, choosing the aesthetic over the mechanical every time. I am currently trying to justify the hiring of 1 more mechanic or electrician. Unfortunately trying to explain this to the 'bean counters' seems to be a more difficult endeavor than I expected.

Your point of not running a lift that has deferred maintenance, eventually the lift will take care of that itself.

Still my question is regarding being able to estimate or project the cost of deferring these items in other terms than a lift failure. What is the percentage of higher cost that you should expect to see if you delay replacing a part or being able to fully inspect motors, liners, switches and so forth. I am trying to think this through and was looking for some outside input.

[william b]

Termin8or, on 04 April 2010 - 04:00 PM, said:

I realize this point. Our main lift fully loaded is 280 on the line, my crew is fully aware of the implications of the chance for injury or death due to a lift failure. We are not looking to defer any maintenance on a single lift, however given our crew size of 4 mechanics and 2 electricians (I count myself as one of the electricians and as the department head of 2 departments I do not spend a lot of time in the field) to maintain 2 high speed quads, 3 Riblet doubles and 2 magic carpets, some items are going to be put on the back burner. We are highly selective of these items, choosing the aesthetic over the mechanical every time. I am currently trying to justify the hiring of 1 more mechanic or electrician. Unfortunately trying to explain this to the 'bean counters' seems to be a more difficult endeavor than I expected.

Your point of not running a lift that has deferred maintenance, eventually the lift will take care of that itself.

Still my question is regarding being able to estimate or project the cost of deferring these items in other terms than a lift failure. What is the percentage of higher cost that you should expect to see if you delay replacing a part or being able to fully inspect motors, liners, switches and so forth. I am trying to think this through and was looking for some outside input.

I can't help myself here... I have to comment.
I think I know what it is that you want regarding cost. First, my philosophy is that every component of a lift (or any machine) has a useful life. In order to maximize the useful life, the condition of these components must be verified. On chairlift grips, for example, we conduct NDT on a sample of grips every year, and this tells us where we stand in regard to their condition. Using this information, we can maximize the useful life of a part... we can still remove the part before it fails during use. The same for sheave bearings, for example. If you lift the rope from the sheave units and spin the sheaves, an experienced person can detect potential problems before they affect the operation of the lift, whether it be simply a nuisance, or worse.
The cost of replacing these various components can be estimated fairly accurately, if it is a planned replacement that does not interrupt operation. It is when a componnent fails during use that it becomes more difficult to estimate the cost of repairs. Often, when a componnent fails during use, additional damage is done, which drives up the cost. For example, an estimate for changing a bullwheel bearing in the off season might be $5,000.00. Let that bearing fail on Friday of February vacation weekend, and try to estimate the cost of the replacement. If there is a bearing available, it will need to be shipped pronto. Staff, and likely contractors will need to work around the clock. If the bearing's useful life ended at an undetermined time in the recent past, then the hub will need machine work. On a Saturday. On top of the mountain. Perhaps the bullwheel can be transported to the shop, or to a machine shop for this weekend work. When you're done, you're lucky if you only missed one day's operation. How many refunds were given out? How much did this affect the operation?
One of the rules of thumb is that if you take the cost of a certain job that has been scheduled during downtime, square that cost if it fails during use. The $5,000.00 job now will cost $25,000.
I always stress the importance of assessing the condition of the equipment. This allows for the timely scheduling of maintenance that will minimize the effects of equipment that has failed during use. If you have assessed the condition of your equipment, and defer maintenance even if you suspect that work needs to be performed, you can be assured that the work will be expensive. If you don't assess the condition of your equipment (ignorance is bliss), then problems will be more of a suprise.
The cost of the bullwheel bearing job in the above photo was more likely in the $50,000.00 range (Christmas Vacation), not to mention the risk to the passengers.

I wish you the best in your negotiations with the higher-ups.

wbl

[mthornton]

Suggest to the GM that rather than experiment with deferring lift-maintenance (& the public's safety), you will instead defer the maintenance of his/her company vehicle.

• no oil-changes. In fact, don't ever check any vehicle fluid-levels.
• no washing, painting or body-work. But keep the company logo clearly visible.
• keep original battery in place no matter what. (get em' an AAA membership for when it won't start)
• no replacement brake-pads (tell em' to learn to drive easy)
• worn tires? leave em on till they blow. got some old used ones out back for replacements when that happens.
• got a big wobble in the front-end? wait till it gets worse.
• break down somewhere... stranded? carry a cell-phone.
• loose control & kill someone innocent? Blame the maintenance staff for negligence

Some ski-hill owners just shouldn't be in the game. They just can't resist pulling excessive operating revenue out of the lifts budget, and risking the public's safety. Much better to sell the operation to another owner that better understands the lift business.

[Kicking Horse]

mthornton, on 06 April 2010 - 08:07 AM, said:

Suggest to the GM that rather than experiment with deferring lift-maintenance (& the public's safety), you will instead defer the maintenance of his/her company vehicle.

• no oil-changes. In fact, don't ever check any vehicle fluid-levels.
• no washing, painting or body-work. But keep the company logo clearly visible.
• keep original battery in place no matter what. (get em' an AAA membership for when it won't start)
• no replacement brake-pads (tell em' to learn to drive easy)
• worn tires? leave em on till they blow. got some old used ones out back for replacements when that happens.
• got a big wobble in the front-end? wait till it gets worse.
• break down somewhere... stranded? carry a cell-phone.
• loose control & kill someone innocent? Blame the maintenance staff for negligence

Some ski-hill owners just shouldn't be in the game. They just can't resist pulling excessive operating revenue out of the lifts budget, and risking the public's safety. Much better to sell the operation to another owner that better understands the lift business.

+2 well said.

[jeffe]

Well put mthorton.

Looking into the mind of some ski area managers can be a scary thing.

There are many items in a ski areas budget that should be cut before even considering going short on the lifts.

Would the manager of this resort consider issuing a press release stating the intention to defer lift maintenance? Not likely.

http://www.worldscin...66607000078.pdf

[Bill]

This article was published in April of 2008 in the NSAA Journal. It may have some helpful ideas.

 PreventiveMaintenanceArticle.pdf (494.4K)
Number of downloads: 63

[Lift Dinosaur]

Nice find, Bill.

Termin8tor- It seems like your issue is 2 fold - deferred maintenance and an increase in staff.
What areas of the "required maintenance" have you and your budget reviewers determined as acceptable to defer?

Labor is the largest line item in any budget and a given - can you waste labor by moving the #1 sheave to the #3 position and the 3 to the 1 to save the cost of a sheave liner? Yes, but you should have actually spent the labor to correct the alignment problem first!

Here's my $.02 on staff - someone with real day figures please contribute.
My recollection is for a detachable chairlift you can count on about 1200 man hours of labor to perform you required off season mechanical and electrical maintenance. For a fixed grip this is about 600 hours. If you take this estimate and figure then number of man hours you have available from your current staff (less vacation, etc) it should tell you how you match up. Just looking, with you counted as an electrician and doing two other jobs, it seems like you need another sparky as opposed to a mechanic.

Please read Jon Mauch's statement at the bottom of the NSAA article. It says a lot about cost vs. efficiency.

I hope this helps.

Dino

[Bill]

I reposted for user Larry Smith, who was having Firewall issues. :)

[Kelly]

Termin8or -We have specific industry forums, please contact me via forum email– see image below for Society of Ropeway Technicians overview and contact information.
 SORT-info-arrow.jpg (98.7K)
Number of downloads: 11
As william b implies in the post above - It’s important to recognize the subtle differences and interactions between maintenance and condition monitoring.
-Replenishing a known amount of lost grease in a bearing is a maintenance task.
-NDTing grips is condition monitoring
Each can be deferred successfully to a later time and each if not performed could have disastrous results.
Everybody defers maintenance - it could be that the daily stuff gets shoved into the monthly stuff (I’ll get that squeaky bushing when we do the 400 hour check). Or - forget painting until it gets warmer and when I might have more manpower available or maybe paint only the side the customers see…
To mathematically quantify deferred maintenance is extremely difficult - even with bearing and gear wear, a number of subjective correction factors are used.
The conclusions from the replies that were given by the above members represent at least 100+ years of maintenance experience. Most, if not all deferred circumstances would be difficult to fit into a “line item” in your budget without a detailed written explanation – this may be difficult for traditional schooled management (no maintenance experience) to understand.

The deferred recovery estimate is different for each condition - I would use “what if” examples to develop some type of prognostication outcomes for this summer’s maintenance schedule and next-year’s reliability or failure results:

-Last year’s deferred items that need to be done this year?
-What if Chile Express’s gearbox failed on Christmas Saturday and the results being essentially closing the area for the high season?
-Is #3 Riblet essential or can we close it for the season?
-Is the industry suggested gearbox total NDT/rebuild 8 year cycle valid for us?
-Is our gearbox condition monitoring extensive enough?
-Should we still put-off NDTing grips and hangers with the current litigation climate?
-What happens to deferred maintenance if the base area real estate market does not recover and we again have to defer?

Said by members but it should be repeated: Deferred maintenance does not reduce maintenance - it only postpones what needs to be done, and it also has the potential to become exponentially expensive.
I would encourage you to develop the new maintenance schedule with those examples in mind. Good luck.

[svlifttech68]

shoemanII, on 04 April 2010 - 03:59 PM, said:

show this to the bean-counters

I believe that was caused by a bearing failure.