Next Upgrades at NY Ski Areas

snoloco wrote

Look, do you want to ski The Rumor or not?

It sounds like what you are proposing would require the trail to be renamed... maybe to something like "This used to be called The Rumor... but now it's called The Groomer... for Panzies like Snoloco"

I've skied it plenty with the rocks and ledges and will continue to do so. Thankfully, your know-it-all powers don't extend any further being annoying on the internet.

The lower mountain gets hard and icy without constant snow in November, Dec, and early Jan. What makes you think the Rumor will be different? Putting a bunch of intermediate level holiday warriors on a groomed out, bumpless, rockless, featureless Christmas ice sheet is a recipe for disaster. I would rather ski it a little less and as is, than slide down it trying to set an edge and not die for an extra month.

YUKON CORNELIUS wrote

The lower mountain gets hard and icy without constant snow in November, Dec, and early Jan. Putting a bunch of intermediate level holiday warriors on a groomed out, bumpless, rockless, featureless Christmas ice sheet version of the Rumor is a recipe for disaster. I would rather ski it a little less and as is, than slide down it trying to set an edge for an extra month.

Agreed 100%

So this is the same excuse you guys use to justify the lack of snowmaking and thus, consistent operations at the Ski Bowl.  "No snowmaking or grooming we need to preserve the old school vibe". Vibe schmibe, I don't give a crap about the vibe.  If you want old fashion, go to Big Tupper.  Look how well that place is doing.  Not too well in my book.  What I give a crap about is if it is open.  If that means widening the trails and grooming them, then so be it.  At least they're open.  They don't need to widen the trails for snowmaking either.  There's plenty of snowmaking equipment that is DESIGNED FOR NARROW TRAILS.  Why do snowmaking companies make this equipment?  So that trails of every shape and kind can be covered whether nature helps you or not.

I never said " turn Gore into Stratton".  I said get the snowmaking up to standard so all lifts can run by 12/26.  Most mountains can do this (Hunter, Windham, Killington, Mount Snow, Stratton, and Okemo just to name a few).  When there's people driving hours and spending hundreds of dollars to ski your mountain, you better be damn sure that you provide the best possible experience you can.  A mountain with multiple lifts closed with snowless trails doesn't qualify.  This has nothing to do with homogenizing the ski area, this has to do with getting more snowmaking pipe, installing it, buying snowguns, having proper pumping capacity, and using it.

Adk Jeff wrote

snoloco wrote

Upgrade the North Quad to high speed.

I may have asked this before, but instead of a brand new HSQ is it possible to add carpet loading to the existing lift and crank up the rope speed by say 50% ?  I would think that would be a relatively inexpensive upgrade.

I asked one of the MC lifites if a load carpet could be added to our Granite Peak Quad which has a similar stop/slow problem.  He said that it was not possible unless the lift had a computerized electrical system.  The lift I asked about was installed in fall of 1998 and does not have this.  The North Quad is a year older.  It would need it's entire drive system replaced to add a load carpet.  Once you do that, you may as well have just gotten a HSQ.

I said to relocate the north quad to become the Subway Chair.  When a lift is relocated it is considered brand new and must meet all safety/inspection standards.  Let's say a lift was installed before safety bars were required.  After it was installed, a law was passed that required safety bars on all new lifts.  That lift would be grandfathered and the mountain wouldn't need to install them on that lift.  However, if that lift were relocated, it would be considered a "new lift".  Tis means that safety bars would need to be installed.  For the North Quad if it were relocated, this law might mean upgrading to a computerized electric system.  This means a load carpet could be added to that lift as the electrical system would support it.

Smooth every thing down and cover it with Snowflex.

Happy now?

snoloco wrote

So this is the same excuse you guys use to justify the lack of snowmaking and thus, consistent operations at the Ski Bowl.  "No snowmaking or grooming we need to preserve the old school vibe". Vibe schmibe, I don't give a crap about the vibe.  If you want old fashion, go to Big Tupper.  Look how well that place is doing.  Not too well in my book.  What I give a crap about is if it is open.  If that means widening the trails and grooming them, then so be it.  At least they're open.  They don't need to widen the trails for snowmaking either.  There's plenty of snowmaking equipment that is DESIGNED FOR NARROW TRAILS.  Why do snowmaking companies make this equipment?  So that trails of every shape and kind can be covered whether nature helps you or not.

I never said " turn Gore into Stratton".  I said get the snowmaking up to standard so all lifts can run by 12/26.  Most mountains can do this (Hunter, Windham, Killington, Mount Snow, Stratton, and Okemo just to name a few).  When there's people driving hours and spending hundreds of dollars to ski your mountain, you better be damn sure that you provide the best possible experience you can.  A mountain with multiple lifts closed with snowless trails doesn't qualify.  This has nothing to do with homogenizing the ski area, this has to do with getting more snowmaking pipe, installing it, buying snowguns, having proper pumping capacity, and using it.

sigh....i was trying not to get into this.









you should totally go join a stratton forum. with the amount of bitching you do about gore its unreal you even go there.

No comments on ice park.


In case none of you have seen this done.   All man made ice using water line with drip hoses.     The climbers actually tie their ropes to the water line at the top.    

The photos on this site can be better.  I have some great ones but would need to find them.  


Use this link.


http://ourayicepark.com/tour-the-ice-park/lower-bridge/

Video on home page is worth it....

"Ice Farmer" jobs.      Cool title.    

Loco, are you saying that every trail should have snowmaking? I'm ok with having coverage on some stuff to have most areas opened during low snow years but all of it? I can't agree with that one. Man made snow is just shitty compared to natural. Even if it snows a bunch the new snow gets pushed around too much by lower level skiers and the whole run turns into an ice skating rink. It's just not a substitute for the real thing. It's sort of like wanking it compared to a real woman....sorry kid, it will happen at some point.

I think for a really well rounded ski resort you want to have a very varied trail system. Keep it interesting, flowy, and fun. Widen and put snowmaking on every run and you will blow it, scaring off your core fans and ruining your reputation.

I think you need to look at the big picture and the industry trends. Not everyone wants to drive four hours to ski the same kind of runs/conditions that Mountain Creek or Hunter have. Also with the advancements in technology people are seeking out more challenging experiences and something more back country esque. Look at the Sugarloaf expansion, I heard you poo poo that one too on here and honestly if it brings in the numbers and there is enough snow to justify the maintenance of those gladed areas I think it's bitchen! Hike to gladed zones seem like a much better option imo for ski areas, if it makes sense.

For a mountain Gore's size, it would be nearly impossible to cover everything.  What I'm frustrated with is that come Christmas every year, Gore has less open than it's neighbors to the east.  Why settle for that?  The trails can all have snowmaking without being widened or straightened.  There are many snow guns designed for narrow trails that have pinpoint accuracy and a concentrated snow distribution (meaning they put snow in a very small area).  Install these on all the Ski Bowl trails so that section is actually open and useful.

I was at Gore this past MLK Weekend.  The Ski Bowl was open except for the glades and 46er.  My dad and I skied Moxham first which is a run we have enjoyed a lot in the past.  It has no snowmaking.  It was terrible at best that day.  There was like a 3 inch base and the dirt and rocks below ground into the snow.  The other trails were opened with snowmaking and were in acceptable condition.  If Moxham had snowmaking and the rest of the trails had more snow made on them, it would be so much better and more people would lap the terrain meaning less people on the gondola.

I think that Gore has taken their terrain expansion overboard kinda like Les Otten did at The Canyons.  They built Burnt Ridge back in 2008 with 2 trails and one large glade.  This overall was a great expansion, but it struggled being consistently open the first few years and getting to it was a pain in the a$$ because getting to it required you to hoof it down the Cedars Traverse and getting back meant going down and around and taking the gondola causing monster lift lines there.  What should have been done is have all the connector trails the first year with snowmaking, so people can actually get to the lift.  Then, they should have added a couple more trails and put snowmaking on them either right away, or a year or two later.  Snowmaking capacity also should have been increased to allow the section to open by 12/26 in all but the absolute worst of the worst winters (06-07, 11-12).  Had this been done, Burnt Ridge would have been far better than it was or is now and would be open much more.  However, they instead chose to overreach and build the Ski Bowl which hasn't opened consistently in over 5 years.  All of this of course done amidst budget cuts and two lifts that were falling apart (AE1 is gone now, good thing, but High Peaks Chair is still there).  Also, every year they choose to add more glades to the map than upgrading the obviously underpowered snowmaking system to get every lift on the mountain open by 12/26.

PeeTex wrote

In my heart I do know sno is right. Eventually most ski areas will have the life and soul sucked out of them for profit.

But I don't have to like it.

In your opinion, what is sucking the life and soul out of skiing?  Homogenization?

The ski area doesn't need to have the life and soul sucked out of it to have up to standard snowmaking.  Explain how opening all lifts by 12/26 sucks the life and soul out of a ski area.

What sucks the life and soul out of a ski area for me is when the money is sucked out of one project to do another on the cheap.  Instead of having one project that was successful (Burnt Ridge) and upgrading snowmaking, lifts, etc on the rest of the mountain, you've now got two (Ski Bowl and Burnt Ridge).  One of which is a miserable failure (Ski Bowl) and one that didn't reach full potential because its funds were bled dry to fund the one that failed (Burnt Ridge).  You've also got a lift that is ready to die for good (High Peaks Chair), and one that was replaced a year late with dire consequences such as being down for 3 weeks causing Disney style lines at the gondola (AE1).

snoloco wrote

In your opinion, what is sucking the life and soul out of skiing?

Take a peek in the mirror

Sno... you and I have a different idea of what makes skiing fun.  I care about snow quality and terrain. The rest is just noise.

Natural snow is by (my) definition better snow.  Simple lodges and slow lifts don't mean shit to me.  In my way of thinking they can actually improve the experience.  (Think Hickory, Plattekill, Ski Bowl, SR).

This doesn't mean you are wrong. And the evidence is pretty strong that you are in the majority of all skiers.

Accept that fact that you and I will never agree on what makes a great ski experience.

I think the numbers on this page loom large behind Sno's "annoyance" with how slowly Gore opens terrain compared to other big mountains in the East. 2012–13 and 2013–14 were very kind to us; 2014–15 doesn't look good on paper, but we all know it was great, mainly due to the long stretch of cold temps. Perhaps Sno is worrying, in his way, about what happens in a bad snow year?

I remember watching the conditions page during the 2011–12 season, wondering whether or not to make our first trip to Gore. Having paid attention to the progress of the recent expansions, I wanted to go when the Snow Bowl and connector trails were open. Perhaps my memory is fuzzy, but I don't remember the whole shebang being open much at all… We held off 'til 2014 for Gore.

Not being able to open terrain in bad snow years can hurt a mountain economically, and I wonder if Sno is a bit worried about that. Perhaps he shouldn't worry so much, given that Gore wears a giant New York State fiscal parachute. But I think he has his heart in the right place.

Harvey and others, perhaps Sno comes to bury Gore (in snow), not to raze all ledges, glades, and quirks from its face. His paeans to high-speed quads notwithstanding, I even sense a nascent appreciation of those things that others value here—simple lodges and a good vibe, if not slow lifts. Without snow, however, there is no ski experience to be had, at Plattekill, Okemo, or Gore. And without a few intermediate raceways spread throughout a mountain, not enough skiers will come to keep a mountain economically viable.

So, I think he has something here. Gore most definitely should have better snowmaking all over the mountain. What are its percentages? Whiteface touts 98% coverage. Shouldn't Gore be in the same ballpark? It's the East, after all, no matter how much I love it. Why can't we have our cake and eat it too?

What I tend to weight heavily is terrain availability at peak times.  I ski at Hunter a lot and I think they've always done a great job with this.

I don't have a problem with fixed grip lifts in general.  The lift I ride at Hunter the most is the D-Lift which happens to be the oldest lift on the mountain installed in 1966.  What I do have a problem with is when you put a bunch of families and little kids on a fixed grip lift which means they can't run at full speed and slow down and stop all the time.  Mountains that get a lot of families and little kids need to realize this and upgrade their lifts accordingly.  This is something Okemo has done well at.  Gore tends to be a family mountain as well, so wouldn't it be expected that it might have more high speed lifts, especially in family areas like the North Side?

If I ran Gore, snowmaking would definitely be the first priority.  I wouldn't get rid of all the glades, I enjoy occasionally venturing into them.  I just wouldn't have glades as key connections throughout the mountain.  Boreas, and some of Barkeater and Cirque might be lost to trails as Burnt Ridge sorely needs more, but they can always be rerouted and the trails can be routed around the best parts of the glades that are already there.  There's always room for more glades as Gore has a relatively low density trail layout.

As for lifts, I said I'd do 3 upgrades in a heartbeat if I had the money.  HSQ for North Side, North Quad to Sunway alignment, and new double or triple to replace Dark Side chair that goes to where you can get to all the trails relatively easily.  Not all lifts can or will be high speed.  Straightbrook, High Peaks, and Sunway are not long enough.  Topridge serves only intermediate and advanced terrain, so it can run fast and not stop, and the Hudson Chair doesn't get enough users.

The objective for me IS NOT homogenization.  It is to keep the character of the trails while also making sure they are consistently open and in the best condition possible and are served by lifts suited to the terrain they serve.  In some cases, that means high speed, and in some others, not.  

Who wouldn't love being able to book a vacation over Christmas week and know that in all likelyhood, they would have the full number of lifts to choose from and most trails off those lifts as well?  That is what is going to help the town.  Getting more people in the area during peak times.  If people aren't confidant in Gore's ability to open all their trails, why would they go?  These people would bring their business and $$$ elsewhere.

Part of the reason we chose Steamboat for our western trip is because they have a better early season record than almost anyone.  They average 93% open by Christmas Day.  We know that in all likelyhood, we will have all the lifts to choose from and almost all trails.

snoloco wrote

If I ran Gore, snowmaking would definitely be the first priority.  I wouldn't get rid of all the glades, I enjoy occasionally venturing into them.  I just wouldn't have glades as key connections throughout the mountain.  Boreas, and some of Barkeater and Cirque might be lost to trails as Burnt Ridge sorely needs more, but they can always be rerouted and the trails can be routed around the best parts of the glades that are already there.  There's always room for more glades as Gore has a relatively low density trail layout.

As for lifts, I said I'd do 3 upgrades in a heartbeat if I had the money.  HSQ for North Side, North Quad to Sunway alignment, and new double or triple to replace Dark Side chair that goes to where you can get to all the trails relatively easily.  Not all lifts can or will be high speed.  Straightbrook, High Peaks, and Sunway are not long enough.  Topridge serves only intermediate and advanced terrain, so it can run fast and not stop, and the Hudson Chair doesn't get enough users.

The objective for me IS NOT homogenization.  It is to keep the character of the trails while also making sure they are consistently open and in the best condition possible and are served by lifts suited to the terrain they serve.  In some cases, that means high speed, and in some others, not.  

Who wouldn't love being able to book a vacation over Christmas week and know that in all likelyhood, they would have the full number of lifts to choose from and most trails off those lifts as well?  That is what is going to help the town.  Getting more people in the area during peak times.  If people aren't confidant in Gore's ability to open all their trails, why would they go?  These people would bring their business and $$$ elsewhere.

Part of the reason we chose Steamboat for our western trip is because they have a better early season record than almost anyone.  They average 93% open by Christmas Day.  We know that in all likelyhood, we will have all the lifts to choose from and almost all trails.

Well I got to say that I agree with just about everything with ya here Loco, at least from a ski area management perspective. I believe that Gore has potential to be one of the most successful east coast ski areas but it needs some fine tuning. Of course this is coming from someone that has never skied there so I say this only based on what I have read and seen on Google Earth. The big thing I would want to put into the plan would be better connectivity to the Bowl and the town. Maybe a short gondy that goes from the center of town to the base area. Then another gondy or stage continuing up to the top of Burnt Ridge. That gully/gorge/creek looks like it would create some challenges for that pods ski runs but maybe (and this is a long shot) some large earth bridges could be created for new ski trails? Other than the creek the area looks perfect for mostly low angle family skiing and a giant terrain park. Maybe have night skiing, a tubing park, and some zip lines? My vision would be to have the area right in town be an epic center for the weekend or even week long vacationing tourist type skiers. Make sure that as you said it's in a close to full operation during those peak periods and get a bunch of $ into that community.

Burnt Ridge does look like the perfect area for more blue cruiser runs, the kind of terrain that most $ spenders desire. Some current glades might be sacrificed to create the best possible ski area but as you said more could be created. I also agree on having fluid connectivity between different mountain areas and to have it covered with snowmaking. I'm not so sure I'm keen on 98% coverage like Whiteface, that sounds a little like too much to me, I would want to maintain plenty of natural ski terrain but the mountain is big enough that I think you could keep everyone happy.

Again, having a cool town right next to one of the largest ski areas in the east and being only 4 hours from NYC to me are what could make it one of if not the most successful ski areas in that region. The ski area improvements would only be a part of the whole plan. My goal would be to create a complete and perfect package. Competitions and events such as music and other festivals would be part of that. I would want to make it a cool place that people would want to stay at, spend money and not just ski as a day trippers. I think that would make a huge difference.

And yeah, I totally stare at google earth and think about the best possible ways to improve ski areas if I was in charge and had unlimited resources. So weird......

This is the product of getting everything you want at all times.  So spoiled that you believe Gore should treat the ski area like your parents treat you.  Unfortunately they have limited funds and it takes time to allocate them.  They can't just do it all at once.  Christmas break is not midseason.  There is no expectation for full coverage.  Only from brats who want it all on their family vacation despite mother nature's ability to more often than not, not cooperative this early in the season.