Colorado 2019-2020 Colorado Weather and Stoke (and beer)

[Noodler]

https://www.fs.usda.gov/nfs/11558/www/nepa/111978_FSPLT3_4806093.pdf

Chair 6 at Loveland has full replacement approval. Perhaps more in the 2021 stoke department, but big news.

Does a HSQ make sense for 6? I get how it would cater to lower intermediates with a fast ride. However, I can’t say I have noticed long lines for the double, and the cost would be exponentially higher. A triple with a loading carpet seems like a better fit, though without the marketing value perhaps.

So this is just to replace the existing chair without any possible re-routing?

 

[Green08]

So this is just to replace the existing chair without any possible re-routing?

Seems the goal is clearly to replace aging lift, increase uphill capacity, and shorten the ride time. All results of increased popularity for intermediate terrain.

 

[Blue Streak]

Seems the goal is clearly to replace aging lift, increase uphill capacity, and shorten the ride time. All results of increased popularity for intermediate terrain.

I wonder which playbook that comes out of. Sounds a lot like the Evil Empire.

 

[Noodler]

I wonder which playbook that comes out of. Sounds a lot like the Evil Empire.

I don't know - probably not an evil plot. #6 is really old, slow, and uncomfortable. It also bogs down quite a bit at times depending on your timing when you hit that lift. I'd say having a replacement is all good. Note that I wouldn't have said that previously before seeing the result of Chet's. Knowing that LL probably won't be increasing the number of skiers thrown onto the top of those runs gives me some comfort that they know how to do this right.

 

[SBrown]

Skied Copper yesterday afternoon. It is your basic Ptarmigan-to-the-bottom run, including Fairplay. Fast and firm, but smooth at least. Bring edges.

 

[Green08]

I don't know - probably not an evil plot. #6 is really old, slow, and uncomfortable. It also bogs down quite a bit at times depending on your timing when you hit that lift. I'd say having a replacement is all good. Note that I wouldn't have said that previously before seeing the result of Chet's. Knowing that LL probably won't be increasing the number of skiers thrown onto the top of those runs gives me some comfort that they know how to do this right.

Chet’s did not increase uphill capacity, because Luv chose to use fewer chairs initially. They were very intentional. The belief was Catwalk/Mambo and the top of Spillway had traffic limits.

#6 is a double. Going to a triple or quad will increase capacity. But many of those trails are underused. Luvs plan explocitly says they want to increase capacity. With such a shallow pitch those trails stand little danger of being scrapped off.

Chair size also presents other challenges. Skiers have become wider over the years. So many folks presently find a double very restrictive—be glad there is no center pole! But triples are often treated as extra wide comfy doubles by many skiers, unless a lifty makes sure it all loads well.

Triples tend to have a slightly faster line speed than a fixed quad. Paired with a loading carpet the functional speed and capacity increases further. Many good or older skiers find loading carpets awkward. But, with most new skiers and contemporary lower intermediates having learned to ski using a magic carpet it seems to work well.

A HSQ+triple combo would be very similar to BMX+Lenawee at ABasin.

A common misconception is that a high speed detachable will increase uphill capacity. If you monitor lift capacity stats, that just is not true. Detachables require more space between chairs, and therefore move the same number of people up the hill. The ride is shorter, but that also means any wait is going to form in a line, rather than filling in extra slow chairs.

Luv has had lots of success using triples. #2, #4, and Ptarmigan are all triples. Making 6 a triple would fit that pattern.

Smaller front range resorts seem to have found a flagship high speed paired with all other fixed grips to be a good mix. Elders, Luv, and ABasin. Granby is the same I think. Moving to two HSQ would move Luv into another category, and perhaps a necessarily more expensive one to cover operating costs.

 

[dbostedo]

I wonder which playbook that comes out of. Sounds a lot like the Evil Empire.

I think it's every resort's/ski area's playbook. Intermediate skiers are the bulk of the industry.

 

[Doug Briggs]

'Evil Empire'. Give me a break.

 

[Doug Briggs]

The gating factor for a lift's uphill capacity is the load speed. In Colorado, you can not load more than 1 chair every 6 seconds. That restriction determines how far apart the chairs can be based on haul rope speed. It is all an engineering and budgetary equation from there. More chairs means stronger towers, brakes and motor.

 

[nay]

A triple makes the most sense for that chair. 6 takes a good amount is wind and I think a HSQ would face a decent amount of wind closure, which would be a shame since the trees off 6 are a lot of fun in storms when the upper mountain is shut down.

Chets had some wind closure last season that 1 never had, and while it wasn’t major wtf do you ski at Luv if the base chairs are shut for storm/wind?

This is precisely why A-Basin won’t “upgrade” Pali.

 

[dbostedo]

A triple makes the most sense for that chair. 6 takes a good amount is wind and I think a HSQ would face a decent amount of wind closure, which would be a shame since the trees off 6 are a lot of fun in storms when the upper mountain is shut down.

Chets had some wind closure last season that 1 never had, and while it wasn’t major wtf do you ski at Luv if the base chairs are shut for storm/wind?

This is precisely why A-Basin won’t “upgrade” Pali.

Though I've seen the wind thing mentioned a lot of places, I don't think I've ever seen a good explanation for why a fixed grip lift is less wind prone than a high-speed lift. Anyone know?

And yeah, I don't see a real need for a high-speed to replace 6 at Loveland... though of course less lift time is almost always nice.

 

[Blue Streak]

'Evil Empire'. Give me a break.

Tongue in cheek.

This what Mid-Vail looks like today.
Vail installed an incredible snowmaking system this summer - the largest single year snowmaking project in history - or so they claim.
New addition to the summit of Golden Peak - adding about 1,000 vertical to the Ski Club Vail training area.
Should be a great year

 

[Blue Streak]

I think it's every resort's/ski area's playbook. Intermediate skiers are the bulk of the industry.

Correct.
And who has dominated the industry with that philosophy?

 

[dbostedo]

Correct.
And who has dominated the industry with that philosophy?

Alterra / Ikon!!

 

[Blue Streak]

Alterra / Ikon!!

For better or worse, VR is the 800 pound gorilla.

 

[nay]

Though I've seen the wind thing mentioned a lot of places, I don't think I've ever seen a good explanation for why a fixed grip lift is less wind prone than a high-speed lift. Anyone know?

And yeah, I don't see a real need for a high-speed to replace 6 at Loveland... though of course less lift time is almost always nice.

I think the short answer is that a detachable chair is easier to detach.

The longer answer is fixed grips are vice gripped to the cable and detachable are spring loaded to create the grip force (notice the coil spring). Enough wind can presumably overcome the spring load and create dangerous conditions sooner than breaking the tension of the fixed vice grip.

Chet’s is a pretty well protected lift, but it still takes exposure at the top. 6 takes a lot more exposure. Part of the decision to add detachable lift capacity is having more wind hold. WP is a disaster in the wind. Loveland runs in conditions that would pretty much close WP entirely. That’s lift type. And also a bit of having an actual set of balls.

 

[nay]

For better or worse, VR is the 800 pound gorilla.

Except Alterra and Vail are basically the same size and doing the exact same thing.

 

[KingGrump]

Though I've seen the wind thing mentioned a lot of places, I don't think I've ever seen a good explanation for why a fixed grip lift is less wind prone than a high-speed lift. Anyone know?

HSQ generally have larger and taller towers than fixed grip chairs. Wind speed generally increase as one get away from the ground. Especially over the tree top level.

 

[dbostedo]

HSQ generally have larger and taller towers than fixed grip chairs.

Does that have to be that way though? Or is that just typical because of the terrain they're typically on? Or maybe that they tend to be newer and the more modern tendency is taller with less towers (or something like that... just speculating here)?

 

[nay]

HSQ generally have larger and taller towers than fixed grip chairs. Wind speed generally increase as one get away from the ground. Especially over the tree top level.

Is that true as a lift is replaced? Would a HSQ and a modern fixed grip quad have different towers or is that a comparison of safety design standards for older fixed grip chairs that you couldn’t build today?

edit: @dbostedo beat me to it.

And we are generally taking about exposure above tree line here. In CO, lifts protected by trees (lower wind exposure) are typically detachable, and the high alpine lifts never are because of the wind they take. It would relegate those lifts to fair weather use.

And that’s the question on 6. It’s a short chair, but it’s a cold ride in bad weather and it has a lot of cross wind exposure. It’s kinda like Ptarmigan. That chair is downright tropical on the lower half until you clear tree line, and then you get strafed for the second half. It’s a super obvious HSQ for the terrain it serves, unless you want mid-mountain on wind hold regularly.