Page 27 of 31 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... LastLast
Results 391 to 405 of 453
  1. #391
    Quote Originally Posted by Orca View Post
    My understanding is that modern high-speed detachables are designed and installed to be much more tolerant to high winds. The lifts have more sophisticated sensors with auto-slow and auto-stop functions and, depending on design, heavier chairs and lower towers. There is some interesting information and links to various chairlift videos at: http://www.skilifts.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=9793. A liftie speaks and has a video of running the Snowmass Villiage Express (VX) in winds up to 60 mph.
    Regardless, none of the upper mtn lifts warrant the capacity of a hsq. They are significantly more expensive than the fixed grip. And since they serve limited terrain, the trails couldn't handle that amount of traffic. I can see hg being replaced with a quad but that's about it.


  2. #392

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    waiting for winter :(
    Posts
    156
    A quad on HG would be a big improvement especially if it went up a little further so everyone didn't have to skate up the hill.

  3. #393
    Because the last two posts specifically advocated a fixed-grip quad on HG, I want to try to clear up a misconception about lift capacities. Performance of lifts is primarily measured in two ways: (1) uphill capacity and (2) transit time. Now, everyone knows that a detachable high-speed lift has a shorter transit time than a fixed-grip; that is easily noticed by comparing the ride times. Perhaps unintuitively however, uphill capacity is not significantly more on a detachable than on a fixed-grip, something that is easily shown using a simple calculation. In order to compute uphill capacity, one merely counts the number of seconds between loading chairs and then performs some simple math. For example, Super Bravo chairs load every about every six seconds, which is 10 chairs per minute or equivalently 600 chairs per hour. 600 chairs each carrying a maximum load of 4 people means a maximum uphill capacity of 2400 skiers per hour. (Of course the maximum capacity neglects partially full chairs, stoppage, etc.) The interesting thing is that a fixed-grip with the maximum density of chairs on the rope loads people at about every 6 seconds also. That means that the throughput calculation is exactly the same for a fixed-grip quad with a 6 second interval: 2400 skiers per hour. It turns out that the capacity of a lift is not at all dependent on the rope speed, but merely on the load rate. What limits the load rate is how fast people can get into position to be picked up by the chair. Now, to be precise you have to get the chair interval timed right (not just counting in your head like I do). You might find high-speed lifts have more like 5.5 second chair intervals and dense fixed-grips might have a 6.5 interval, so there might be a slight increase in uphill capacity for the detachable because they are marginally easier to load. But to first order, the uphill capacity of a high-speed detachable quad is the same as a closely-spaced fixed-grip quad.
    Last edited by Orca; 04-13-2014 at 08:51 AM.

  4. #394
    Quote Originally Posted by angler View Post
    A quad on HG would be a big improvement especially if it went up a little further so everyone didn't have to skate up the hill.
    I think the reason the lift does not go all the way up is so there are less wind holds. The top of the mountain blocks the wind


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  5. #395

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    behind plow
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by Benski View Post
    I think the reason the lift does not go all the way up is so there are less wind holds. The top of the mountain blocks the wind
    What I remember , it was in the Forest service permit...that when the Gondi was replaced...the foundation had to go and the HG could not end on the summit. I think it was more about blasting, erosion and regrowth.

    OT........how about adding a few more bartender's on a busy sunny sat. Felt sorry for the CR Pub guy's......did what they could, but it was a major cluster.............!!!!!!

  6. #396
    Quote Originally Posted by Plowboy View Post
    OT........how about adding a few more bartender's on a busy sunny sat. Felt sorry for the CR Pub guy's......did what they could, but it was a major cluster.............!!!!!!
    Again. money left on the table through poor design. I still believe the whole base area was "designed" on a paper napkin over a bottle of scotch late at night. The CRP is the most poorly conceived ski bar in the history of American Ski Areas, don't fotget what it was before the "addition". Glad we set up on the hill and stayed away from the basement.

  7. #397
    Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Just ahead of you in the woods....
    Posts
    1,823
    I think that the bartenders like it that way and the decision has been made with their input. Another Bartender would mean another person to split the tips. Just a casual observation. Nothing to back that up.
    Trouble with you is the trouble with me,
    Got two good eyes but we still don’t see!

  8. #398
    gostan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    West Of Boston
    Posts
    503
    I have always detested the Design of the CRP. I employ several architects in our real estate development business and they each have various expertise. I would not hire any of our architects to design a bar and pub. Whoever designed the CRP never should have been hired. I used to go in peace to the bar at Timbers for real glasses for my beers and booze, but the days of walking in and scooping up a bar seat are few and far between with the huge influx of skiers and families, etc.
    Stan

    "There's No Cure For Life"

  9. #399

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    behind plow
    Posts
    418
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    I think that the bartenders like it that way and the decision has been made with their input. Another Bartender would mean another person to split the tips. Just a casual observation. Nothing to back that up.
    Yes, after discussing this with some friends yesterday, that was the same conclusion we came up with!!!!! A service bartender and 2 bartenders would work much better. A tub of retro beers out front????

  10. #400

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    waiting for winter :(
    Posts
    156
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawk View Post
    I think that the bartenders like it that way and the decision has been made with their input. Another Bartender would mean another person to split the tips. Just a casual observation. Nothing to back that up.
    One might think if you had another bartender you would increase sales which in turn would increase tips. Not to mention better service.

  11. #401
    Hawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Just ahead of you in the woods....
    Posts
    1,823
    Quote Originally Posted by angler View Post
    One might think if you had another bartender you would increase sales which in turn would increase tips. Not to mention better service.
    Dude, who said that you could use logic. Don't cloud the issues with logic. Geeze!

    I really don't know what they are thinking. It would make total sense. This is one area of operations that I do not have lots of friends working for the mountain so I really do not have an informed opinion
    Trouble with you is the trouble with me,
    Got two good eyes but we still don’t see!

  12. #402
    Quote Originally Posted by angler View Post
    One might think if you had another bartender you would increase sales which in turn would increase tips. Not to mention better service.
    But the bar tenders would have to split those tips. you would need double the tips to make it a good move for the bar tender.
    Last edited by Benski; 04-14-2014 at 09:57 PM.

  13. #403
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Behind That Tree
    Posts
    1,627
    Quote Originally Posted by gostan View Post
    I have always detested the Design of the CRP. I employ several architects in our real estate development business and they each have various expertise. I would not hire any of our architects to design a bar and pub. Whoever designed the CRP never should have been hired. I used to go in peace to the bar at Timbers for real glasses for my beers and booze, but the days of walking in and scooping up a bar seat are few and far between with the huge influx of skiers and families, etc.
    Amen. It never ceases to amaze me how the new GH lodge is 2x the size of the building it replaced yet seems to hold 1/2 the people.

    Going down to the CRP reminds me of pounding beers in an overcrowded basement in high school. No thanks.

  14. #404
    I think there are significant more people now plus i think the majority of the seats in the valley house are empty. I think if the valley house and the gate house were equaly as crowded, the lodges would not be packed. Maby the valley house should serve something other than lesser versions of gate house food.

  15. #405
    Well, I guess we all agree that CRP leaves much to be desired. I'd suggest leaving the annex as is, but replacing several of the large tables in the middle of the room with smaller and taller tables with tall stools (much as was done in Timbers). That should provide more practical seating and improve flow. Thankfully, Henri's bar is well engineered.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Ski Gear | Snowboard Gear | Cycling Gear | Camping/Hiking Gear | Ski & Snowboard Racks | Gear Outlet | Men's Clothing | Women's Clothing | Kids' Clothing

Ski Vermont | Whiteface / Gore Message Boards