About 3 weeks to World Cup course pre-inspection.....

[skiadikt]

Despite the brief warmup, the mood is celebratory here at The Beast where we received final confirmation from the FIS on Wednesday that the snow surface on Superstar will be ready to host the Xfinity Killington Cup on Thanksgiving weekend.

to virtually no one's surprise...

and to highway star's disappointment ...

[da Pimp]

This is great news, two years in a row staging a word cup event early season. Huge man hour and capital investment, plus a heavy dose of snowmaking savvy. A tip of my helmet to K Ops.

So - it makes me wonder - if there was no world cup to prepare for - would it be financially possible to spread out a lot of that effort across the hill? Since the trails will get an investment of snowmaking anyways, and weather windows can be narrow or marginal early season, I wonder what might be possible for Thanksgiving and early December target dates if K committed to making A REAL LOT of snow whenever those weather windows allowed. Yes, they make good snow in North Ridge but think about the possibilities untapped for the rest of the hill.

If there was no world cup this year, would it cost the same or less to cover two top to bottoms on Snowdon, Skye Lark and Bitterswet on Skye, Snowshed, and the usual North Ridge and Peak routes? Those trails will get X hours of open-the-trail snowmaking anyway. Might as well blow things wide open and make a marketing coup. It seems like K works a very cautionary early season plan and does not truly take advantage of their altitude and snowmaking capacities. Obviously with the ups & downs of November weather they have accomplished tremendous things two years in a row. When people sees how much is open and how good it is, the reservations for Xmas, MLK and Pres week will jump up as well as all the standard weekends. If Mt. Snow can cover a lot more acreage and open it, why not here? I have people in my Ct ski club buzzing about Mt. Snow right now, making them a preferred choice for Nov/Dec. What are they saying about Killington? Their perception this month is less trails to ski on, less snowmaking in use for the public, and that killer walk back up. Not one but three negative reasons. K has lost their competitive advantage, and its a shorter drive for much of New England to Mt. Snow. Personally I rarely ski Mt Snow or Okemo any more, but I am in the small minority with my Ct skiing peers.

Sure there are factors like the FIS contribution to snowmaking, but since there would not be a demand for huge deep base depths with 100 guns roaring on one trail I think the costs would be contained within traditional budgets. Yes there is a risk of a melt down but that becomes less and less likely as December progresses. And don't forget that it still snows in Vermont, too.

[skiadikt]

This is great news, two years in a row staging a word cup event early season. Huge man hour and capital investment, plus a heavy dose of snowmaking savvy. A tip of my helmet to K Ops.

So - it makes me wonder - if there was no world cup to prepare for - would it be financially possible to spread out a lot of that effort across the hill? Since the trails will get an investment of snowmaking anyways, and weather windows can be narrow or marginal early season, I wonder what might be possible for Thanksgiving and early December target dates if K committed to making A REAL LOT of snow whenever those weather windows allowed. Yes, they make good snow in North Ridge but think about the possibilities untapped for the rest of the hill.

If there was no world cup this year, would it cost the same or less to cover two top to bottoms on Snowdon, Skye Lark and Bitterswet on Skye, Snowshed, and the usual North Ridge and Peak routes? Those trails will get X hours of open-the-trail snowmaking anyway. Might as well blow things wide open and make a marketing coup. It seems like K works a very cautionary early season plan and does not truly take advantage of their altitude and snowmaking capacities. Obviously with the ups & downs of November weather they have accomplished tremendous things two years in a row. When people sees how much is open and how good it is, the reservations for Xmas, MLK and Pres week will jump up as well as all the standard weekends. If Mt. Snow can cover a lot more acreage and open it, why not here? I have people in my Ct ski club buzzing about Mt. Snow right now, making them a preferred choice for Nov/Dec. What are they saying about Killington? Their perception this month is less trails to ski on, less snowmaking in use for the public, and that killer walk back up. Not one but three negative reasons. K has lost their competitive advantage, and its a shorter drive for much of New England to Mt. Snow. Personally I rarely ski Mt Snow or Okemo any more, but I am in the small minority with my Ct skiing peers.

Sure there are factors like the FIS contribution to snowmaking, but since there would not be a demand for huge deep base depths with 100 guns roaring on one trail I think the costs would be contained within traditional budgets. Yes there is a risk of a melt down but that becomes less and less likely as December progresses. And don't forget that it still snows in Vermont, too.

the good news is that by the weekend after the world cup, we'll catch up in a hurry and those trails will be ours. expansion should be rapid before they send back the additional compressors. would be cool in the future if they rented an additional compressor or two for early season.

[alanlw9]

Obviously the great temps we've had have gone away, but now that the WC has the green light, wouldn't you expect an all out blitz on the rest of the mountain to expand terrain as much/soon as possible (before the WC)?

The WC trail is pretty, but not open to the public. It might be hard for WC travelers to justify ~$90-100 for 10 "trails" of which 1 is TTB...

If the WC is run at a loss, and people are buying day passes to other mountains with more open terrain, what is the real WIN for Killington?

I understand they may be able to expand faster later, but will they have lost the advantage of holiday bookings to resorts that expanded terrain before them ex. all the buzz around Mt. Snow?

[rogman]

Congrats to Killington and Mountain Ops for a job well done. It's a major coup; and kudos for pulling it off despite the persistently warm late fall environment.

I have been asking this question for quite a while: does it make sense to increase water pumping capacity up the hill to take advantage of brief cold snaps when they present themselves? You need a lot less air, so you can make more snow at the same cost. Killington has shown a willingness to spend a ton of money on low E to reduce the amount of air they use in a season. Wouldn't it make sense to up pumping capacity so they can better take advantage of snow making windows when they need less air? It would have the same effect. Perhaps they've done this already? As far as I know, their water capacity hasn't changed in 15 or 20 years.

[Highway Star]

This is great news, two years in a row staging a word cup event early season. Huge man hour and capital investment, plus a heavy dose of snowmaking savvy. A tip of my helmet to K Ops.

So - it makes me wonder - if there was no world cup to prepare for - would it be financially possible to spread out a lot of that effort across the hill? Since the trails will get an investment of snowmaking anyways, and weather windows can be narrow or marginal early season, I wonder what might be possible for Thanksgiving and early December target dates if K committed to making A REAL LOT of snow whenever those weather windows allowed. Yes, they make good snow in North Ridge but think about the possibilities untapped for the rest of the hill.

If there was no world cup this year, would it cost the same or less to cover two top to bottoms on Snowdon, Skye Lark and Bitterswet on Skye, Snowshed, and the usual North Ridge and Peak routes? Those trails will get X hours of open-the-trail snowmaking anyway. Might as well blow things wide open and make a marketing coup. It seems like K works a very cautionary early season plan and does not truly take advantage of their altitude and snowmaking capacities. Obviously with the ups & downs of November weather they have accomplished tremendous things two years in a row. When people sees how much is open and how good it is, the reservations for Xmas, MLK and Pres week will jump up as well as all the standard weekends. If Mt. Snow can cover a lot more acreage and open it, why not here? I have people in my Ct ski club buzzing about Mt. Snow right now, making them a preferred choice for Nov/Dec. What are they saying about Killington? Their perception this month is less trails to ski on, less snowmaking in use for the public, and that killer walk back up. Not one but three negative reasons. K has lost their competitive advantage, and its a shorter drive for much of New England to Mt. Snow. Personally I rarely ski Mt Snow or Okemo any more, but I am in the small minority with my Ct skiing peers.

Sure there are factors like the FIS contribution to snowmaking, but since there would not be a demand for huge deep base depths with 100 guns roaring on one trail I think the costs would be contained within traditional budgets. Yes there is a risk of a melt down but that becomes less and less likely as December progresses. And don't forget that it still snows in Vermont, too.

The World Cup is overall a major loser for the vast majority of Killington's customer base. It hurts the skiing product.

[Stormchaser]

Congrats to Killington and Mountain Ops for a job well done. It's a major coup; and kudos for pulling it off despite the persistently warm late fall environment.

I have been asking this question for quite a while: does it make sense to increase water pumping capacity up the hill to take advantage of brief cold snaps when they present themselves? You need a lot less air, so you can make more snow at the same cost. Killington has shown a willingness to spend a ton of money on low E to reduce the amount of air they use in a season. Wouldn't it make sense to up pumping capacity so they can better take advantage of snow making windows when they need less air? It would have the same effect. Perhaps they've done this already? As far as I know, their water capacity hasn't changed in 15 or 20 years.

I remember a discussion a few years back about increasing pump efficiency up the hill by eliminating and reducing losses, but not directly increasing pump or pipe capacity.

[Bubba]

Soooooooooo...........yeah. About that.................

Soooooooooo...........yeah. About that................. Right again.....

[Stormchaser]

This is great news, two years in a row staging a word cup event early season. Huge man hour and capital investment, plus a heavy dose of snowmaking savvy. A tip of my helmet to K Ops.

So - it makes me wonder - if there was no world cup to prepare for - would it be financially possible to spread out a lot of that effort across the hill? Since the trails will get an investment of snowmaking anyways, and weather windows can be narrow or marginal early season, I wonder what might be possible for Thanksgiving and early December target dates if K committed to making A REAL LOT of snow whenever those weather windows allowed. Yes, they make good snow in North Ridge but think about the possibilities untapped for the rest of the hill.

If there was no world cup this year, would it cost the same or less to cover two top to bottoms on Snowdon, Skye Lark and Bitterswet on Skye, Snowshed, and the usual North Ridge and Peak routes? Those trails will get X hours of open-the-trail snowmaking anyway. Might as well blow things wide open and make a marketing coup. It seems like K works a very cautionary early season plan and does not truly take advantage of their altitude and snowmaking capacities. Obviously with the ups & downs of November weather they have accomplished tremendous things two years in a row. When people sees how much is open and how good it is, the reservations for Xmas, MLK and Pres week will jump up as well as all the standard weekends. If Mt. Snow can cover a lot more acreage and open it, why not here? I have people in my Ct ski club buzzing about Mt. Snow right now, making them a preferred choice for Nov/Dec. What are they saying about Killington? Their perception this month is less trails to ski on, less snowmaking in use for the public, and that killer walk back up. Not one but three negative reasons. K has lost their competitive advantage, and its a shorter drive for much of New England to Mt. Snow. Personally I rarely ski Mt Snow or Okemo any more, but I am in the small minority with my Ct skiing peers.

Sure there are factors like the FIS contribution to snowmaking, but since there would not be a demand for huge deep base depths with 100 guns roaring on one trail I think the costs would be contained within traditional budgets. Yes there is a risk of a melt down but that becomes less and less likely as December progresses. And don't forget that it still snows in Vermont, too.

The World Cup is overall a major loser for the vast majority of Killington's customer base. It hurts the skiing product.

Pot, meet Kettle...

[DrJeff]

Congrats to Killington and Mountain Ops for a job well done. It's a major coup; and kudos for pulling it off despite the persistently warm late fall environment.

I have been asking this question for quite a while: does it make sense to increase water pumping capacity up the hill to take advantage of brief cold snaps when they present themselves? You need a lot less air, so you can make more snow at the same cost. Killington has shown a willingness to spend a ton of money on low E to reduce the amount of air they use in a season. Wouldn't it make sense to up pumping capacity so they can better take advantage of snow making windows when they need less air? It would have the same effect. Perhaps they've done this already? As far as I know, their water capacity hasn't changed in 15 or 20 years.

My hunch is that with what Mount Snow was able to do, and the fact that they, per posted numbers on both Killington's and Mount Snow's part, can pump about the same amount of water now, that an upgrade on K's part in their pumping ability may very well be in the not too distant future.

Heck, anytime one resort makes upgrades to up the ante a bit, we all tend to win as eventually others will follow and/or raise the bar even higher. Additionally, with that air mass we had about a week ago, it was basically the PERFECT window of temps, humidity, and time for many resorts to be able to operate their systems at basically maximum efficiency and capacity which allowed them to quickly put some coverage down, and often on terrain with far less of a snow quantity demand as Superstar for a World Cup race requires, so that did in essence artificially skew the snowmaking results against K's crew last weekend as well.

Hands down though, hats off to the K snowmakers for what they've done thus far this season and historically as well!!

[Stormchaser]

Congrats to Killington and Mountain Ops for a job well done. It's a major coup; and kudos for pulling it off despite the persistently warm late fall environment.

I have been asking this question for quite a while: does it make sense to increase water pumping capacity up the hill to take advantage of brief cold snaps when they present themselves? You need a lot less air, so you can make more snow at the same cost. Killington has shown a willingness to spend a ton of money on low E to reduce the amount of air they use in a season. Wouldn't it make sense to up pumping capacity so they can better take advantage of snow making windows when they need less air? It would have the same effect. Perhaps they've done this already? As far as I know, their water capacity hasn't changed in 15 or 20 years.

My hunch is that with what Mount Snow was able to do, and the fact that they, per posted numbers on both Killington's and Mount Snow's part, can pump about the same amount of water now, that an upgrade on K's part in their pumping ability may very well be in the not too distant future.

Heck, anytime one resort makes upgrades to up the ante a bit, we all tend to win as eventually others will follow and/or raise the bar even higher. Additionally, with that air mass we had about a week ago, it was basically the PERFECT window of temps, humidity, and time for many resorts to be able to operate their systems at basically maximum efficiency and capacity which allowed them to quickly put some coverage down, and often on terrain with far less of a snow quantity demand as Superstar for a World Cup race requires, so that did in essence artificially skew the snowmaking results against K's crew last weekend as well.

Hands down though, hats off to the K snowmakers for what they've done thus far this season and historically as well!!

Competition is a good thing for the customer! Warm weather iced it...

[Dr. NO]

aren't there limitations on the Woodward draw down and the Bear and Grand ponds draw down level for fire safety? If they are near capacity on those factors they would have to re-negotiate the pumping systems and peak use of the water.

[skiadikt]

Obviously the great temps we've had have gone away, but now that the WC has the green light, wouldn't you expect an all out blitz on the rest of the mountain to expand terrain as much/soon as possible (before the WC)?

The WC trail is pretty, but not open to the public. It might be hard for WC travelers to justify ~$90-100 for 10 "trails" of which 1 is TTB...

If the WC is run at a loss, and people are buying day passes to other mountains with more open terrain, what is the real WIN for Killington?

I understand they may be able to expand faster later, but will they have lost the advantage of holiday bookings to resorts that expanded terrain before them ex. all the buzz around Mt. Snow?

i'm sure there'll be additional top-to-bottom skiing off the snowdon lifts for the holiday weekend. a longer shot includes possibly off ramshead as well. but even if the wc wasn't here, because of the layout k is at a natural disadvantage because there's of lot of connecting trail infrastructure that needs to be rolled out first. again k will catch up & surpass quickly.

while wc is run at a loss, holiday lodging is probably sold out. they're expecting crowds of 15-20k each day (probably more than a number of resorts in the east combined) and i'm sure the residual effect is that a lot of those folks will be skiing k later in the season. the buzz will be off the hook. successful businesses have to see the bigger picture. maybe a short term loss but an investment that will be paying off for many years to come.

[rogman]

aren't there limitations on the Woodward draw down and the Bear and Grand ponds draw down level for fire safety? If they are near capacity on those factors they would have to re-negotiate the pumping systems and peak use of the water.

Quick google search: Snowshed Pond is 7.2 acres and can be drawn down 12 feet. A rough back of the envelope calculation is thus
7.2 acres * 43560 sq ft/acre * 12 feet * 7.48 gallons/cubic foot = 28151608 gallons available
(28151608 gallons / 12000 gallons per minute) / 60 minutes per hour = ~40 hours water from the pond alone.

However the pond gets smaller as we draw down (the sides are not vertical like a swiming pool), so we'll call it somewhere around 36 hours (day and half) at 12000 gallons/minute.

So assuming that replenishment from Woodward is 12000/minute (a huge assumption) you could run considerably longer than 36 hours until you'd effectively sucked the pond dry. Let's say you double the draw down to 24000 gallons per minute. You're pumping water everywhere you can drag a hose to! Double the uphill capacity! You're pulling 24000 gal/minute, with a 12000 gal/minute refill. Snowmakers are running amok. You can still run for that day and half before you have to start thinking about backing off. Yeah, YMMV...

And another completely unproductive day is in the books...Sigh.

[Bubba]

aren't there limitations on the Woodward draw down and the Bear and Grand ponds draw down level for fire safety? If they are near capacity on those factors they would have to re-negotiate the pumping systems and peak use of the water.

Quick google search: Snowshed Pond is 7.2 acres and can be drawn down 12 feet. A rough back of the envelope calculation is thus
7.2 acres * 43560 sq ft/acre * 12 feet * 7.48 gallons/cubic foot = 28151608 gallons available
(28151608 gallons / 12000 gallons per minute) / 60 minutes per hour = ~40 hours water from the pond alone.

However the pond gets smaller as we draw down (the sides are not vertical like a swiming pool), so we'll call it somewhere around 36 hours (day and half) at 12000 gallons/minute.

So assuming that replenishment from Woodward is 12000/minute (a huge assumption) you could run considerably longer than 36 hours until you'd effectively sucked the pond dry. Let's say you double the draw down to 24000 gallons per minute. You're pumping water everywhere you can drag a hose to! Double the uphill capacity! You're pulling 24000 gal/minute, with a 12000 gal/minute refill. Snowmakers are running amok. You can still run for that day and half before you have to start thinking about backing off. Yeah, YMMV...

And another completely unproductive day is in the books...Sigh.

Not to worry. Highway Star will fill us all in on Killington's water capability with the insight of the ill informed.