Interconnect

[rogman]

The topography between Ramshead and Pico pond is a little weird due to the presence of Little Pico. The lift from the pond to Ramshead may need to go to the top of Ramshead to deal with it. The trails off the top of Pico down to the pond should be pretty gnarly. Terrain looks steep.

I heard that Les Otten was originally going to put in 4 lifts, but Act 250 made him dial it back.

[Guy in Shorts]

Skied those trees down to Pico Pond. Pretty much blue tree runs in that basin.

[rogman]

Skied those trees down to Pico Pond. Pretty much blue tree runs in that basin.

From the Ramshead side, yes. From Pico, not so much. Topo shows it to be steep.

[Downdraft]

Keep dreaming. This is not ever going to happen

[rogman]

denial.png (205.45 KiB) Viewed 822 times

Kzone, over and over: the Bubble, Southridge, the Village, and the Interconnect.

[Danielek74]

The interconnect is happening. With Great Gulf involved you'll be seeing an announcement sometime this year with an official time line.

[newpylong1]

In many businesses it’s great to be able to offer different price points and value propositions. Pico and Killington attract different customers. This is likely a good business model for the company. I’m positive there are many folks with Pico passes that would not buy a Killington pass. So serving those customers represents a win that would potentially be lost with the interconnect.

How many new Killington customers would be gained with the addition of the interconnect? I can buy that the buzz would be some sort of marketing win in the short term. I do not think it makes any difference at all in the marketability of the village in that the demand is already there. No one is going to decide to buy vs not buy or pay more because of the interconnect. The value at Killington is already fully established. So I do not see any meaningful increase in revenue that would be achieved for the village developer. And even if there was some gain, Killington is not the developer selling the village. It’s not like other mountains where the ski area totally owns the Realestate that is being sold and wants to spend to sell Realestate.

On the cost/feasibility side there are many problems with the interconnect build. As it is, the summit quad at Pico frequently does not run due to wind and the difficulty of getting it going in a powder day. Recently it did not run for over a week due to a mechanical failure followed by the big storm we had. A lift from the bottom to the summit would have the same problem and would be very expensive. What happens when the summit lift goes down and strands people on the Pico side? It’s a single point of failure with no opportunity for a redundant lift since the summit of pico is not large enough to support a second lift. Ive seen lots of discussion regarding the need for redundant fixed grips. Pico does not have this.

The existing lift is a HSQ and seems entirely adequate given that it’s not uncommon for there only to be one trail open from the summit (49r). 49r is not a reasonable gateway between the two areas as it’s steaper than a typical intermediate trail in several places and can be extremely icy. No doubt Okemo, for example, would label it a black. There is no way a beginner family can park at Pico and ski across back from K at the end of the day down 49r. Honestly, there are days that I would not want to do it lol. So the only answer would be to flatten, widen and turn summit glade and sunset schuss and the bottom of C slope into the gateway. Summit glade is easily the best natural intermediate bump run of the entire K/P complex. Sunset is the remaining piece of the original trial from the summit prior to lift access and as such should be almost as revered and preserved as the Mt Greylock Thunderbolt trail. If it were a building it would be a candidate for the national registry of historic places given its relevance to the history of skiing in this country.

But further to this, the sheer investment in snowmaking would be astronomical. The summit glade sunset trail area has no snowmaking nor does the interconnect itself. For those who have never skied it, it’s similar to great northern. It’s another very long wide connecting trail to try to get up and running early season in order to make the connection open say by Xmas. Add to that it’s east, south east exposure making it worse. And then the tens of millions it would cost for additional lifts. Pico barely makes it open by Christmas and barely makes it to April 1st. There was a recent year prior to Covid that pico opened on 1/6 and closed on 3/15. Due to lack of snowmaking on the summit trails only 49r, KA and Pike can even open with no natural snow. Outpost has no snowmaking. I think snowmaking on Knomes knoll has not run in years. It’s often late january - early February before Pike (under the summit quad) and Expressway/panhandler (under the golden lift) see any snowmaking and that requires a lot of dragging old guns to make very wet snow. It’s clear the system is antiquated. I have no inside knowledge but the addition of water lines over the interconnect to support Pico snowmaking seemed to me to be a “keep the lights on” type of investment. I’m sure the extensive racing needs for snow making by the Pico ski club it a factor as Pico had become so water starved that there were several times a year when no additional snowmaking was even possible to open more trails because the pond was empty. It was normal to see the whole pond get drained to open B slope after fools gold, lower pike. That left the rest of the mountain waiting for the pond to fill back up before anything else could open. I believe the mountain is currently air starved, just by my non-scientific observation. It seems either a big stretch or impossible to blow on both the top and bottom trails in any meaningful way at the same time.

If there is no significant uptick in revenue to be gained from
The interconnect, and the cost is astronomical, and there is a significant risk in losing the existing Pico customers due to the loss of the lower price point offering, and the sheer challenge of the single point of failure with a lift issue stranding countless people on the wrong side of the pass as well as other operational challenges, where is the ROI that makes this hair-brained idea feasible?

I think a lot of people who don’t ski Pico think it would be cool if Killington were bigger and sort of envision adding Oico like another peak in the existing complex. But Pico is quite a bit further away from K than it may seem. It’s really not just over the next little ridge like the others. And it has a completely different vibe, customer base etc. I suggest those who don’t ski it often and who have a strong Pro-interconnect opinion, might want to invest some time in understanding what would be lost if the connect happened.

Knomes gets snowmaking every year and Outpost has snowmaking (Bronco and Thataway) they just don't use it since racing was moved to Little Pico. Upper Sunset 71 also gets snowmaking many years. Giant Killer used to but it hasn't been used since the Poma was removed.

The slow trail rollout at Pico at this point is a business, not technical decision. If it ever connects to Killington and becomes 7 days, things will be dialed up a notch.

[skiadikt]

just don't see the roi for the interconnect which be huge for the lifts and requisite snowmaking equipment. then add the daily operating expenses to run the lifts daily. killington doesn't run a number of lifts mon-thurs as it is. now you're asking them to run pico 7 days in addition to the interconnect lifts. again a significant expenditure. and of course the expense of making snow on the interconnect trails. killington doesn't finish with trail expansion until february as it is.

and don't see it moving the needle on skier visits significantly. build it and they will come isn't valid here. it's not like folks are sitting around saying i'll ski killington once they open the interconnect. most of tourons who come here are overwhelmed as it is.

finally the commute will be hell. if you start over at bear, you could spend the better of an hour getting to pico.

only circumstance where i can see the interconnect happening is if the village creates the demand and increases skier days to such an extent making the interconnect necessary.

[rogman]

finally the commute will be hell. if you start over at bear, you could spend the better of an hour getting to pico.

This is not the disadvantage you think it is. It is key to making Killington an Eastern destination resort. I know, on the face of it, an oxymoron.

[Skivt2]

And good luck getting from K to P with the summit quad on wind hold which happens frequently. Anyone here ski Pico more then me? I have averaged about 70 days a year since before 2010.

[newpylong1]

Comparing a 1980s Yan quad to a 6 pack with chairs that are double the weight is not a good indicator of wind susceptibility.

[Skivt2]

Let’s see….I remember the snowshed cross over. Very dangerous crossing trail. Had to have extensive work arounds to deal with the safety issue. How about the easy street/KA intersection? That’s just one issue with putting K crowds on Pico. And what about that poor beginner family that parked at P and skied to K. I’m sure they have no problem navigating upper 49r with it’s typical boilerplate ice late Saturday afternoon.

[daytripper]

Doesn't matter if you like it or not, it's happening.

[Bubba]

Let’s see….I remember the snowshed cross over. Very dangerous crossing trail. Had to have extensive work arounds to deal with the safety issue. How about the easy street/KA intersection? That’s just one issue with putting K crowds on Pico. And what about that poor beginner family that parked at P and skied to K. I’m sure they have no problem navigating upper 49r with it’s typical boilerplate ice late Saturday afternoon.

Perhaps it’s time to stop thinking of K management as totally clueless about how they operate and design terrain? They know where the problem areas are and have been trying to fix them. Do they get it right every time? No, but to think they’ll just recreate past errors is kinda mind boggling isn’t it?

[skiadikt]

still would be very surprised if they build the interconnect concurrently w the village. the cost of building the interconnect and operating it daily is well beyond the current skier-day visit level. as it stands, they close pico 2 days a week and a number of lifts at K (and pico) during the week. in addition the overall snowmaking facility would need to be upgraded to support the increased capacity necessary to support the expansion. they'd have to be assured of a significant increase in visits before any ground is broken. build it and they will come is not necessarily a successful business model.