Moderators: SkiDork, spanky, Bubba
hey tom - please do what you can NOT to implement this.Highway Star wrote:So yes, I am taking partial credit for this specific idea, or at least the re-starting of the idea/concept. [/b]
Oh, don't get me wrong, I think it's a reasonably good idea......and much better than nothing.newpylong wrote:Regardless of who came up with the idea the South Ridge to summit idea makes the most sense to me. Whether you want to call it a "beginner" lift or a access lift, it really doesn't matter. Once you are the peak after taking K1 you would ski the South Ridge area and return to K1 via this new lift. Or, you could wrap around and ski the Glades, and when you are ready to return, take High Traverse back to this lift. Going the other way (South Ridge to Downdraft side of GN) is far more difficult. This lift would require minimal changes to terrain as opposed to something on the other side of K1. There isn't even a spot to put another lift terminal at the peak. Blasting anyone? It just won't happen. Might as well put a relatively short and FLAT lift on the South Ridge side that provides the best of both worlds. Loading at the SR midstation would be great as well.....
Look at Google earth and get back to us on that.......won't work because the old gondi line is relatively flat below the top of south ridge and way above (elevation wise) the south ridge midstation.skiadikt wrote:i'm thinking that perhaps this lift could follow the old gondi line to a point parallel to the south ridge mid station and provide access to skiing upper pipedream. i don't think it should be an access only lift. if they're gonna do this and provide skiing for beginners i don't think we need to have 4 lifts running. it should be set up so the south ridge triple is not part of the early season plan and you'd only have to run 3 lifts.
I don't know if you're a Google dork like myself, but this might interest you:Highway Star wrote:Look at Google earth and get back to us on that
GoogleUniverse on the way soon?XtremeJibber2001 wrote:I don't know if you're a Google dork like myself, but this might interest you:Highway Star wrote:Look at Google earth and get back to us on that
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/space/01/0 ... index.html
I take back what I said earlier. Feel free to waste more bandwidth entertaining the troops.Highway Star wrote:You would never admit my origination of the idea regardless of the facts.
Another self-serving, self-delusional comment to feed an obvious need to justify your semi-pathetic on-line persona. Just because you're an arrogant jackass on-line doesn't mean I wouldn't acknowledge you if you had the facts. It also doesn't mean I wouldn't like you in person even if you do wear Texas stretch pants when you ski.
1. If you had actually heard about this idea previously, why didn't you say something in the numerous previous threads about this......it only comes out now. So you must have heard about it recently.
I did, unfortunately, among all your other ravingly arrogant posts you must've missed it. Too bad.
2. Spinmaster is pretty well up to date on any expansion plans that are being considered. Also, when they were trying to get open in November, numerous options were being considered. If a lift from South Ridge to the peak lodge had been considered previously, such as in the fall prior to opening, he would have known about it. However, when I mentioned it, he said it was a new (original) idea.
And you think he's going to tell you everything he knows, assuming he knows it in the first place? Why should he tell you when his boss has already indicated here that they're working on stuff but they don't want to go public with anything because they'd rather under-promise and over-deliver rather than set themselves up for customers being disappointed if things don't work out. Your arrogance knows few bounds.
What had been discussed previously (and this is where I think you are confused), was the general concept of running a lift to the summit to offer early season skiing - this was proposed by the Snow Engineering consultants they had come in this summer.
This interpretation of the plan is not exactly as I proposed - I had suggested a lift going from further down south ridge on pipe dream, to the summit lodge - as a beginner lift, not just an access lift. But there would be nowhere reasonable to put it. Putting in a lift from near the top of south ridge to the summit for access only, while using the top half of south ridge as intended, is an evolution of the idea.
The concept of early season beginner skiing on upper pipe dream off the south ridge chair was also discussed, and that was not an orignal concept.....but the original intent of the lift.
Bubba, that's an exciting and doable plan, but has anyone at ASC bought into this?Bubba wrote:... here's the one I understand (strictly through the rumor mill) that's getting at some consideration - a short lift from the top of South Ridge (or thereabouts) up to the peak. It's a very short vertical distance and doesn't require much investment, yet it opens the whole upper mountain from the peak to the Glades triple and from the peak to the South Ridge triple midstation to early and late season skiing for beginners (Pipe Dream on South Ridge) as well as advanced down to the Glades. It also makes it easier to expand as the weather gets colder by blowing down to the Canyon quad, then expanding down to KBL.
My statements stand for themselves....you're only trying to somehow convince yourself that I couldn't have possibly proposed something that Killington took and might be moving forward with. If you have indeed posted this idea before, please direct us to the thread/post. Thanks!Bubba wrote:I take back what I said earlier. Feel free to waste more bandwidth entertaining the troops.Highway Star wrote:
Another self-serving, self-delusional comment to feed an obvious need to justify your semi-pathetic on-line persona. Just because you're an arrogant jackass on-line doesn't mean I wouldn't acknowledge you if you had the facts. It also doesn't mean I wouldn't like you in person even if you do wear Texas stretch pants when you ski.
1. If you had actually heard about this idea previously, why didn't you say something in the numerous previous threads about this......it only comes out now. So you must have heard about it recently.
I did, unfortunately, among all your other ravingly arrogant posts you must've missed it. Too bad.
2. Spinmaster is pretty well up to date on any expansion plans that are being considered. Also, when they were trying to get open in November, numerous options were being considered. If a lift from South Ridge to the peak lodge had been considered previously, such as in the fall prior to opening, he would have known about it. However, when I mentioned it, he said it was a new (original) idea.
And you think he's going to tell you everything he knows, assuming he knows it in the first place? Why should he tell you when his boss has already indicated here that they're working on stuff but they don't want to go public with anything because they'd rather under-promise and over-deliver rather than set themselves up for customers being disappointed if things don't work out. Your arrogance knows few bounds.
What had been discussed previously (and this is where I think you are confused), was the general concept of running a lift to the summit to offer early season skiing - this was proposed by the Snow Engineering consultants they had come in this summer.
This interpretation of the plan is not exactly as I proposed - I had suggested a lift going from further down south ridge on pipe dream, to the summit lodge - as a beginner lift, not just an access lift. But there would be nowhere reasonable to put it. Putting in a lift from near the top of south ridge to the summit for access only, while using the top half of south ridge as intended, is an evolution of the idea.
The concept of early season beginner skiing on upper pipe dream off the south ridge chair was also discussed, and that was not an orignal concept.....but the original intent of the lift.
LOL...OK....you can take partial credit. Otherwise I fear your evening will be ruined.Highway Star wrote:My statements stand for themselves....you're only trying to somehow convince yourself that I couldn't have possibly proposed something that Killington took and might be moving forward with. If you have indeed posted this idea before, please direct us to the thread/post. Thanks!Bubba wrote:I take back what I said earlier. Feel free to waste more bandwidth entertaining the troops.Highway Star wrote:
Another self-serving, self-delusional comment to feed an obvious need to justify your semi-pathetic on-line persona. Just because you're an arrogant jackass on-line doesn't mean I wouldn't acknowledge you if you had the facts. It also doesn't mean I wouldn't like you in person even if you do wear Texas stretch pants when you ski.
1. If you had actually heard about this idea previously, why didn't you say something in the numerous previous threads about this......it only comes out now. So you must have heard about it recently.
I did, unfortunately, among all your other ravingly arrogant posts you must've missed it. Too bad.
2. Spinmaster is pretty well up to date on any expansion plans that are being considered. Also, when they were trying to get open in November, numerous options were being considered. If a lift from South Ridge to the peak lodge had been considered previously, such as in the fall prior to opening, he would have known about it. However, when I mentioned it, he said it was a new (original) idea.
And you think he's going to tell you everything he knows, assuming he knows it in the first place? Why should he tell you when his boss has already indicated here that they're working on stuff but they don't want to go public with anything because they'd rather under-promise and over-deliver rather than set themselves up for customers being disappointed if things don't work out. Your arrogance knows few bounds.
What had been discussed previously (and this is where I think you are confused), was the general concept of running a lift to the summit to offer early season skiing - this was proposed by the Snow Engineering consultants they had come in this summer.
This interpretation of the plan is not exactly as I proposed - I had suggested a lift going from further down south ridge on pipe dream, to the summit lodge - as a beginner lift, not just an access lift. But there would be nowhere reasonable to put it. Putting in a lift from near the top of south ridge to the summit for access only, while using the top half of south ridge as intended, is an evolution of the idea.
The concept of early season beginner skiing on upper pipe dream off the south ridge chair was also discussed, and that was not an orignal concept.....but the original intent of the lift.
Until Spinmaster comes on here and tells us there was another, earlier originator of this concept within Killington, I'm taking partial credit - because when I proposed the general idea, it was new to him (and as far as I know, to Killington).
Oh, I don't see why you have to continue to abuse and insult me, it's pretty lame. Perhaps you should show up for my next freeskiing clinic, and we can see what's up, for real.
So yes, I TAKE IT BACK!!!!! I NO LONGER TAKE ANY CREDIT FOR THIS IDEA, AS IT DID NOT ORIGINATE WITH ME OR ANYTHING I PROPOSED.Think about an easy way to return to early season, lift served skiing. Put a short chair of some kind from the top of South Ridge to the peak so people can get up to the gondi to ride down. One short chair (which won't cost that much) in that spot would allow uploading on the K-1, beginner skiing on the upper part of South Ridge (down to the midstation) and more advance skiing/riding all the way around to the Glades. To get back to the K-1 to download, use High Traverse to go from the top of the Glades back over to South Ridge, use the new chair to get back to the peak, then ride the K-1 down. The alternative, if it could be done, is simply to extend the South Ridge chair to the peak. Either way, the South Ridge midstation would allow early season beginner skiing which, because it would be the only early season skiing in the east, would provide more than adequate ROI IMO to justify the expense. It would also change the buzz around here from negative to positive in a heartbeat.
?