North Ridge Quad

[spanky]

.. .. nobody should lose a pass for entering the Cathedral.
Moderate risk / High Reward

It was more than the cathedral. It was the entire lifeline.

[tyrolean_skier]

.. .. nobody should lose a pass for entering the Cathedral.
Moderate risk / High Reward

It was more than the cathedral. It was the entire lifeline.

Ambassadors call the K1 liftline Cathedral. A lot of us know Cathedral as a section of the trees.

[Dr. NO]

Cathedral was tower 12 of the peak chair. It is still there just modified.

[throbster]

Any idea how the loading area will be configured? There's not a lot of space, but hoping for an improvement from the previous set up.

[da Pimp]

If they fill all the quad chairs with people, there won't be a line. Geez, isn't that simple......

[Highway Star]

Any idea how the loading area will be configured?

They are aiming for a cross between a sardine can and sh*t show.

[daytripper]

If they fill all the quad chairs with people, there won't be a line. Geez, isn't that simple......

Opening weekend there will be a line.

[madhatter]

In order to keep crowds manageable the new north ridge chair will be passholders only until additional terrain is added to justify opening a second lift...

just kidding....

[snoloco]

From the 8/24 picture it appears the new towers are higher off the ground than the old so there won't be clearance issues with the sag. Also, hydraulically tensioned lifts don't sag as much as counterweight tensioned lifts (like the old triple was). I don't know if they'll be able to fit a groomer skier's left of the towers, but if not it just means more early season bumps, and the loss of width will be made up with by not having to block off the part under the cable sag.

[Mister Moose]

From the 8/24 picture it appears the new towers are higher off the ground than the old so there won't be clearance issues with the sag. Also, hydraulically tensioned lifts don't sag as much as counterweight tensioned lifts (like the old triple was). I don't know if they'll be able to fit a groomer skier's left of the towers, but if not it just means more early season bumps, and the loss of width will be made up with by not having to block off the part under the cable sag.

Isn't cable sag only an issue when the lift is loaded? And don't they groom at night?

[snoloco]

On the old lift when it was fully loaded, there was extreme cable sag between towers 6 and 7. This caused clearance issues so patrol had to rope off small section of the trail right under the lift. It's generally not a problem on newer lifts since engineering has improved so much since 1972. There should be sufficient ski under clearance on all portions of the route.

The new lift is also further to the middle of the trail than the old. With the old lift they couldn't groom on the skiers left side of the towers. I think it's possible they will be able to on the new lift, but if not there will be a wider bump line. The groomed width lost would be made up because they wouldn't have to rope off anything for clearance issues.

[skibikeclimbguy]

It's generally not a problem on newer lifts since engineering has improved so much since 1972. There should be sufficient ski under clearance on all portions of the route.

Then why does the Snowdon 6 have clearance issues?

[Mister Moose]

On the old lift when it was fully loaded, there was extreme cable sag between towers 6 and 7. This caused clearance issues so patrol had to rope off small section of the trail right under the lift. It's generally not a problem on newer lifts since engineering has improved so much since 1972. There should be sufficient ski under clearance on all portions of the route.

Like the two portions of the brand new 6 pack that had to be fenced off for clearance issues? You mean that increase in engineering?

The new lift is also further to the middle of the trail than the old.

Only at the top. That does not move the entire lift laterally.

With the old lift they couldn't groom on the skiers left side of the towers. I think it's possible they will be able to on the new lift, but if not there will be a wider bump line. The groomed width lost would be made up because they wouldn't have to rope off anything for clearance issues.

They used to groom skiers left of the lift above Great Northern, correct? So grooming there won't be any change at all, and as we just discussed, it had nothing to do with cable sag. Grooming below Great Northern on Skier's left will depend on any change in base terminal location, which so far there has been no announcement about. If the base terminal is in the same spot (A very narrow spot, hard to imagine any width changes without blasting into the ridge), and they don't cut trees, how do you think the grooming skiers left will change in any noticeable amount?

[machski]

It's generally not a problem on newer lifts since engineering has improved so much since 1972. There should be sufficient ski under clearance on all portions of the route.

Then why does the Snowdon 6 have clearance issues?

The Snowdon6 towers are extremely short towers, I'm guessing they and L-P went that route to minimize wind exposure profile of the bubble chairs to keep it turning as often as possible. Obviously when you do that, you risk chair to snow height issues, especially with deeper snowpack from ma nature of man made making it potentially worse than planned.

[Mister Moose]

Here's a still grabbed from the tower install video that gives an indication of tower placement on lower rime. Compare the distance to the trees to the shoulder width of the men.

Rime tower.jpg (167.01 KiB) Viewed 521 times