# Jay Peak and I are not BFFs.



## VTKilarney (Apr 17, 2014)

I skied Jay Peak today for the first time in about 25 years.  After skiing it today, I don't really get the hype.

I appreciate that they get a lot of snow, and I may be missing something since I'm not a glades skier, but I felt much more frustrated with the mountain than impressed.  

The lifts are absurdly ancient.  How can they spend hundreds of millions of dollars on hotels and a waterpark but still have such slow and old lifts?  The high speed quad that goes almost to the summit was closed today.  My opinion might have changed had that been open.

The tram is a terrible lift.  It moves VERY few people up the hill and the ride itself isn't so great.  Once you get up there, you quickly realize that the upper tram house was put in a really lousy spot.  

I also got the feeling that the mountain itself wasn't an ideal mountain to build a ski area on.  One example is the runouts.  Holy cow can they be flat!

I want to like Jay, and I am going to go back and try to figure out what I did wrong today.  I have a feeling that I just had an off day, and that there is a decent mountain for me to uncover.  But I have to admit that I am more excited to go back to Burke.  I thought it would be just the opposite.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 17, 2014)

Lifts: yes, they are old.  It's kind of hard to use EB-5 money for new lifts.  I think they anticipated an increase in other revenues to justify  the new Bonnie Six Pack that was supposed to go in two years ago, and then last season.....

Why was the Freezer...err...Flyer not running?  Wind?  Must not be since the Tram was running.  

And why do you say that the Tram should have ended somewhere else?

I find that if you don't ski the trees, you are going to find Jay either steeper than hell or a lot of traversing across the fall line.  Stateside has some of my favorite terrain there because there is good consistent pitch.  Hence why that's where the ski area was first located.  

They do get a ton of snow and some of my best east coast days were there...


----------



## dlague (Apr 17, 2014)

The jet  chair would be more to your liking as well as flyer.  The tram I agree does not buy you much unless face chute and tuckerman chute are open.  The core appeal to many are the glades though.  Bonnie also has some good runs like powerline.  Northway sucks for sure and some of the cross trails are pretty boring.  Jay Peak IMO shines on powder days!  Some of the beat trails are closed right now.

Give it a late February chance!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## Quietman (Apr 17, 2014)

The Flyer (aka Freezer) being closed really makes a big difference, kind of like Wildcat's HS quad being closed. When we were at Jay, I only took the tram once, and didn't miss it the rest of our trip.  The glades are also a big part of the experience at Jay, but I still enjoyed the rest of the mountain. The amount snow is also a big part of the equation, as they get more powder days than most other areas in the east, but they can have bad days like any other area.  A high speed quad or six-pack from the stateside base is in the plans and should be a major priority, but I would still say to give Jay another chance.  Hopefully the drunken idiots that you ran into today(from your other post) will not come back for your next trip.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 17, 2014)

I think the fact that the Flyer was closed was probably the issue.  If it had been opened, I would have ridden it all day.  My family isn't quite ready for Stateside, so the closest we got was taking the quad from Stateside base up to the main mountain.

The Flyer was definitely not closed due to wind.  I think it was just a late-season midweek money saving issue.


----------



## abc (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> I skied Jay Peak today for the first time in about 25 years.  After skiing it today, I don't really get the hype.
> 
> I appreciate that they get a lot of snow, and I may be missing something since *I'm not a glades skier*, but I felt much more frustrated with the mountain than impressed.


I'm not too impressed with Jay's groomers, except on a powder day. Even then, it's only a few hours after the dump. The snow don't last long, probably due to the high wind blowing them all into the glades. 

As such, I only go up to Jay during or immediately after a storm, and spend much of my time in the trees.

Each mountain has its strength and weakness. If you're not into glades, I don't see why you "want to like Jay". Just because some others like it doesn't make it a good fit FOR YOU!


----------



## BenedictGomez (Apr 18, 2014)

Jay is for glades skiers.  If you dont ski in the trees, there are MANY better ski options (and probably closer) for most.  I dont even bother going to Jay Peak if the glades arent in play.


----------



## Savemeasammy (Apr 18, 2014)

I'll be going to Jay with my wife sometime within the next week.  First time for her, first time for me in 25 or more years...  Hopefully she has a better time than this!  I've suggested we go on Easter b/c of the forecast, but I don't think she will agree.  If the flyer is down midweek, it will probably detract from the experience for her...  

Jay regulars:  is it common for the flyer to be down for low crowds?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

There was a maintenance chair that was attached to the lift.  It was used for a few minutes in the afternoon.  I'm not sure if this is why it was closed.  I had assumed that they were taking advantage of the lift being down since nobody seemed to be doing much.


----------



## kingdom-tele (Apr 18, 2014)

it is normal for them to decrease the lift options, its not the end of the world, if the flyer is down that means the tram probably isn't running fully loaded either.

if your going somewhere expecting a bad time then chances are...

nothing wrong with staying at Burke, it has a lot to offer that J doesn't, J is just another mountain, did you enjoy the views, did you stop to notice all the things you could see besides the problems and things it lacks for you, how were the turns, maybe work would be better


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

kingdom-tele said:


> it is normal for them to decrease the lift options, its not the end of the world, if the flyer is down that means the tram probably isn't running fully loaded either.
> 
> if your going somewhere expecting a bad time then chances are...
> 
> nothing wrong with staying at Burke, it has a lot to offer that J doesn't, J is just another mountain, did you enjoy the views, did you stop to notice all the things you could see besides the problems and things it lacks for you, how were the turns, maybe work would be better



The trams were fully loaded, but with only a few people who would miss the cut.

I was not expecting a bad time.  It was just the opposite.


----------



## crank (Apr 18, 2014)

For the life of me I just don't get why people ski Jay unless it has fresh powder.  It is far.  It is isolated.  It doesn't have the greatest lift system.  The trails are mostly just OK (half dozen really nice trails I admit).  But to me Jay will always be about powder and trees.  And not tree skiing with marginally better conditions than the trails. TREE SKIING UNTRACKED POWDER.  This is what Jay is all about and it has always been and will always be hit or miss.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> I think the fact that the Flyer was closed was probably the issue.  If it had been opened, I would have ridden it all day.  My family isn't quite ready for Stateside, so the closest we got was taking the quad from Stateside base up to the main mountain.
> 
> The Flyer was definitely not closed due to wind.  I think it was just a late-season midweek money saving issue.



Did you ski Stateside of the Jet Triple at all? There are Intermediate trails (Montrealer to Angel Wiggle, Hells Crossing, Paradise Meadows) that provide nice long runs.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

I did not, which is why I believe a second visit may change my mind.


----------



## mister moose (Apr 18, 2014)

Jay is not such a bad place, but it does have its share of compromises.  I think the biggest reason for your dissatisfaction is the fact that you were there in mid April.  When the snow gets slow, the run out on the north side of the mountain goes from no big deal to a royal pain.  You should ski there in mid winter when the snow is good to get a taste of how Jay skis then.

Also, the blue trails at the very top of the mountain tend to stay buffed from exposure to wind.  That's another Jay fact of life, along with winds, low temps, and huge snowfalls.  Some of the aspect of the teeny town has been mitigated by the new hotels, ice rink and water park, but it still is a small town feel.

Jay is likely the most unique ski area in the East.  It has both pros and cons that no other area has.  No other area has the snowfall, the extensive glades, the international character, the water park, or the small friendly feel for such a big mountain, and no other mountain has a lift nicknamed "The Freezer", the length of the drive, or the isolation Jay does.  There's a reason you need to be "Raised Jay".  If you don't like the trade-offs (most of which will not change) then Jay is not for you.  

And if your day is ruined due to fixed grip lifts, Jay is most definitely not for you.  Don't bother with MRG, Magic, Smuggs, Castlerock, the North Face, or Snowdon either.


----------



## Tin (Apr 18, 2014)

People should know about their "wind holds". They have great terrain, lifts, services, etc, but I'm all set with how they run the place. 

I tried getting in touch with a few people at Jay (including someone on here), since months have gone by without a response I might as well share. My last visit when I asked some staff about wind holds a ski patrol member and an instructor told me how they avoid running upper mountain lifts on weekdays or when there isn't enough people there, and how they have BS wind holds to save money, never heard a thing back. Some of the exact quotes were "Ever notice we have more wind holds during the week than the weekend?" , "There just are not enough people to run the Tram today.", and "Some days they will only run Bonnie and the Jet to freeze people into the water park". And of course you're paying full price. I'm all set with Jay. Wasted about $600 and 5 hours of driving to ski off the Jet and Bonnie for a few days with a bunch of roped off trails and glades that were listed as open on the trail report.


----------



## dlague (Apr 18, 2014)

I think expectations are being set too high for this time of year!  If someone is expecting mid winter conditions then you will be hard pressed to find that anywhere.  Likewise, I think that spring skiing is more about just getting out there and taking what the mountain gives you!  I took my wife to Sugarbush last year and we skied Stein's Run and she did not like it very much.  As a result she knew what she needed to work on to prepare for this year.  Now she is excited for it.  The best thing to do is not go off others points of view but to create your own.  Look at the trail map and you will see where the cross overs are and plan accordingly.  If Flyer is down (maybe it was for trail preservation?), Bonnadventure chair has decent trails like Can Am, Canyonland or Powerline or for something a little easier then head down Northway (yes it is flat in the beginning) but it leads to many intermediate options.   The Whole Jet chair area is also fun to ski IMO.

I would hope that people here are not a one and done.  It took my wife three tries at Jay Peak before she liked it.  We are already at two tries at Smuggs and are going to give it another whirl next season.  Negative bias can be detrimental, like wise positive views by some do not necessarily play out the same for others.

I will give you that fact that the chairs are slowish (Flyer is ok, as well as the tram) - unfortunately, EB5 funding does not really allow you to spend money on such infrastructure - unless it can produce more jobs.  If people keep complaining, hopefully it will lead to changes there!


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 18, 2014)

If by wrong mountain you mean it should have been built on Big Jay then yes. Otherwise I think it was a great choice. The mountain is unquestionably for tree skiers that's not hard to see. But the snow is usually great if you know where the wind blows. It's a mountain where 2 people can have 2 completely different experiences from a snow stand point. Groomers can be one big wind scoured ice skating rink while the trees have drifts. It can really be very hit or miss. When it's great it's epic and when it's bad it is awful.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 18, 2014)

Like any ski area it will take at least a couple visits to really get a feel for it and find the good stuff.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

mister moose said:


> Jay is not such a bad place, but it does have its share of compromises.  I think the biggest reason for your dissatisfaction is the fact that you were there in mid April.
> And if your day is ruined due to fixed grip lifts, Jay is most definitely not for you.  Don't bother with MRG, Magic, Smuggs, Castlerock, the North Face, or Snowdon either.



The snow was actually quite good.  It started as packed powder and only softened up somewhat later in the afternoon.  And there was plenty of it.

I honestly don't mind slow lifts, if they are in proper context.  I don't expect a Plattekill to have the fanciest of everything.  But Jay is different.  They have dumped countless millions of dollars into the place, but the lift system has not benefited from this.  Knowing this is somewhat maddening.  Trailboss has a very good point about EB-5 funds not being able to be allocated toward lifts, but it nonetheless leaves a bad taste in your mouth.  And I am never going to like the tram.  I recalled not liking it when I was last there 25 years ago.  My main gripe with the tram is that it moves so few people up the hill.  I really wish they had a gondola instead.  But it is what it is.

Understanding that I'm not a tree skier, my non-lift gripe was that I didn't do nearly as much fall line skiing as I would have liked.  Since I was with my family, we stuck to the intermediate trails, so perhaps the problem seemed worse to me than it should have.


----------



## dlague (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> The snow was actually quite good.  It started as packed powder and only softened up somewhat later in the afternoon.  And there was plenty of it.
> 
> I honestly don't mind slow lifts, if they are in proper context.  I don't expect a Plattekill to have the fanciest of everything.  But Jay is different.  They have dumped countless millions of dollars into the place, but the lift system has not benefited from this.  Knowing this is somewhat maddening.  Trailboss has a very good point about EB-5 funds not being able to be allocated toward lifts, but it nonetheless leaves a bad taste in your mouth.  And I am never going to like the tram.  I recalled not liking it when I was last there 25 years ago.  My main gripe with the tram is that it moves so few people up the hill.  I really wish they had a gondola instead.  But it is what it is.
> 
> Understanding that I'm not a tree skier, my non-lift gripe was that I didn't do nearly as much fall line skiing as I would have liked.  Since I was with my family, we stuck to the intermediate trails, so perhaps the problem seemed worse to me than it should have.



Some of the glades are actually not that bad and open up - I do not like tight glades but there are glades that can be quite fun to try and I am not talking about the blue glades either.

You should try to ski with a local - wait you are a local (kind of) - ok a local who skis Jay Peak regularly.  They may show you some runs that entertain more!


----------



## hammer (Apr 18, 2014)

Only been to Jay once, was after a rain/freeze event in February so it was cold and icy.  Never bothered with the tram, too crowded.  Riding the freezer was tough but there was never any real line.  Lots of scraped trails but the glades were still open and the low angle ones I sampled were a lot of fun.

Was a good experience but until I'm at the skill level to appreciate the woods in all honesty it would not be worth the drive.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 18, 2014)

Tram vs Gondola:  When Weyerhaeuser owned it, they put the Tram in.  I imagine that it was in part because to draw folks year round as a tourist attraction and in large part because at that time that was the technology to use with that terrain (assuming you ran a lift from base to summit).  The summit cliffs are quite steep (obviously) and I don't foresee how they could run a gondola up that aspect.  Remember that waaaay back in the day they DID have a double chair that ran to the summit from a different aspect.  

It is an older tram and has limited capacity.  It is tiny in comparison to Jackson's or Snowbird's.  Cost was probably an issue.  I was a bit surprised that they did not use larger cabs on it in 2000 or so when they upgraded it.  Again, I imagine the cost of new haul ropes, drive, and other hardware for larger cabs was cost prohibitive.


----------



## WoodCore (Apr 18, 2014)

I enjoy skiing at Jay and they do get lots of snow but think it's a tad bit over-rated. Not even close to being the best tree/glade skiing in the Northeast.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> They have dumped countless millions of dollars into the place, but the lift system has not benefited from this.  Knowing this is somewhat maddening.  Trailboss has a very good point about EB-5 funds not being able to be allocated toward lifts, but it nonetheless leaves a bad taste in your mouth.



When the news was released last spring that the Powerline High Speed 6 lift was not going to be built and the Old Bonneventure Quad was just going to be shorten to  make room for the Stateside Hotel, a lot of people were saying the same thing about Jay's antiquated lift system. More info here: http://forums.alpinezone.com/showth...an-(2011-2016)?p=780611&viewfull=1#post780611


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

thetrailboss said:


> The summit cliffs are quite steep (obviously) and I don't foresee how they could run a gondola up that aspect.



I have a vague recollection of riding a gondola up some pretty steep terrain, but I can't remember where.  Maybe my mind is playing tricks on me.  I could be thinking of crossing some canyons in Europe, rather than going up a very steep slope itself.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> I have a vague recollection of riding a gondola up some pretty steep terrain, but I can't remember where.  Maybe my mind is playing tricks on me.  I could be thinking of crossing some canyons in Europe, rather than going up a very steep slope itself.



No doubt.  The technology (probably) exists today, but not in the late 1960's...at least not feasibly.  

If you are ever bored, you can probably read online about the tales of the ORIGINAL Killington Gondola project that bankrupt the manufacturer and nearly sank the resort because of its length and two turn stations.


----------



## legalskier (Apr 18, 2014)

Tin said:


> I'm all set with Jay. Wasted about $600 and 5 hours of driving to ski off the Jet and Bonnie for a few days with a bunch of roped off trails and glades that were listed as open on the trail report.



My last trip to WF doesn't seem so bad after all....


----------



## skiNEwhere (Apr 18, 2014)

If jay had all new high speed lifts and a high capacity tram, the group of people who like jay the way it is now would complain that the mountain gets tracked out way too fast on a powder day. 

Just goes to show you can't please everyone


----------



## Tin (Apr 18, 2014)

legalskier said:


> My last trip to WF doesn't seem so bad after all....



If it was weather I would understand, but it was efforts to save money and poor communication.


----------



## dlague (Apr 18, 2014)

skiNEwhere said:


> If jay had all new high speed lifts and a high capacity tram, the group of people who like jay the way it is now would complain that the mountain gets tracked out way too fast on a powder day.
> 
> Just goes to show you can't please everyone



Exactly!


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

But that ship has really sailed with all of the development on the mountain.   It is a resort now.


----------



## thetrailboss (Apr 18, 2014)

skiNEwhere said:


> If jay had all new high speed lifts and a high capacity tram, the group of people who like jay the way it is now would complain that the mountain gets tracked out way too fast on a powder day.
> 
> Just goes to show you can't please everyone



They are already complaining.....


----------



## from_the_NEK (Apr 18, 2014)

thetrailboss said:


> They are already complaining.....



Therefore they need to build West Bowl :idea:


----------



## Big Wave Dave (Apr 18, 2014)

Jay and Burke are actually perfect compliments, its a shame they are not a bit closer so you could support a more viable dual ticket. what jay lacks in pure trail skiing burke offers. Jay is NOT the place to go if you like to ski trails. I actually dont ski jay any more on weekends, nor will I ski there unless its a powder day or right after. Since I am retired I have the leisure to do this. But when you hit it right, you really cant find much better anywhere, and I have skied all over the world.

but as I think you have already figured out, if you like to ski classic new england trails or even wide open groomed bombers, stick with your burke pass and only head to jay when you want the powder or woods. Jay;s flat runout and cattrack layout is not that great.


----------



## gladerider (Apr 18, 2014)

WoodCore said:


> Not even close to being the best tree/glade skiing in the Northeast.



ah, ok, you mind sharing where the best is then? thanks.

to the OP, i personally can't see how people can appreciate jay much when they are not crazy about fresh pow and glades as many already mentioned, especially in mid april.


----------



## WoodCore (Apr 18, 2014)

gladerider said:


> ah, ok, you mind sharing where the best is then? thanks.



About 30 miles to the south!


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

gladerider said:


> to the OP, i personally can't see how people can appreciate jay much when they are not crazy about fresh pow and glades as many already mentioned, especially in mid april.



Agreed.  It seems like it's just that the mountain is not a good fit for me.  It's not the mountain's fault - and I am not necessarily the typical skier.  Some mountains are good for some people, and not for others.  Variety is not a bad thing.

On other hand, even if I was a passionate glades skier, I would still hate that tram.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> I skied Jay Peak today for the first time in about 25 years.  After skiing it today, I don't really get the hype.
> 
> I appreciate that they get a lot of snow, and I may be missing something since I'm not a glades skier,



I stopped reading here.  Lots of snow and amazing trees are what Jay is.  That's all it is and all it needs to be.


----------



## legalskier (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> Agreed.  It seems like it's just that the mountain is not a good fit for me.  It's not the mountain's fault - and I am not necessarily the typical skier.  Some mountains are good for some people, and not for others.



So, what kind of skier are you? What are you looking for in a mountain?


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 18, 2014)

legalskier said:


> So, what kind of skier are you? What are you looking for in a mountain?



As nervous as I am to admit it around here, I like to cruise groomers.  Coming off of a multi-year break, I am much less adventurous than I used to be.  I am finding that I need to get my confidence back.  Being older has not helped.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Apr 18, 2014)

It's all about timing.........late march at jay this year after a nice dump. It's important to ID the strong points of any mountain you visit and determine if they mesh with your expectations. Great conditions generally outweigh almost any negative.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 18, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> As nervous as I am to admit it around here, I like to cruise groomers.  Coming off of a multi-year break, I am much less adventurous than I used to be.  I am finding that I need to get my confidence back.  Being older has not helped.



No reason to feel nervous. Many different types of skiers/riders on this board.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Apr 18, 2014)

WoodCore said:


> I enjoy skiing at Jay and they do get lots of snow but think it's a tad bit over-rated. *Not even close to being the best tree/glade skiing in the Northeast*.



It would be fine if you think it's not the best tree skiing in the northeast, but when you say "not even close", one would assume you have a list of at least 5 or 6 places with better glades skiing.  This I would love to hear.  IMO, Jay probably is the best glades skiing in the east (granted I've never skied ME), but even if I wanted to speculate otherwise, I certainly couldnt name 4 or 5 or 6 better places.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 18, 2014)

BenedictGomez said:


> It would be fine if you think it's not the best tree skiing in the northeast, but when you say "not even close", one would assume you have a list of at least 5 or 6 places with better glades skiing.  This I would love to hear.  IMO, Jay probably is the best glades skiing in the east (granted I've never skied ME), but even if I wanted to speculate otherwise, I certainly couldnt name 4 or 5 or 6 better places.



I don't know about that but I can see the argument. It definitely has the most variety of tree skiing for all ability levels. If you are talking challenging I definitely wouldn't put it #1 but it would be in my top 5.


----------



## legalskier (Apr 18, 2014)

Moe Ghoul said:


> View attachment 12399It's all about timing.........late march at jay this year after a nice dump. It's important to ID the strong points of any mountain you visit and determine if they mesh with your expectations. Great conditions generally outweigh almost any negative.



Moe!  Welcome back!  Is that you up there? ^



VTKilarney said:


> As nervous as I am to admit it around here, I  like to cruise groomers.  Coming off of a multi-year break, I am much  less adventurous than I used to be.  I am finding that I need to get my  confidence back.  Being older has not helped.



Certainly understandable. I can see why you weren't comfortable at Jay. Depending on how long you've been sidelined, you may want to consider a lesson or two next season- a lot has changed.


----------



## Moe Ghoul (Apr 18, 2014)

Yup, a buddy of mine has a great camera and eye and was snapping a few pix on an awesome powder day in March at Jay. IIRC, they got almost 18-20" out of that cycle.


----------



## legalskier (Apr 18, 2014)

Moe Ghoul said:


> Yup, a buddy of mine has a great camera and eye and was snapping a few pix on an awesome powder day in March at Jay. IIRC, they got almost 18-20" out of that cycle.



Sweet. Next time we'd love a TR.  :smile:  Don't be such a stranger.


----------



## Smellytele (Apr 18, 2014)

I do not like tram side non-tree trails. The glades are fun. State side is much better for non-Glades and has some great glades as well. Boots and pants boots and pants. I mean glades and snow!


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 18, 2014)

Smellytele said:


> I do not like tram side non-tree trails. The glades are fun. State side is much better for non-Glades and has some great glades as well. Boots and pants boots and pants. I mean glades and snow!



I'd have to agree. Some of the expert trails on the tram side could be considered intermediate and I do enjoy some glades on that side (Everglade, Staircase, and Andre's). I much rather do laps on a lot of the Stateside trails and glades. Hoping for my last tree skiing of the season tomorrow!


----------



## abc (Apr 18, 2014)

Are the trees still in play? 

(they're only expecting a dusting tonight. But if that changes to noticeable accumulation, I may change my plan and dash up there...)


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 18, 2014)

abc said:


> Are the trees still in play?
> 
> (they're only expecting a dusting tonight. But if that changes to noticeable accumulation, I may change my plan and dash up there...)



Pretty much all the glades are in play from what I've heard minus Deliverance,  Face/Tuck Chutes,  and some of the lower mountain intermediate glades. I'll be up there so shoot me a message if you go


----------



## abc (Apr 18, 2014)

I'll only make the drive if the mythical "Jay Cloud" does its magic in producing some accumulation. I don't ski the trees for the challenge. It better have a couple inches of fluff in there to tempt me.


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 18, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Pretty much all the glades are in play from what I've heard minus Deliverance,  Face/Tuck Chutes,  and some of the lower mountain intermediate glades. I'll be up there so shoot me a message if you go



Face chutes are definitely not skiable.   Everything else is doable.   Green beret is good from the alternate entrance.

It's jay peak, you're expected to ski closed runs.


----------



## Savemeasammy (Apr 19, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> Face chutes are definitely not skiable.   Everything else is doable.   Green beret is good from the alternate entrance.
> 
> It's jay peak, you're expected to ski closed runs.



Read between the lines here MMW:  the face chutes are not skiable.  But man-up and ski them anyway   Then you can tell your wife that you need new skis 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 19, 2014)

Savemeasammy said:


> Read between the lines here MMW:  the face chutes are not skiable.  But man-up and ski them anyway   Then you can tell your wife that you need new skis
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



We attempted to damage them on numerous occasions. Even thought about skiing Pumphouse until the fog lifted and revealed nothing but rock. Oh well there is always next year.


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 19, 2014)

As a hardcore Jay skier here are my thoughts on this thread in random order:

-Jay sucks for intermediate skiers;
-Jay is not great for groomers, Stateside is OK and that's about it;
-Jay glades are awesome. Anyone who says Jay is not top three out east for glades is either trolling, jealous or delusional;
-Jay is awesome for the variety of unmarked terrain - my own ski map of Jay has 78 official runs and 42 unmarked glades;
-Jay is awesome for slackcountry opportunities;
-Jay is awesome for kids;
-The tram is slow and inefficient but the top cannot handle that many skiers anyway.  Waiting for the tram to ski Vermonter or Northway is something I will never understand.  Otherwise, ski the tram very early or very late.  As fun as some of the runs off the ridge are, none is worth a 40 minutes wait;
- Outside of a few Saturday and windhold days, there are no line-ups at Jay.  Hence I fail to see the need for high-speed lifts.  Even on a busy Saturday, you can ski most glades without seeing anyone else.   That's what slow lifts will do for you.  I love slow lifts;
- Arguably best snow and longest season out east (not counting having one run open over an extended period of time);


----------



## Savemeasammy (Apr 19, 2014)

Oh well, MMW...!  Maybe next time.  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 19, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> As a hardcore Jay skier here are my thoughts on this thread in random order:
> 
> -Jay sucks for intermediate skiers;
> -Jay is not great for groomers, Stateside is OK and that's about it;
> ...



In no particular order....Smuggs, Stowe, MRG all ahead of Jay. I must be delusional.


----------



## abc (Apr 19, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> In no particular order....Smuggs, Stowe, MRG all ahead of Jay. I must be delusional.


Stowe glades "better" than Jay? How do you define that?


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 19, 2014)

abc said:


> Stowe glades "better" than Jay? How do you define that?



Well it's not really fair to compare on map since Stowe barely marks any. People have been cutting lines through the trees on Mansfield since the 60s.


----------



## Sick Bird Rider (Apr 19, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> As a hardcore Jay skier here are my thoughts on this thread in random order:
> 
> -Jay sucks for intermediate skiers;
> -Jay is not great for groomers, Stateside is OK and that's about it;
> ...



Quoted for truth. It is a mountain that grows on you, and what grows on you are the quirks, the weather, the screwy trail map, the community, the passion, the snow, the view, the trees, the wind and where do I stop? It is a mountain that rewards the creative, the resilient and the adventurous and, yes, it does take some getting used to.


----------



## steamboat1 (Apr 20, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> In no particular order....Smuggs, Stowe, MRG all ahead of Jay. I must be delusional.



I'd add Killington to that mix also. Nobody ever talks about the glades at Killington which are numerous. I'd venture to say they have the most glade skiing in the east & have them for all ability levels.


----------



## BenedictGomez (Apr 20, 2014)

abc said:


> Stowe glades "better" than Jay? How do you define that?



I'm not getting that either.    

Only advantage I see is the stuff off Sterling Pond via Stowe or Smuggs is pretty great, but that's slackcountry and not within the borders and I'm not sure we're counting that?  Though if we did, then a Jay skier could likely point to the similar run to the road off Timbuckto.


----------



## deadheadskier (Apr 21, 2014)

BenedictGomez said:


> I'm not getting that either.
> 
> Only advantage I see is the stuff off Sterling Pond via Stowe or Smuggs is pretty great, but that's slackcountry and not within the borders and I'm not sure we're counting that?  Though if we did, then a Jay skier could likely point to the similar run to the road off Timbuckto.



I would say that area is an added bonus along with the hundreds of acres skiers left of Chin Clip.

I think what MMW is referring to is that pretty much the entire Mansfield side of the mountain and much of Spruce has essentially developed glades between every trail that at many ski areas would be on the map.  On Upper Mansfield, really the only area that hasn't been cut much is between Liftline and Starr.  There are some lines in there, but I've found they don't open up much except for in big snow years.  Between every other trail though, it's pretty much wide open.   Same thing at MRG with all the glades between their marked trails.  

Jay's glades are fantastic, but I'll take Mansfield.


----------



## polski (Apr 21, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> - Outside of a few Saturday and windhold days, there are no line-ups at Jay.  Hence I fail to see the need for high-speed lifts.  Even on a busy Saturday, you can ski most glades without seeing anyone else.   That's what slow lifts will do for you.  I love slow lifts;


Hear hear. And even for someone who skis groomers not glades, more high-speed lifts would mean a lot traffic on the slopes, not necessarily a more enjoyable experience. I hit Jay after a 2-foot dump in Feb 2013 and had a blast but mid-afternoon the second day there was one run near the top, I forget which, that we were taking to a glades entrance and it was like a six-lane superhighway with a LOT of people bombing very fast and a lot of the surface scraped off despite all the new snow. We got to the near-solitude of the glades and were like, WHOA, what was THAT??? A distinctly sour note on an otherwise great trip. Then again my own bias is towards a place like MRG with one fixed-grip single chair to the top, capacity 500 skiers per hour.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 21, 2014)

polski said:


> more high-speed lifts would mean a lot traffic on the slopes, not necessarily a more enjoyable experience.



This is a big myth.  The reality is that capacity can be controlled with a high speed lift.  Aspen, for example, has some low-capacity high speed lifts.  And keep in mind that while the cable is running faster, there are fewer chairs on that cable.  

Here is why Jay would benefit from more high speed lifts.  Jay is cold and windy.  A skier is coldest when riding the lift.  Jay would be a much more appealing place to ski if you could minimize the amount of time you are on the lift itself.  They could do this while keeping capacity exactly the same.  Of course, the downside is that, if capacity is the same but the lift ride itself is shorter, lines would increase somewhat.  So I can see both sides of the coin.


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 21, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> This is a big myth.  The reality is that capacity can be controlled with a high speed lift.  Aspen, for example, has some low-capacity high speed lifts.  And keep in mind that while the cable is running faster, there are fewer chairs on that cable.
> 
> Here is why Jay would benefit from more high speed lifts.  Jay is cold and windy.  A skier is coldest when riding the lift.  Jay would be a much more appealing place to ski if you could minimize the amount of time you are on the lift itself.  They could do this while keeping capacity exactly the same.  Of course, the downside is that, if capacity is the same but the lift ride itself is shorter, lines would increase somewhat.  So I can see both sides of the coin.



The main reason for high-speed chair (which are more expensive) is to increase capacity.  While it is true that they could capacity the same it would be en economic non-sense.


----------



## SIKSKIER (Apr 21, 2014)

Please Note: The Tramside Carpet is closed for the season, the Flyer Quad is closed for midweek operations but is slated to spin this coming Friday.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 21, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> While it is true that they could capacity the same it would be en economic non-sense.



Since Jay Peak has gone the resort route, there is some economic sense to be had by elevating the customer's experience on the mountain.  It helps to sell hotel rooms.  On the other hand, it's certainly possible that they don't need help and that the rooms are selling just fine.


----------



## Domeskier (Apr 21, 2014)

SIKSKIER said:


> Please Note: The Tramside Carpet is closed for the season



Say it isn't so!!


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 21, 2014)

Domeskier said:


> Say it isn't so!!



Yep.  It was a hard blow.  We had to use the carpet on stateside this morning.


----------



## dlague (Apr 21, 2014)

SIKSKIER said:


> Please Note: The Tramside Carpet is closed for the season, the Flyer Quad is closed for midweek operations but is slated to spin this coming Friday.



And it did!  Sunday was awesome!


----------



## Domeskier (Apr 21, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> Yep.  It was a hard blow.  We had to use the carpet on stateside this morning.



I hope that's the highspeed carpet, at least.


----------



## dlague (Apr 21, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> As a hardcore Jay skier here are my thoughts on this thread in random order:
> 
> -Jay sucks for intermediate skiers;
> -Jay is not great for groomers, Stateside is OK and that's about it;
> ...



To ride the tram for Vermonter or Northway - it is a take it once in a day type of deal.  However, Valhalla, Green Beret, Face Chutes and Tuckermans and the various runs that you can make out of those runs are worth the trip.  Not heavily traveled, and  when there is snow up there it can be very fun!  Early and late season the tram is useless otherwise.

As for intermediates, I totally disagree.   There are intermediate runs off every chair.  In addition, there are intermediate glades all over the place for those starting out in the woods.  Even some of the black rated trails are very skiable by intermediates such as The Jet and Derrick Hot Shot.

Groomers, we had to ski them this past Sunday since the glades were firm in the morning and all the intermediates like Angles Wiggle, Hells Crossing,  non flat sections of Northway skied really nice, the runs off The Jet chair were awesome  JFK skied really well, Goat Run and GMB, Ullrs and Wedelmaster all skied great.  If you are skiing a trail and are one and done then maybe there is some credence to your statement otherwise there is plenty to keep most people busy and I did not mention others.

I agree with everything else!


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 21, 2014)

dlague said:


> As for intermediates, I totally disagree.   There are intermediate runs off every chair.  In addition, there are intermediate glades all over the place for those starting out in the woods.  Even some of the black rated trails are very skiable by intermediates such as The Jet and Derrick Hot Shot.



Directly off the Bonnie and Flyer, you have access to a grand total of 4 intermediate runs (Northway, Ulr's, Alligator Alley and Goat run. Four and that's it.   All four are extremely traveled and the latter is an ice-fest pretty much year-round.   There are some interesting intermediate terrain on the lower mountain (flash, racer, lower goat, but you are pretty much stuck with the above four run to get there ALL the time.  These four runs also act as collectors so you get lots of advanced skiers and beginners on them. Other resorts have entire pods totally dedicated to intermediate skiers with lots of options and where no expert will ever show up (Stowe for example has 2 chairs serving pretty much only intermediate terrain with something like 25 runs).

Much of stateside is advanced intermediate (a bit intimidating for the true intermediate skier), and Montrealer takes you straight back to the Northway.

Intermediate skiers can have fun at Jay, but there are much much better resorts for them.


----------



## dlague (Apr 21, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> Directly off the Bonnie and Flyer, you have access to a grand total of 4 intermediate runs (Northway, Ulr's, Alligator Alley and Goat run. Four and that's it.   All four are extremely traveled and the latter is an ice-fest pretty much year-round.   There are some interesting intermediate terrain on the lower mountain (flash, racer, lower goat, but you are pretty much stuck with the above four run to get there ALL the time.  These four runs also act as collectors so you get lots of advanced skiers and beginners on them. Other resorts have entire pods totally dedicated to intermediate skiers with lots of options and where no expert will ever show up (Stowe for example has 2 chairs serving pretty much only intermediate terrain with something like 25 runs).
> 
> Much of stateside is advanced intermediate (a bit intimidating for the true intermediate skier), and Montrealer takes you straight back to the Northway.
> 
> Intermediate skiers can have fun at Jay, but there are much much better resorts for them.



I will give you that but we cherry pick our days and have not experience tough conditions three trips there.  Before advance terrain was available to my wife she still liked it!  Now she definitely has more options so the experience is better for sure!


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## BenedictGomez (Apr 21, 2014)

polski said:


> it was like a six-lane superhighway with a LOT of people bombing very fast and a lot of the surface scraped off despite all the new snow. We got to the near-solitude of the glades and were like, WHOA, what was THAT??? A distinctly sour note on an otherwise great trip.



That was most likely Goat Run, which even this past Saturday, deep into the ski season with low attendance, felt like the Grand Central Parkway.   I imagine it would/could be scary for a low-level intermediate or even true intermediate skier.



fbrissette said:


> *The main reason for high-speed chair *(which are more expensive) *is to increase capacity.*  While it is true that they could capacity the same it would be en economic non-sense.



True, but he's not wrong.  Some places use the "over-capacity" issue as an excuse (SEE: Smuggler's Notch) not to have to invest millions in new lift(s).


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 21, 2014)

BenedictGomez said:


> I'm not getting that either.
> 
> Only advantage I see is the stuff off Sterling Pond via Stowe or Smuggs is pretty great, but that's slackcountry and not within the borders and I'm not sure we're counting that?  Though if we did, then a Jay skier could likely point to the similar run to the road off Timbuckto.



If we are not talking about slack country then that makes my case against Jay even better. Throw out West Bowl and the stuff in between it and BP. Throw out Big Jay, and everything beyond Timbuktu. What your left with is the ridge....this puts it in the top 5 discussion by itself. The rest of the glades on the map are pretty blah that lack any real character. No super steep gnar chutes with no way out rock bands. The trees are all neatly spaced as if someone measured the space between each one. All the glades allow skiers to easily link turns without any serious challenge. That is why Stowe is better. And the Mansfield backcountry is far superior to BJ and West Bowl.


----------



## abc (Apr 22, 2014)

> No super steep gnar chutes with no way out rock bands. The trees are all neatly spaced as if someone measured the space between each one. All the glades allow skiers to easily link turns without any serious challenge. That is why Stowe is better.


That's what I was getting at as to the definition of "better"!

Perhaps to you more gnar is "better". But to many others, Jay's marked glades provides better progression without having to commit to unknown rock bands!


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 22, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> If we are not talking about slack country then that makes my case against Jay even better. Throw out West Bowl and the stuff in between it and BP. Throw out Big Jay, and everything beyond Timbuktu. What your left with is the ridge....this puts it in the top 5 discussion by itself. The rest of the glades on the map are pretty blah that lack any real character. No super steep gnar chutes with no way out rock bands. The trees are all neatly spaced as if someone measured the space between each one. All the glades allow skiers to easily link turns without any serious challenge. That is why Stowe is better. And the Mansfield backcountry is far superior to BJ and West Bowl.




Ok, I see where you are coming from.  By 'glades' I'm talking official terrain with names on a map.  Talking slackcountry or backcountry requires another thread.  By most people definition (amount of runs, total acreage, progression etc..) Jay Peak is undoubtedly top three. 

If your definition of a bonafide glade is 'rocky gnar face with mandatory air' then so be it.  I've yet to see an official run out east that would fit your category and I've skied most places (the notable exception begin Mad River Glen).  Nothing fits that category of the ridge at Jay either.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 22, 2014)

abc said:


> That's what I was getting at as to the definition of "better"!
> 
> Perhaps to you more gnar is "better". But to many others, Jay's marked glades provides better progression without having to commit to unknown rock bands!



Fair enough. From a progression standpoint I would probably put Smuggs slightly ahead of Jay but not by much. Those 2 are head and shoulders above other mountains.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 22, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> Ok, I see where you are coming from.  By 'glades' I'm talking official terrain with names on a map.  Talking slackcountry or backcountry requires another thread.  By most people definition (amount of runs, total acreage, progression etc..) Jay Peak is undoubtedly top three.
> 
> If your definition of a bonafide glade is 'rocky gnar face with mandatory air' then so be it.  I've yet to see an official run out east that would fit your category and I've skied most places (the notable exception begin Mad River Glen).  Nothing fits that category of the ridge at Jay either.



Good point about the Ridge. Although one could argue Paradise is similar depending on where one considers the actual boundary of the trail exists.


----------



## mister moose (Apr 22, 2014)

fbrissette said:
			
		

> *The main reason for high-speed chair *_(which are more expensive) _*is to increase capacity.*_ While it is true that they could capacity the same it would be en economic non-sense._






BenedictGomez said:


> True, but he's not wrong.  Some places use the "over-capacity" issue as an excuse (SEE: Smuggler's Notch) not to have to invest millions in new lift(s).



High Speed Quad = 2,400 skiers per hour
Fixed grip quad = 2,400 skiers per hour.

A high speed quad gives you slower loading and unloading and faster ride times.  It does not increase capacity.  It does reduce loading issues for unskilled skiers.  

On any given weekend at Killington, the line for the Skye Peak HSQ goes out the maze.  All that the new HSQ has accomplished is that you now wait in the liftline instead of sitting on the chair.  So on a calm day, you lose being able to sit down.  On a windy day, you get to be sheltered at the base for more of the time.  

On a busy, mostly advanced skier lift (where loading beginners is not an issue), the extra millions for a HSQ only gets you shorter ride time.  The wait+ride time is still exactly the same as a fixed grip.


----------



## steamboat1 (Apr 22, 2014)

I'm sure mister moose would also agree with me that K has some of the best glade skiing in New England & lots of it as I mentioned earlier in this discussion.


----------



## drjeff (Apr 22, 2014)

mister moose said:


> [/I]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Bingo!  If the same number of seat chair loads every 6 seconds (the "standard" time between chairs at normal line speed for most lifts) it's still 10 chairs that will load and 10 chairs that will unload every minute.  The transit time up the hill is irrelevant in the capacity equation.

It's just like at Mount Snow, people think that the Bluebird has a greater capacity than the Grand Summit Express because it's a 6 pack vs. a quad.  Not the case.  The Bluebird has 9 second spacing (The extra 3 seconds was decided upon to help get 6 people on/off simultaneously) so it delivers 120 people to the summit every 3 minutes which equates to 2400 people an hour. The grand summit sends 120 people every 3 minutes to the summit too, which is the same 2400 people an hour.  Line speed just effects ride time, the number of seats is what effects overall capacity, this concept is lost on many


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 22, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> I'm sure mister moose would also agree with me that K has some of the best glade skiing in New England & lots of it as I mentioned earlier in this discussion.



Only at Killington can you take one glade and turn it into three separate trails.


----------



## mister moose (Apr 22, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Only at Killington can you take one glade and turn it into three separate trails.



Beaver Glade.
Beyond Beaver Glade
Beyond Beyond Beaver Glade.


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 22, 2014)

mister moose said:


> Beaver Glade.
> Beyond Beaver Glade
> Beyond Beyond Beaver Glade.



There is only one Beaver Pond on the trail map. Granted BP and AP should be one glade but making Anarchy, Julio, and Juanita 3 separate glades is ridiculous. There's a few others as well.


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 22, 2014)

mister moose said:


> [/I]
> 
> 
> 
> ...




All of this is of course true if you have two quads with 2400 skiers per hour.  Truth is, most fixed grip quads have a capacity of about 1800 skiers per hour, whereas a detachable quad is in the 2400 skiers per hour range.


----------



## from_the_NEK (Apr 22, 2014)

Burke's Mid Burke express did not increase uphill capacity over the old Willoughby fixed grip quad. However, it does allow individual people to do more laps per hour on non-capacity (i.e. no lift lines) days due to the reduced ride time.


----------



## dlague (Apr 22, 2014)

from_the_NEK said:


> Burke's Mid Burke express did not increase uphill capacity over the old Willoughby fixed grip quad. However, it does allow individual people to do more laps per hour on non-capacity (i.e. no lift lines) days due to the reduced ride time.



Exactly!


----------



## drjeff (Apr 22, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> All of this is of course true if you have two quads with 2400 skiers per hour.  Truth is, most fixed grip quads have a capacity of about 1800 skiers per hour, whereas a detachable quad is in the 2400 skiers per hour range.



How so? Since if you have a FGQ that loads a chair every 6 seconds and a HSQ that loads a chair every 6 seconds, BOTH lifts can load (and deposit at the top) 4 people every 6 seconds.  

If you want to talk the semantics of more people wanting to ride a HS lift vs. a FG lift and/or FG's potentially stopping more often for loading/unloading problems, that's a different story.  But as Mr. Moose correctly pointed out, line speed and lift capacity are two completely different and irrelevant topics.  What it all boils down to is how many chairs are loaded and unload their occupants every hour


----------



## BenedictGomez (Apr 22, 2014)

MadMadWorld said:


> Granted BP and AP should be one glade



I've always just assumed it's to fraudulently bump the number of glades they have, but it's odd in that they dont do that anywhere else really.  Though Kokomo isnt really a glade, and neither is the Moon area, more like beginner ski trails through wooded sections.


----------



## Domeskier (Apr 22, 2014)

drjeff said:


> line speed and lift capacity are two completely different and irrelevant topics.



Only if you stipulate that the chairs are loaded at the same rate.  If the FG loads at a rate of 4 people every 8 seconds, you'd get fbrissette's numbers.


----------



## dlague (Apr 22, 2014)

BenedictGomez said:


> I've always just assumed it's to fraudulently bump the number of glades they have, but it's odd in that they dont do that anywhere else really.  Though Kokomo isnt really a glade, and neither is the Moon area, more like beginner ski trails through wooded sections.



To an experienced skier Kokomo and Moon glades are boring and offer nothing in terms of challenge but to those wanting to learn or experience a glade effect those areas can offer some options if they go off the beaten path.  Stateside glade is the same!  A majority of the skiers and boarders do not have the skills most on this sight have!  That is like saying mountains should not include beginner trails, run outs and cross overs.


Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone


----------



## drjeff (Apr 22, 2014)

Domeskier said:


> Only if you stipulate that the chairs are loaded at the same rate.  If the FG loads at a rate of 4 people every 8 seconds, you'd get fbrissette's numbers.



Which is why I said in the paragraph before that that most lifts, FG or HS these days load at 6 second intervals. So line speed and capacity are often unrelated


----------



## Domeskier (Apr 22, 2014)

drjeff said:


> Which is why I said in the paragraph before that that most lifts, FG or HS these days load at 6 second intervals. So line speed and capacity are often unrelated



I did not read your conditional statement as a claim about the actual rate at which most FG quads are loaded, but about the consequences of loading the FG and HS quads at the same rate.  I suspect fbrissett's was making an empirical claim about that rate at which FG quads are actually loaded, rather than any of the nonsequiturs you were attributing to him.


----------



## steamboat1 (Apr 23, 2014)

If they installed a high speed detachable single chair at MRG would there be more people on the mountain? 

Would lift lines be shorter?


----------



## MikeTrainor (Apr 23, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> If they installed a high speed detachable single chair at MRG would there be more people on the mountain?
> 
> Would lift lines be shorter?



I would think the capacity would be the same based on the examples given above. The lift would just have half the amount of chairs and load at the same interval. The line would be longer at the bottom since there would less people on the lift.


----------



## drjeff (Apr 23, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> If they installed a high speed detachable single chair at MRG would there be more people on the mountain?
> 
> Would lift lines be shorter?



If they still loaded people at the same time interval they do now, there would be the exact same number of people on the mountain as there currently can be


----------



## drjeff (Apr 23, 2014)

MikeTrainor said:


> I would think the capacity would be the same based on the examples given above. The lift would just have half the amount of chairs and load at the same interval. The line would be longer at the bottom since there would less people on the lift.




Yup, a few more people in line at the base, but if there aren't any more people per hour trying to make a run on the single than there are now, the overall "total lift time" (waiting in line + ride up) would be the same as now


----------



## marcski (Apr 23, 2014)

High speed lifts generally have fewer chairs on the line than a similarly situated fixed grip chair.  Hence, on crowded days high speed lifts tend to create longer liftlines but have shorter ride times.   Usually, as noted above, the uphill capacity remains the same when a fixed grip quad is replaced with a hsq.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 23, 2014)

If anything, it is easier to control skier capacity with a high speed lift.  You can always turn the speed of the lift down 20% or so.  If you tried doing that with a fixed grip chair, there would be a near riot.


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 23, 2014)

marcski said:


> High speed lifts generally have fewer chairs on the line than a similarly situated fixed grip chair.  Hence, on crowded days high speed lifts tend to create longer liftlines but have shorter ride times.   Usually, as noted above, the uphill capacity remains the same when a fixed grip quad is replaced with a hsq.



That's in theory if the loading rate is the same.  If the loading rate is the same, the efficiency of the fixed-grip is significantly lower than that of the detachable (I was told 80%) because you get more problems when loading because of the higher speed and more frequent stops, as well as having to slow down for beginners.  To compensate for these problems, the fixed grip ends up having a smaller loading rate. 

Note: I'm no chairlift expert, my info comes from a Dopplemayr guy I met on a ski trip a few years ago.


----------



## bobbutts (Apr 23, 2014)

They vary wildly.  Just look around, some fg lifts are faster with wider spread chairs, some are slower with more chairs.  Same for HS.
I think at the fastest/most chairs setting for efficiency a HSQ will take 3000/hr and FGQ 2400/hr
Real world numbers are likely lower in almost every case.


----------



## Cannonball (Apr 23, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> If they installed a high speed detachable single chair at MRG would there be more people on the mountain?
> 
> Would lift lines be shorter?



Is like those "if a tree falls" questions?


----------



## MadMadWorld (Apr 23, 2014)

steamboat1 said:


> If they installed a high speed detachable single chair at MRG would there be more people on the mountain?
> 
> Would lift lines be shorter?



No but that would just be so silly it might attract people


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 30, 2014)

I've mentioned before that I view Jay's tram as a negative.  I did some Googling, and found that the tram capacity is 360 people per hour.  The Flyer's capacity is 2,400 people per hour.

In an entire eight hour day, the tram only carries 20% more skiers than the Flyer carries in just one hour!

I understand that the trails at the top of the tram can't handle many skiers, but that's just an indication that the problem is multi-faceted.  

Based on Jay's current design, the reality is that the peak is not at all accessible on busy days.  If ski lifts were the internet, the tram would be the equivalent of a 24.4k modem.  

Not that I expect it to happen anytime soon, but a bubble chair or a gondola to the peak would be a HUGE improvement.  I wonder how many towers would need to be installed for a gondola.  I suspect it would be fewer than for a chair.  Are gondolas any less prone to wind holds compared to trams?


----------



## Domeskier (Apr 30, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> Not that I expect it to happen anytime soon, but a bubble chair or a gondola to the peak would be a HUGE improvement.  I wonder how many towers would need to be installed for a gondola.  I suspect it would be fewer than for a chair.  Are gondolas any less prone to wind holds compared to trams?



I would like to see them install a funicular.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 30, 2014)

Domeskier said:


> I would like to see them install a funicular.



That would be an engineering marvel!


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 30, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> I've mentioned before that I view Jay's tram as a negative.  I did some Googling, and found that the tram capacity is 360 people per hour.  The Flyer's capacity is 2,400 people per hour.



It's less than 360 people an hour.  They rarely pack 60 people in there and the return time exceeds 10 minutes (less than 6 trams per hour). It could be 10 minutes but they are not very efficient during the loading portion.



VTKilarney said:


> I understand that the trails at the top of the tram can't handle many skiers, but that's just an indication that the problem is multi-faceted.



I fail to see where it is multi-faceted.   The Vermonter gets icy with less than 360 skiers per hour.  Imagine 2400..   The steep stuff of the face is fun but we're talking 5 to 10 turns at best.  Nobody needs to lap this.



VTKilarney said:


> Based on Jay's current design, the reality is that the peak is not at all accessible on busy days.  If ski lifts were the internet, the tram would be the equivalent of a 24.4k modem.



The top is accessible early in the morning and late in the day with minimal wait.  You can walk from the flyer to the top in 10 minutes if you want, which is much less than the wait for the tram.  I highly recommend it on wind hold day.



VTKilarney said:


> Not that I expect it to happen anytime soon, but a bubble chair or a gondola to the peak would be a HUGE improvement.  I wonder how many towers would need to be installed for a gondola.  I suspect it would be fewer than for a chair.  Are gondolas any less prone to wind holds compared to trams?



According to Jay Peak, both options are not feasible because of the high winds.

On another front, the tram is a huge attraction year-round an that's part of the reason it's not going to get replaced anytime soon.


----------



## VTKilarney (Apr 30, 2014)

fbrissette said:


> I fail to see where it is multi-faceted.   The Vermonter gets icy with less than 360 skiers per hour.  Imagine 2400..



That is exactly my point.  You have absurdly low capacity coupled with a trail system (at the peak) that can only handle a very small fraction of skiers upon it.  That's not a good combination when you think in terms of how much that tram must cost to operate in relation to the number skiers who actually use it.

Have they ever considered converting the Flyer to a bubble chair?  Or would that create too many wind-holds?


----------



## fbrissette (Apr 30, 2014)

VTKilarney said:


> That is exactly my point.  You have absurdly low capacity coupled with a trail system (at the peak) that can only handle a very small fraction of skiers upon it.  That's not a good combination when you think in terms of how much that tram must cost to operate in relation to the number skiers who actually use it.



I don't know for what historical reasons they replaced the double chair that used to go to the top with a tram.  One thing is sure it is now a landmark for the area and it sees quite a bit of use year round.   With weddings and celebration now happening on top, I would think it is profitable overall.




VTKilarney said:


> Have they ever considered converting the Flyer to a bubble chair?  Or would that create too many wind-holds?



Yes.  The combination of a detachable (already more iffy with the winds) and the bubbles made the chair way too susceptible to windholds.


----------

