Gore Proposals

2»

Comments

  • lotsoskiinglotsoskiing expert
    Posts: 984
    JMaul said:

    JMaul said:

    The connector lift would help in low snow times to get the development going at Ski Bowl. maybe a cabriolet? Hybrid?


    I am confused on the extension of High Peaks to the top. Any additional trails it would serve go to other lifts. If lapping High Peaks, you'd have flats on the top section.

    The replacement of the Hudson may have to do with expansion and development of the Ski Bowl area. Check out this topo from 2008.


    Having a chair stop short of the top for reasons that no longer apply
    makes no sense. Adding another 680 ft to the High Peaks chair greatly
    increases the flexibility of the management to open Gore and operate the
    upper mountain with more efficiency. The High Peaks chair went to the top from
    1967 to 1996. There is no flat spot for Cloud if they put the top terminal in the same spot it was in prior to 1996.  It would also help spread skiers
    out over the upper mountain.  It was shortened when the replacement Gondola was still headed to the top like the original gondola. The top terminal of the High Peaks would have interfered with the installation of the new gondola.
    Correct me if I am wrong but it would only add access to Rumor and increase traffic on the upper portion of Cloud.
    I think you'd get to upper Hawkeye from the old summit station of HP lift?
  • z1000307470z1000307470 advanced
    Posts: 123
    NELSAP said:

    From the top of the Straightbrook Chair,  skiing down Cloud towards the top of the High Peaks Chair - the top section as discussed above, is extremely flat it not uphill in places. It's a slog for skiers, and absolutely no fun for snowboarders.

    I disagree. The little steep section where cloud starts gets me going. The section of Cloud before Ruby Run is a slog.
  • z1000307470z1000307470 advanced
    Posts: 123
    JMaul said:

    JMaul said:

    The connector lift would help in low snow times to get the development going at Ski Bowl. maybe a cabriolet? Hybrid?


    I am confused on the extension of High Peaks to the top. Any additional trails it would serve go to other lifts. If lapping High Peaks, you'd have flats on the top section.

    The replacement of the Hudson may have to do with expansion and development of the Ski Bowl area. Check out this topo from 2008.


    Having a chair stop short of the top for reasons that no longer apply
    makes no sense. Adding another 680 ft to the High Peaks chair greatly
    increases the flexibility of the management to open Gore and operate the
    upper mountain with more efficiency. The High Peaks chair went to the top from
    1967 to 1996. There is no flat spot for Cloud if they put the top terminal in the same spot it was in prior to 1996.  It would also help spread skiers
    out over the upper mountain.  It was shortened when the replacement Gondola was still headed to the top like the original gondola. The top terminal of the High Peaks would have interfered with the installation of the new gondola.
    Correct me if I am wrong but it would only add access to Rumor and increase traffic on the upper portion of Cloud.
    You would be able to access the entire Straight Brook area. I know because I did it when the HP went to the top.
  • djaskipa68djaskipa68 novice
    Posts: 10
    I know when you ride the Straightbrook Quad you have an uphill climb until you reach the top of Rumor. 

    What surprised me is the snowmaking capacity uphill. They talk about unlimited water from the Hudson River but if that the case you would see a quick recovery after warms up. Their system reminds me of Stratton and Mount Snow in the late 80s and early 90's before the overhaul took place. Based on old master plans for Gore they have max withdrawal capacity of 5000 gpm from the Hudson. Does that go directly up the hill or to the snowmaking reservoir?

    With the talk about High Peaks replacement have they looked into better configuration that eliminate either the North Quad or High Peaks with one lift to cover all of that terrain? Especially since they like to close alot of lifts midweek.
    mini-20170129_140725.jpg
    800 x 450 - 93K
  • ADKskierADKskier advanced
    edited January 31 Posts: 307
    They could always elevate the Summit Terminal if they extend. Places like McCauley and Woods Valley in Rome have used this to put their lift terminals about 20 ft above the surrounding terrain. Woods Valley built their summit terminal up about 50 ft above surrounding terrain.
    ~Rich~
  • obienickobienick expert
    Posts: 1,037
    From what I've seen on nyskiblog, their uphill capacity is slightly less than their draw from the Hudson. They've reported on the order of 6-7 million gallons a day which is 4200-4900 gpm.
  • rickbolgerrickbolger expert
    Posts: 1,230
    obienick said:

    No one complains about states or cities running golf courses or beaches.




    Beware of absolutes :D

    I will complain about any of the above when they do it poorly.

    Gore generally does a good job! A gondola from North Creek, given the existing conditions, is absurd.

  • ADKskierADKskier advanced
    edited February 1 Posts: 307

    obienick said:

    " A gondola from North Creek, given the existing conditions, is absurd."

    Agreed, if Fronstreet had developed out like they said 8 years ago I could see the need, its an absolute waste of taxpayer dollars. 
    ~Rich~
  • newmannewman advanced
    Posts: 318
    How does a lift like that work? Are they free for anyone?
  • TomWhiteTomWhite expert
    Posts: 540
    In addition to Peter Landsman's original at Liftblog.com, ropeways now has the Gore and Whiteface charts.

  • rickbolgerrickbolger expert
    Posts: 1,230
    Skied Gore Saturday.  In light of these proposals, I tried to be a bit more of a clinical observer of what was going on, as I've been a Gore fan since I started skiing there a few years ago.

    Gore has a long way to go to compete with Vermont.  

    Came away with a different point of view on the three fixed grip chairs -- they've got to replace them.   High Peaks went down around noon.  The other two are incredibly slow.

    Not changing my opinion on the great North Creek Gondola proposal.  that's a pointless waste of taxpayer money.  They've got to do a lot more things to up their game before they can consider this folly.

    The lodge is undersized.  Needs about 3x the restroom capacity it now offers.

    They need to get more trails open.  It's kind of pathetic to have so many trails but so few open.  Looking at what they have versus the interactive trail maps at Killington or Okemo today, it's no comparison.  If they want to compete with the major leagues they can't keep playing triple-A ball.

    Was skiing there with a friend who is not really passionate about skiing anymore, but he does get to Gore about 4-5x per season.  His observation?  "They're being cheap with the snowmaking this year."





  • 4aprice4aprice advanced
    Posts: 135
    Thanks for the update Rick.  Have been thinking Gore for next weekend, may go Okemo instead.

    Alex

    Lake Hopatcong, NJ  
  • z1000307470z1000307470 advanced
    Posts: 123

    Skied Gore Saturday.  In light of these proposals, I tried to be a bit more of a clinical observer of what was going on, as I've been a Gore fan since I started skiing there a few years ago.


    Gore has a long way to go to compete with Vermont.  

    Came away with a different point of view on the three fixed grip chairs -- they've got to replace them.   High Peaks went down around noon.  The other two are incredibly slow.

    Not changing my opinion on the great North Creek Gondola proposal.  that's a pointless waste of taxpayer money.  They've got to do a lot more things to up their game before they can consider this folly.

    The lodge is undersized.  Needs about 3x the restroom capacity it now offers.

    They need to get more trails open.  It's kind of pathetic to have so many trails but so few open.  Looking at what they have versus the interactive trail maps at Killington or Okemo today, it's no comparison.  If they want to compete with the major leagues they can't keep playing triple-A ball.

    Was skiing there with a friend who is not really passionate about skiing anymore, but he does get to Gore about 4-5x per season.  His observation?  "They're being cheap with the snowmaking this year."




    "They're being cheap with the snowmaking this year."
    This should be Gore's tag line. It is true every year.


  • ciscokidciscokid expert
    edited February 6 Posts: 2,000

    Skied Gore Saturday.  In light of these proposals, I tried to be a bit more of a clinical observer of what was going on, as I've been a Gore fan since I started skiing there a few years ago.


    Gore has a long way to go to compete with Vermont.  

    Came away with a different point of view on the three fixed grip chairs -- they've got to replace them.   High Peaks went down around noon.  The other two are incredibly slow.

    Not changing my opinion on the great North Creek Gondola proposal.  that's a pointless waste of taxpayer money.  They've got to do a lot more things to up their game before they can consider this folly.

    The lodge is undersized.  Needs about 3x the restroom capacity it now offers.

    They need to get more trails open.  It's kind of pathetic to have so many trails but so few open.  Looking at what they have versus the interactive trail maps at Killington or Okemo today, it's no comparison.  If they want to compete with the major leagues they can't keep playing triple-A ball.

    Was skiing there with a friend who is not really passionate about skiing anymore, but he does get to Gore about 4-5x per season.  His observation?  "They're being cheap with the snowmaking this year."





    Now That's a no nonsense straight forward trip report if I've ever seen one.


    Now that's telling it straight, no bs. Maybe there was a reason even back in the '70s I went from Huntah to Vt
Sign In or Register to comment.