New Lift

[Andrew B.]

No reputable contractor would do the work without proper permit and code compliance.

[Ski_The_East]

This doesn’t seem to be an issue at saddleback with their new t bar, it is a trail crossing at the top

[goldenboy80]

No reputable contractor would do the work without proper permit and code compliance.

I'd just go up to the guy and say, "hey that's a nice looking pamphlet of Passenger Ropeways Safety Standards you got there... it would be a shame if something should happen to it... capisce?" Then you take out your glade trimming weed whacker, rev up the motor, and laugh maniacally until you get what you want.

[Andrew B.]

No reputable contractor would do the work without proper permit and code compliance.

I'd just go up to the guy and say, "hey that's a nice looking pamphlet of Passenger Ropeways Safety Standards you got there... it would be a shame if something should happen to it... capisce?" Then you take out your glade trimming weed whacker, rev up the motor, and laugh maniacally until you get what you want.

[Glade Monkey]

This doesn’t seem to be an issue at saddleback with their new t bar, it is a trail crossing at the top

There has to be a trail at the top so you can ski away.
The issue is trails crossing along the route.
See the differences?

[goldenboy80]

Why not install railroad crossing gates that swing down to block cross-cuts when its gusting 50 mph and the extended T-bar is running? I guess that's not provided as an option in the ANSI handbook but it seems like a possible workaround. The T-bar runs so infrequently it would only be for a handful of days a year so the cross cut gates wouldn't be that disruptive. Or maybe they would... the maximalist method would be to install a second T-Bar from top of Boardwalk to bottom of current Bateau not intersecting the cross-cut. But there's probably not enough space and adding surplus T-Bars in busy areas is sort of a short-sighted 1960s fix. There was a method to the madness of the short-side long-side double-doubles.

[SpillwayEast]

Who cares.........its a t-bar............lets move on. Will there be new urinal cakes later this year?

[Ski_The_East]

This doesn’t seem to be an issue at saddleback with their new t bar, it is a trail crossing at the top

There has to be a trail at the top so you can ski away.
The issue is trails crossing along the route.
See the differences?

Yes, I am plenty aware, why not just call gin pole an unload area then? Point is that there are clearly workarounds, and signs at saddleback clearly show you can ski over the t line to cross from the respective sides

[goldenboy80]

The good news is that within a 10 year period the answer will be quite clear.

[gondicar]

Point is that there are clearly workarounds, and signs at saddleback clearly show you can ski over the t line to cross from the respective sides

I don’t know how you can say “clearly there are workarounds”. What “workarounds” specially are you referring to? And Saddleback is not an example of a “workaround” because they haven’t worked around anything, there are no trails or cut throughs between the bottom terminal and the unloading area on their new tbar. Same at SR. Extending #3 down would create a divider through the middle of the mountain that would create way more problems than it solves.

[Ski_The_East]

Point is that there are clearly workarounds, and signs at saddleback clearly show you can ski over the t line to cross from the respective sides

I don’t know how you can say “clearly there are workarounds”. What “workarounds” specially are you referring to? And Saddleback is not an example of a “workaround” because they haven’t worked around anything, there are no trails or cut throughs between the bottom terminal and the unloading area on their new tbar. Same at SR. Extending #3 down would create a divider through the middle of the mountain that would create way more problems than it solves.

My point is that if “unloading areas” are allowed to be intersections, just make it an “unloading area” at gin pole and pick pole. Its seriously that simple

[Glade Monkey]

Point is that there are clearly workarounds, and signs at saddleback clearly show you can ski over the t line to cross from the respective sides

I don’t know how you can say “clearly there are workarounds”. What “workarounds” specially are you referring to? And Saddleback is not an example of a “workaround” because they haven’t worked around anything, there are no trails or cut throughs between the bottom terminal and the unloading area on their new tbar. Same at SR. Extending #3 down would create a divider through the middle of the mountain that would create way more problems than it solves.

My point is that if “unloading areas” are allowed to be intersections, just make it an “unloading area” at gin pole and pick pole. Its seriously that simple

Nice try but there is also a requirement to have an attendant on duty at every designated unloading area.

[Ski_The_East]

I don’t know how you can say “clearly there are workarounds”. What “workarounds” specially are you referring to? And Saddleback is not an example of a “workaround” because they haven’t worked around anything, there are no trails or cut throughs between the bottom terminal and the unloading area on their new tbar. Same at SR. Extending #3 down would create a divider through the middle of the mountain that would create way more problems than it solves.

My point is that if “unloading areas” are allowed to be intersections, just make it an “unloading area” at gin pole and pick pole. Its seriously that simple

Nice try but there is also a requirement to have an attendant on duty at every designated unloading area.

….so put one at that crossing. Not a big deal, t bar doesnt run unless basically everything is on hold anyway

[Glade Monkey]

Who cares.........its a t-bar............lets move on. Will there be new urinal cakes later this year?

Haven't they unloaded the extra ones sent from Big Sky along with that used chair?

[gondicar]

Point is that there are clearly workarounds, and signs at saddleback clearly show you can ski over the t line to cross from the respective sides

I don’t know how you can say “clearly there are workarounds”. What “workarounds” specially are you referring to? And Saddleback is not an example of a “workaround” because they haven’t worked around anything, there are no trails or cut throughs between the bottom terminal and the unloading area on their new tbar. Same at SR. Extending #3 down would create a divider through the middle of the mountain that would create way more problems than it solves.

My point is that if “unloading areas” are allowed to be intersections, just make it an “unloading area” at gin pole and pick pole. Its seriously that simple

Seriously, it isn’t.

[Ski_The_East]

Lol really??? How is it not? Where is the flaw in that working?

[gondicar]

Lol really??? How is it not? Where is the flaw in that working?

Go ask the regulators and insurance companies.

[Andrew B.]

Another thread about t-bars and funiculars
Really???

[Glade Monkey]

Another thread about t-bars and funiculars
Really???

we like to call them "signature lifts"

[gondicar]

Another thread about t-bars and funiculars
Really???

This one was started waaaaay back in December, so probably time for a new one.

[WrathOfAramark]

The good news is that within a 10 year period the answer will be quite clear.

How? When the busiest lift on the mountain has this sign on it because it's so old?

[essslsclsact]

Another thread about t-bars and funiculars
Really???

This one was started waaaaay back in December, so probably time for a new one.

Yes this has gone way off point of unnecessary DR Replacement. Many many more important lift needs.

[goldenboy80]

Yes this has gone way off point of unnecessary DR Replacement. Many many more important lift needs.

What are the many, many? Timberline? After that I'd make DR a HSQ.
Then after that I'd make King Pine a HSQ. The West Mountain Express is a given at this point.

[gondicar]

Another thread about t-bars and funiculars
Really???

This one was started waaaaay back in December, so probably time for a new one.

Yes this has gone way off point of unnecessary DR Replacement. Many many more important lift needs.

Only many many? Not many many many?

[Glade Monkey]

Back on topic...Boyne is still buying brand new quad chairlifts and announced one for Cypress (BC) this week that is going in this summer.
https://cypressmountain.com/latest-news/skyquad-chairlift

[essslsclsact]

Back on topic...Boyne is still buying brand new quad chairlifts and announced one for Cypress (BC) this week that is going in this summer.
https://cypressmountain.com/latest-news/skyquad-chairlift

Looks and sounds like similar to Skyline.

[JAC487]

...After that I'd make DR a HSQ.

Showed up this morning eager to ski and found only DRC was open. Superquad and Whiffletree where on icing/conditions hold. Makes me thing this lift will be replaced with a fixed grip in the event of icing. Additionally it would be cheaper. I agree Timberline needs to be replaced/upgraded but atleast it's not from the 70's

[machski]

...After that I'd make DR a HSQ.

Showed up this morning eager to ski and found only DRC was open. Superquad and Whiffletree where on icing/conditions hold. Makes me thing this lift will be replaced with a fixed grip in the event of icing. Additionally it would be cheaper. I agree Timberline needs to be replaced/upgraded but atleast it's not from the 70's

Yes, if a new DRC is going to have a midstation unload, I would think it would be a FGQ, probably with a load carpet. A HSQ midstation is substantially higher $$$ amounts and adds an extra cycle on the grips each spin.

[jerryg]

...After that I'd make DR a HSQ.

Showed up this morning eager to ski and found only DRC was open. Superquad and Whiffletree where on icing/conditions hold. Makes me thing this lift will be replaced with a fixed grip in the event of icing. Additionally it would be cheaper. I agree Timberline needs to be replaced/upgraded but atleast it's not from the 70's

Yes, if a new DRC is going to have a midstation unload, I would think it would be a FGQ, probably with a load carpet. A HSQ midstation is substantially higher $$$ amounts and adds an extra cycle on the grips each spin.

This is accurate and Mach definitely knows his lifts.
I am one of the few who likes the DR the way it is. I think it lends character to the hill. DR lifts were the original quads, so to speak, and HSQs in novice areas are typically a waste of money. People who are learning to ski don't care about HSQs, by-in-large. Yes, I know that people use this to get to Skyline and so do I, but I also sometimes appreciate being able to rest a little.
The lift will be replaced down the road and it will be a fixed grip quad. If Boyne isn't even getting us a new HSQ for the "signature expansion," they sure as hell aren't installing a HSQ with an extra detachable mid-station, and HSQ with midstations must detach or else what's the point of it being detachable?

[Alpiner]

If the Gin Pole crossing could continue to be grandfathered after extending the tbar down Kangaroo, then I say do it. The crossing from Spillway to NG is not needed.

But maybe FIS rules would prevent that or make it too big of a headache.

I now agree the DR replacement should be a fixed grip quad with carpet load. Because that chair needs to be as ice and wind proof as possible.

Or don’t extend the tbar and replace DR with a FGQ with mid station.

Gin Pole cannot be closed as long as SQ is running. During crowded times there is a need to run the tbar as well as SQ and Skyline.