With one of the largest lift fleets in the country and a dozen recent additions, Vail Mountain could probably stop building lifts for awhile and be fine. However a new 2024 Master Development Plan, accepted by the Forest Service last month, suggests investment will continue at Vail Resorts’ flagship mountain. The new plan is a collaboration between Vail, SE Group and the Forest Service and replaces a 2018 MDP. It’s important to note that resort master plans are conceptual in nature and don’t constitute approval of specific projects. But Vail has big plans, or at least big ideas.
Today Vail operates two gondolas, 21 chairlifts, four surface tows and seven conveyors designed to accommodate 23,690 guests on the mountain. However the resort is managed to a capacity of 19,900 skiers per day, a planning target that won’t change as lifts are upgraded and reconfigured. “Vail desires to maintain certain capacities, particularly the lift network capacity, in excess of the manage-to threshold in order to ensure a high-quality guest experience,” the plan notes. If implemented completely, it would increase lift network capacity by about seven percent to to 25,420 guests. “The goals of Vail are to continue operating at less than full capacity, but add lifts and lift capacity where needed in order to improve circulation, ease congestion, spread skiers out, more fully utilize underutilized terrain and keep wait times at lifts at a comfortable level and, therefore, maintain a high level ski experience for guests,” notes the MDP.
A major focus of the upgrade plan is moving guests up and out of Vail’s base areas. When Vail occasionally makes headlines for an epic lift line, it’s often at a gondola base first thing on a powder morning. To address this, five new egress lifts are planned. First the Eagle Bahn Gondola at Lionshead is earmarked for replacement. “Given its year-round, day and night operations, freight hauling duties, and limited capacity, the gondola will need a major overall or potentially an upgrade during the life of this plan,” notes the MDP. Built by CTEC in 1996, Eagle Bahn is technically a twelve person gondola; however, Vail has operated the gondola effectively as an eight passenger gondola. A new Lionshead gondola will likely feature 12 passenger cabins and move 3,200 riders per hour.
On the Vail Village side of the valley, the Riva Bahn Express is planned to become a third gondola extending all the way to Two Elk Lodge. The new lift would continue to feature a mid-station on Golden Peak but the top terminal would move thousands of feet up the mountain. “Due to the extended alignment, it will have an enhanced role in transporting guests to the back bowls rather than having guests access this terrain using Northwoods Express #11,” the plan notes. This eight passenger gondola would be a beast, stretching more than 16,000 linear feet and rising nearly 3,000 vertical feet from base to summit.
Also envisioned for Vail Village is a completely new lift with the working name Trans Montane. This 8,400 foot long six pack would start adjacent to the workhorse Gondola One and rise to mid-mountain, providing much-needed capacity and redundancy out of Vail Village. The top station would sit where the Riva Ridge and Trans Montane runs merge and provide access to Northwoods Express. Trans Montane would carry 3,000 guests per hour with a vertical rise of 1,829 feet.
Another new out-of-base lift in Lionshead has already been approved by the Forest Service but not constructed. Once known as Ever Vail and now called the West Lionshead lift, this would be either a detachable chairlift or 10 passenger gondola with a capacity of 2,400 skiers per hour. A couple possible alignments are under consideration with approximately 1,200 feet of vertical unloading near the base of Pride Express #26. Also at Lionshead, Born Free Express #8, is slated to become a six pack while continuing to run parallel to the Eagle Bahn Gondola. This lift is the only original CLD-260 detachable left on the front side, dating back to 1988.
Finally on the out-of-base egress front, the longest fixed grip lift at Vail, Cascade Village #20, would also go detach. This one would be a quad, either following the existing alignment or running further up the mountain to Eagle’s Nest. The lengthened option would include a mid angle station with the lift totaling 2,272 feet of vertical rise. Once all new lifts are in place, guests could choose from seven different gondolas and chairlifts capable of moving 21,000 skiers each hour.
Numerous chairlift replacements are also envisioned on the upper mountain. Even relatively new lifts may be replaced with more modern and larger capacity versions. The first is Avanti Express #2, which would go from a six to an eight place (Vail Resorts just this season opened its first eight place chairlift in North America at Whistler and apparently sees more possibilities in the future.) Mountaintop Express #4 also could be up-gauged from a six to an eight. If either of these projects happen, existing equipment would likely be reinstalled on Vail Mountain or elsewhere in the Vail Resorts portfolio.
Wildwood Express #3 and Pride Express #26, both aging CTEC detachables, would be replaced by newer technology high speed quads or six packs. Little Eagle #15, another one of the three remaining fixed grip chairs at Vail, would be replaced with a detachable quad to create an improved beginner experience. The alignment would move slightly as well and increase in length.
Vail’s Back Bowls are the other location where viral lift line photos occasionally originate. In China Bowl, the 1988 build Orient Express #21 is slated for retirement. “This chairlift is the only access to Mongolia, and Siberia bowls, so reliable service is critical to access the back bowls of the resort,” notes SE Group. The new lift would become the first six pack in the Back Bowls. Nearby, Teacup Express #36 could also go from a quad to a six seater. Finally, a completely new Mongolia Express quad is proposed to run from near Two Elk Creek to the ridgeline above the existing Mongolia Platter. This would create a direct route up Mongolia Bowl and become the sixth detachable lift in the legendary back bowls.
No lift upgrades are planned in Blue Sky Basin, however a variety of trails remain in Vail’s plans. The MDP also contains plans for snowmaking improvements, new lodges and summer activities across the mountain. The full plan is available on the Forest Service website here.
Lift Blog 
I like most of these proposals. With one exception: the Trans-Montane six pack out of Vail Village. Maybe it’s just me, but I feel it should run all the way to the top of Riva Ridge, so that one can access the Mid-Vail chairlifts via Christmas, and not just the Northwoods Express and Highline Express.
Also, they really need to resurrect Minnie’s restored to its original pre-1994 length, as then it would provide relief to the Avanti Express in serving this area.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think they should put a 3000 PPH HSS going from vail village to the bottom of Avanti, then put another HSS(or give it an angle station)going from the bottom of Avanti to mid vail
LikeLike
Interesting proposal from Vail. My bet is that Vail will likely upgrade Orient Express first, followed by Mountain Top/Wildwood replacements, then a Teacup upgrade.
If/when Vail decides to upgrade Mountain Top and Avanti, I see Mountain Top moving to replace Wildwood, and Avanti replacing Pride Express.
I also find it interesting that they are not going to make Eagle Bahn a bit more of a monster in terms of capacity as it’s arguably Vail’s main lift. Blackcomb’s gondola has an uphill capacity of almost 4,000/hr, so I find it strange that they’re only opting for a 3,200/hr lift (the same can be achieved on a 6 passenger lift) .
If I had any say, I would like to see Born Free replaced in a new alignment, starting in its current location and terminating at the top of Avanti, a high-speed quad in the Minnies alignment, and a 4,000/hr 10 passenger gondola replacing Eagle Bahn. In theory, this would allow guests who are starting their day at Lionshead to quickly traverse over to Mid Vail via Born Free, which would also make Game Creek and Avanti less transport lifts and more lapping lifts, pulling traffic off them. Minnies would help trafic traveling in the other direction (from Mid Vail to Lionshead). Thoughts?
LikeLike
I definitely have some thoughts.
Riva Bahn has always made more sense as a gondola, particularly with the Golden Peak mid-station. And taking it all the way to Two Elk is absolutely the right call. This would also almost seem to justify the silly Sourdough lift as it could become a new learning area accessed from the new gondola. Though if I had my way, I would move the base of Northwoods to the base are of Highline, move the top of Highline to Two Elk, and realign the top of Sourdough to the Teacup / Sun Up summit area for better flow through this area of the mountain and to compliment the new gondola.
The idea and alignment for Transmontane seems half-baked and illogical. I understand the need to get skiers out of the base in the morning as quick as possible, but a lift that goes exclusively to a catwalk makes me think it would not be a favorite mountain access point for skiers in the morning. I just can’t imagine installing such a high capacity lift for an area that can’t be lapped could be a good investment of Vail’s money. A couple better ideas of the top of my head:
The West Lionshead options continue to seem like a silly pipe dream unless some serious redevelopment happens in that area such as in the infamous EverVail proposals. I’m certainly not holding my breath on this one.
I fail to see why there would be any need to upgrade the capacity of extend Cascade to the top of the front side. This lift is rarely used by anyone outside of the few guests staying over there and more often than not is completely empty. Seems like it could stay as is and allow some more needed upgrades elsewhere.
The capacity upgrades in the back bowls will be a welcome reprieve however. The Sun Down lift has already helped alleviate High Noon immensely so the real choke points are Tea Cup and Orient. Based on its age and its tendency to form massive lines, I expect Orient to be upgraded within the next two years.
I cannot wait for the new Mongolia lift and hope the Vail goes through with this sooner rather than later. That area is completely underutilized because of the absolute slog it takes to lap it. The new lift will make that much easier. Some people might decry the loss of their seemingly secret powder stashes but I honestly don’t think that lift will increase the amount of people accessing that terrain too much.
I am glad to see the plan for additional cut and glades runs in Blue Sky are still in the works. Those will be great for spreading people out a bit more and helping the flow between Blue Sky and the Back Bowls by eliminating some of the long runout catwalks. I wish vail would add some more cut and/or gladed runs to some areas of the frontside as well (particularly in the Highline pod and in the Riva Ridge / Prima areas).
While all this mostly looks great, I can’t help but notice what is not included in this master plan: no additional lifts in Blue Sky (such as the opposite ridge from Earl’s), and no terrain expansion into South Game Creek bowl. As areas that have been in Vail’s SUP for a while now, I am surprised Vail isn’t thinking ahead by adding them into the master plan now. Maybe it was too much for the forest service to approve at this time, but I just can’t imagine Vail wants to stay at its current operational acreage for their flagship when places like Steamboat continue to increase their lift-served terrain.
Overall, can’t wait to see some of these things come to fruition! thanks to anyone who actually read all this. In case you couldn’t tell, I’m a pretty passionate Vail devotee. 😂
LikeLiked by 2 people
I had the same thoughts about Transmontane. It would definitely be more useful running up to the top of Christmas so that one could access Mid-Vail.
LikeLike
If the top of the Transmontane alignment moved to the Prima,Riva Ridge, Christmas trail split, then a midline load could be added in the drainage at the bottom of Riva ridge allowing some infill trail development. This idea would be a huge lift over 10k foot long line and around 2700vert but it makes more sense.
LikeLike
I think the top of Highline is itself a localized maximum (a mini peak) so moving the top of that lift to Two Elk means that lapping Blue Ox/Highline/Roger’s Run becomes so difficult as to be impossible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
a lift network is not a subway system. it’s not meant to connect every major point together. a chairlift at its best is delivering skiers to terrain they want to lap multiple times. The current config of Chairs 10 and 11 are excellent at this. chair 10’s current summit avoids a very awkward skate to its expert terrain. chair 11’s bottom terminal stops short of equally awkward steep, low-elevation terrain that would be unpleasant for the folks lapping flapjack or the blue runs.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I am a little surprised they are going to upgrade both Eaglebahn and Born Free. I always felt like this was an opportunity to install one lift on that line such as a Tri-line gondola, 3S gondola, Funitel, etc.
On the other hand, agree that Transmontane feels forced, it could be that Vail regrets decision to take out Giants Steps, why they are keeping Born Free, etc.
Another surprise is that Skyline is not on the upgrade list. That lift has to function both as an access lift (to Blue Sky) and a lapping lift so I would have expected it to be upgraded to at least a six pack.
Finally, its interesting to me that Vail is thinking eight pax on MountainTop/Avanti; but only Six Packs on Orient/Tea Cup. I would have thought those would be the same.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One reason they might have chosen not to upgrade Skyline could be the ridge at the top. There might be issues with wind. I’ve definitely been stuck on some miserable rides in the past where they had to wait for the wind to die down before restarting. I don’t think they have any issues with capacity, since it seems like they rarely run Earl’s these days.
LikeLike
My guess apart from wind as to not upgrade skyline is to limit the people accessing the terrain. The runs in Blue sky are not wide and the median skier only ever tends to cut over on cloud nine and ski big rock park and the couple blues on petes. Instead of upgrading skyline, I could see the trail pod on petes being expanded and that lift turned to a 6. Then if the lines back up at skyline, those who decide not to wait can be alleviated by a new 6 pack to teacup. A bigger lift is going to move more people and if the runs cant support that, then theres going to be issues whether it be collisions. Its already hard enough coming down from Iron Mask/ lovers leap to enter the gully at the bottom with the amount of people coming from big rock park.
The reason for adding in the sundown chair to alleviate high none was that the bowls could support the flow of people easily and the runs into game creek and wildwood. Blue sky is a bit different in that its isolation away from elsewhere can only support so much unless an upgrade to skyline means that the ridge and wuides will would be groomed more often as the ridg not only bumps up, but is also in a thin plot of snow. As a regular skier, I have no problem skiing anything, but to attract tourists, you cant pump a ton of people into a pod without adequate conditions on the run. Another option then would be to groom encore back down to skyline and wuides to earls to give skiers more of an option to leave the pod at belles camp faster, but at the current condition, theres just not enough there to spread people out faster. Upgrading a lift on the frontside is much more different to upgrading a lift in bluesky.
LikeLike
The Riva Bahn gondola, both lift type and proposed alignment, is a great idea. Having the current lift end right at Northwoods makes that lift line unnecessarily long, and ending at Two Elk allows people to disperse.
The Trans Montane alignment makes little sense to me. It just forces skiers onto a catwalk they can already access from Gondola One. Or, they could ski back down to the base on Riva Ridge, which also ends at a catwalk. Vail Village does need more capacity, but why not rebuild Giant Steps? Or, to actually bring people to a new place, have a lift that goes to Eagle’s Nest.
For replacing Eagle Bahn and Born Free, why not aim for a single lift with a ridiculously high capacity? The lines are always very long, Eagle Bahn’s alignment is preferred over Born Free’s, Eagle’s Nest can handle more people, and the cost of installing a funitel, for example, must be roughly comparable to the cost of installing both a new gondola and new six-pack.
The Cascade, West Lionshead/Pride alternative, and Mongolia proposals all make sense as well. An expansion into South Game Creek Bowl would be nice at some point, but I understand why it is not a priority right now. Other Vail properties need additional terrain more than Vail at the moment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lionshead kinda needs two lifts. Even if just for redundancy so that if one of them goes down, you can still get on the mountain. Think about how Snowbasin built the DeMoisy Express to ensure that Strawberry Basin can still open if the gondola can’t, or how Breck built the Freedom SuperChair to provide a secondary lift on Peak 7 and relieve the Independence SuperChair.
The gondola gets you all the way up to Eagle’s Nest, while the Born Free Express provides means of accessing the Pride Express if you want to go to Eagle’s Nest, or the Avanti Express if you want to head east towards Mid-Vail while bypassing Eagle’s Nest.
Really, that lack of redundancy is a bit of a flaw with the other two base areas, and I’ve seen stories of the long lines that Gondola One or Riva Bahn can get if the other lift is down for any reason. That would be one problem that could be fixed by bringing back Giant Steps on a longer alignment.
LikeLike
I agree. I don’t really understand the point of the Trans Montane lift. A modern Giant Steps lift seems much more practical. I get the need for redundancy, but make the lift actually useful. I never understood why they took out the original Giant Steps lift, other than the bottom terminal being in the way for their fancy country club.
LikeLike
I fully agree. I’ve ridden the original chair 1 exactly once, but it got me out of the Village area efficiently and while I then went to chair 2, I could see how the original trail pod was designed and it doesn’t really seem to ski well without a lift there. Getting rid of terrain for real estate really sucks.
LikeLike
Agree with many of the comments above – this master plan seems more wishlist, pie-in-the-sky thinking. I guess the mantra its better to put it down if you are even thinking about that trying to do so after the fact. Maybe they feel the regulatory environment toward getting things approved is going to be increasingly more difficult. I don’t know…
Anyways:
Trans Montane – what? Long, expensive, no real lappable ski terrain, and really only forced egress to Chair 11. Essentially access-only, but seems like more skiers would prefer the Gondola 1 or the proposed Riva Gondola for better access to to top.
Agree bringing back “Giant Steps” in combination with a new “Minnies” would give far better access, back-up, and improve skier circulation mid-mountain. Could access Avanti, Born Free, and new “Minnies” A new “Minnes” gives better progression from the learning area off of Eagles Nest terrain and would take pressure off of Avanti.
Riva Bahn Gondola to Two Elks makes alot of sense. Although would go with a 2 mid-station line, one at top of Golden Peak, one at the current upload by Chair 11, and then top up at Two Elks. That would take pressure off Gondola 1 since otherwise Riva no longer becomes a way to access PHQ or Sun Up/Sun Down Bowl like you can do today with the 6->11 combo.
With all the major capex and lift replacements across all of their resorts I don’t see alot of this stuff happening anytime soon.
By the end of decade I anticipate we will see the following projects:
The rest of the stuff like replacing/upgauging all of the relatively new quads and 6 packs with 8 packs etc. Don’t see that happening until well into the 2030s or beyond.
The amount of detachable lifts across all of Vail Resorts properties reaching 30 years old over the next two staggering, and that is a lot of Capex spend. Hence why I don’t see them pulling out younger lifts (like 2, 4, etc.) early.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, replacing the last two CLD-260 high speed quads and Eagle Bahn, plus an infill lift for Mongolia Bowl, that seems more pragmatic.
Also, makes sense that the Riva Bahn Gondola should include a mid-station for those who’ve used the Riva Bahn Express to Northwoods Express route to get on the mountain.
LikeLike
In agreement with all the comments up to this point: the Trans-Montane lift, as it’s planned, is a dumb idea. Bring back Giant Steps as a DC6 instead, at least it would provide access to the other base areas, more realistic lap-able terrain, and immediate access to the Avanti lift.
LikeLike
Vail is already beyond crowded. It really needs terrain expansion into some of:
-East Vail Chutes
-Minturn
-Commando Bowl
-Mushroom Bowl
LikeLiked by 1 person
the same bighorn sheep who began clutching their pearls over employee housing would literally explode if Vail proposed expanding its SUP boundary to the East Vail Chutes.
Vail has thousands of acres left undeveloped within their existing SUP boundary, including exceptional exposures like West Game Creek Bowl and the other half of Earl’s Bowl.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Little Eagle #15 is mentioned to in the article to be updated to a D4 however the “Changes front Vail” map shows lift #15 to be replaced by a detachable triple.
LikeLike
Yeah, I don’t really understand the benefit of that one. The only thing I can come up with is they want to set the record for shortest detachable lift in North America.
LikeLike
This is a very disappointing direction for the Trans Montane Rod and Gun Club.
This plan seems singularly obsessed with pulling as many people out of the village and onto the ridge as possible. How many parallel lifts running base to summit do you need? Lionshead is gonna feel like Mount Snow or Mammoth. Are they seriously considering roping Pride into a base-to-summit lift? People actually like skiing the upper mountain blues there.
And what are skiers supposed to do after getting off Trans Montane? Lap Tourist Trap repeatedly until they collide with Gwyneth Paltrow? Skate to the already-giant line at Northwoods?
The plan seems to insist that they are increasing lift capacity without the intent of increasing the total volume of skiers. But I am very skeptical of taking the word of a C-corp with an explicit aim of maximizing shareholder value. More out of base capacity will lower the cost of showing up at 10am. So more people will do it. Which would be fine if the plan was *also* paired with expanded terrain or expanded uphill capacity on under-utilized terrain.
Instead, we see missed opportunities, like an Orient Six Pack. That lift unlocks a ~ton~ of skiable acreage. Why still a quad? With or without a Mongolia detach, it’s the only way to access 3.5 of the 7 back bowls.
The capacity increases they are proposing seem purely reactionary. ”Hey everyone skis Avanti, let’s allow even more people to ski Avanti”. ”Hey everyone is lapping Cloud 9 on Blue Sky, let’s upgrade Teacup so they can get out of there faster”. This is not a vision for improving a world class ski resort. it’s a reaction to a spreadsheet of historical lift wait times.
~~~
Do their spreadsheets also capture how crowded Flapjack or Big Rock Park or Bear Tree can feel? Does it capture the number of near-misses in mid-Vail or how fast Avanti or Simba can feel icy and skied off on some days? Lift lines are important, but so is skier density. This master plan seems very skewed towards improving only the former metric.
LikeLike
All of this is well said, with the exception of the unnecessary shade directed towards Mammoth. There might be just one pair of lifts (1 and 6) that serve essentially identical terrain and are in regular operation together, but even then they serve very different purposes. Yes 21 parallels 10 to some extent and 20 does the same with 4, but those lifts are effectively back ups at this point that rarely run outside of holiday weekends. Otherwise, Mammoth strikes me as a particularly bad example to point to for redundant or unnecessary lifts.
LikeLike
Despite the sentiment in this comment section, I actually understand what Vail is trying to do here a bit with Trans-Montane. They’re trying to solve the morning rush. Evidently they figure that the Riva gondola will turn Northwoods into a ghost town in the early morning rush (which is true), so they want to have another way to dump people there.
Building to Mid-Vail (or to a point where you can ski to Mid-Vail) is the first logical thought but Mid-Vail is already a crowds disaster and Vail evidently doesn’t expect people to equally balance the lines by taking the cattrack to Northwoods.
Ok, so what about building straight to Northwoods instead? Well that’s 2,000 feet longer than building to TM, and is basically just the current alignment of Riva Bahn.. So one could definitely argue they should just leave Riva quad in place, lol.
Dumping a six pack onto Trans-Montane is a bad idea for obvious reasons. But I do see how it ended up in the master plan.
They might be better off leaving at least the first section of Riva Quad in place so that when the gondola line is long people can go Riva->Highline->Sourdough. But then in their eyes Northwoods is still a missed opportunity. Maybe they need to extend Northwoods to the bottom of highline? Trans-Montane six pack is certainly not an elegant way to solve the problem.
I do like the idea of bringing back Giant Steps as a high speed quad but it doesn’t fix out of base capacity. Anyone trying to get anywhere besides Avanti is forced to the aforementioned disaster that is Mid-Vail, or the newly upgraded Game Creek.
I know this is also incredibly unpopular but I highly doubt the future viability of 8 pack chairs. Even when fully loaded they already have the same capacity as 6 packs, and bigger chairs are certainly harder to load since anecdotally, people in lift lines usually struggle to even count to 4. There’s a wall you hit around 3300-3600pph and you can’t build a chairlift that does better than that without double loading or some other shenanigans.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the idea people have when bringing back Giant Steps is that it should be a six pack, and be extended to the top of the Eagle’s Nest Ridge. Building that, along with resurrecting Minnie’s as a high speed quad restored to its pre-1994 length, would mitigate traffic flow on the central Front Side and improve out-of-base capacity.
As for the proposed Trans-Montane lift, what the others here are saying is that without being able to reach Mid-Vail, it’ll just be a lift to nowhere since the only way to get anywhere else will be taking a cat-track to the Northwoods Express or Highline Express. Not exactly ideal.
LikeLike
I’m not really sure there’d be a need for a 6 pack on a Giant Steps line, although their plan calls for a 6 pack for Trans Montane. I do like your idea for a resurrected Minnie’s lift, in its original, longer format. They’d have to move the top of it though, as the old terminal is where the tubing hill is now. If they could move it further up the ridge so you could lap Berries, Lodgepole, and Ledges, that’d be the best lift on the mountain. Plus, it would reduce crowding on Chair 2, which is probably the busiest chair on the hill.
LikeLike
I’m of the same opinion of 8-packs….. there is a point of diminishing returns, and I’ve love to see the real world data of actual real capacity utilization/increase of a 6 pack vs 8 pack. Especially when making the business case to replace young 6 packs…..
LikeLike
Vail, Beaver Creek, and Breckenridge are all the kinds of places that probably can eke by with just six packs. The one place where I think an eight pack would be warranted would maybe be Quicksilver Super6, but even then Breck is planning to build a separate gondola to serve a new learning area below Ten Mile Station.
LikeLike
You do realize 8 packs are not some untested new concept that might be found unviable, they have been around since the late 90s in Europe and have been increasingly popular for resort operators since.
LikeLike
Yes, but I’m talking about the total ROI/business case of going from a “young” 6-pack to an 8-pack. Maybe if you have to replace a bunch of old fixed grips or a old detach quad, but there is no way in the horizon of this plan that VR is going to rip out Mountain Top Express or Avanti to put in an 8-pack of the minimal capacity increase it might yield.
The way most places manage their lines/mazes and line-ups, some places struggle to utilize 6-packs effectively, let alone a 8-pack.
People can’t figure out how to line-up, let in singles, etc.
LikeLike
Plus, Vail Resorts ain’t Boyne. If they put an eight-pack in, it’s because they think the lift needs it. Silverlode was planned to become an eight pack before that was scuttled, and Whistler used what would’ve been Silverlode 8 to replace Fitzsimmons because of the benefits it’ll provide when hauling bikes in the summer.
LikeLike
It really isn’t an ROI issue, accountants look at time value of money (less money spent now is worth more than more money spent latter), with the allowed depreciation and reuse savings upgrading a relatively young 10-15 year old lift and reusing it pencils out in their mind.
8 packs can move over 4000 pph easily without issue I’d doubt that a 4800 pph eight pack at six second chair spacing would really work as even quads have issues.
I am guessing that the current Mountain top would move to Wildwood and Avanti to Teacup as these are the most similar size lifts though Teacup is 200 vert more.
LikeLike
A few things:
First, I wholly agree with your analysis on Trans Montane. Once Riva runs all the way to Two Elk, there’s gonna be a need to divert some of the morning rush to Northwoods. It’s inelegant, but it’s the only sensible way to do that while also keeping people out of Mid-Vail.
Second, regarding Giant Steps, my understanding is that there’s literally not enough room any more for a terminal at the bottom of the old liftline, because the base has been built out since removal. They’d have a very expensive project on hand to make it fit without hampering crowdflow.
Finally, I used to agree with you about 8-packs (I think the industry did too), but then I changed my mind on things after I thought about it more. The theoretical capacity is always gonna have to be capped near 3600/h, but that doesn’t mean that the actual capacity can’t be improved with better design. Consider the case of two lifts with theoretical capacities of 2400/h: a quad with 6s intervals and a six-pack with 9s intervals.
You mentioned that it’s hard for lifties to form groups of 6 or 8, but it’s also hard to form a group of 4, particularly when you have 33% less time on a quad. To figure out the actual capacity of the quad, you’ve got to anticipate what share of chairs will have 4 seats filled, what share will have only three seats filled, and so on. Taking a weighted average and multiplying it by 600 chairs/h will get you your actual capacity. Now, if you do the same thing on a six-pack, you’ll have wider variability, but the cost of failing to fill one seat per chair is less (17% vs 25% of capacity). If a six-pack averages five riders per chair, then that works out to an actual capacity 0f 2000/h. For a quad to manage the same throughput, each chair needs to average 3.33 riders. So there’s a different sort of margin for error on a six-pack.
When you compare a quad and a six-pack on a 2400/h line, I think the quad might be more efficient because of the added complexity. With an six versus an eight on a 3600/h line, however, I think that the balance might shift to the wider chair.
LikeLike
whistler blackcomb need a new plan like this. They have there master plan but they need upgrade plans to existing lifts.
LikeLike
No talk at all about the problem with crowded cat walks to get around the mountain. Many of these need to be widened and made more beginner/intermediate friendly. The S curves on Gitalong road and the catwalk of Lower Lionshead way has ended a ski season for many people. Too many families with kids or seniors, who have been skiing for decades, have been terrified with the daily close calls. Virtually everyone skiing the mountain has to traverse too many narrow catwalks and now VR is packing even more people on the mountain and NOTHING has been done to widen some critical ski arteries. Better yet, they even put permanent snow making equipment 15 feet into the catwalk on some a few years ago making the catwalks even MORE narrow. Bachelor Gulch has million dollar tunnels and bridges to get people around the mountain and from village to village, why can’t Vail? Ski Snowboard club spent plenty of dough using excavators for months to build a mogul slope (that the rest of us can’t use). Why can’t Vail fix these problem choke points BEFORE they invest in more lifts?
LikeLike
Some of these make sense, but others seem poorly thought out. I’d really hate to see Riva Bahn become a gondola, as that is some fun terrain to lap. Trans Montane seems poorly planned. As others have mentioned, a resurrected Giant Steps lift seems much more practical. They were approved for the EverVail gondola over 15 years ago, and nothing happened. The issue I see with that one though, is as late in the season as they open the Pride lift, it would be a gondola to nowhere, unless they either added cabins to the Pride lift, or ran the gondola all the way up to Eagle’s Nest. Having a chair to make Mongolia lap-able would be awesome, but that is another one that has been planned for many years but has yet to be built.
One that isn’t on the plan that would be awesome would be a new Minnie’s lift, starting from the original, lower terminal position before the old lift was shortened. The top terminal location is now the tubing hill, but if they could have it end on the ridge at the top of Berries that would be awesome. It’d take the stress off of the Avanti lift, and would be fantastic for lapping Berries, Lodgepole, and Ledges.
LikeLike
meanwhile all the east coast mountains vail bought are struggling to keep their lifts running and could use upgrades BAD.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This Master Plan Update doesn’t say that East Coast lifts won’t be installed in the future. It’s Vail Mountain specific not the Company wide plan.
LikeLike
Well, as someone at one of the red-headed stepchild areas here in the East, I’d welcome a masterplan for us that includes lifts. Our five aerial lifts are from 2000 – fixed quad; 1998 – detach quad; 1992 – detach quad (Okemo hand me down); 1987 – fixed triple (repaired 2008 after return bullwheel was launched down the hill); 1987 – fixed triple (Riblet/Doppelmayr mutt).
Meanwhile, recording more skier/rider visits than any of the other Vail NH areas. A new roof on the summit building – while needed – does not improve the on-snow experience.
LikeLike
Mountaintop and Avanti will be 20 year old crowded sixes by 2035. Replacing them with new eights and using the existing sixes to replace older lifts elsewhere in Vail’s portfolio seems reasonable to me. That seems like a cost effective way to keep the flagship mountains to up to par, without falling behind on investment at the other places.
LikeLike
Theres a few things I see in this plan happening sooner than others. If vail is to try the same things that Breckenridge is doing recently in wanting to build a new learning center at the base of peak 9, then we may see a riva bahn upgrade sooner than later, however i have a problem with it. The proposal only asks for a mid station at the top of golden peak to service those runs and the terrain park, however there is no proposal for a second mid station. If anything, it would be better that this massive new proposed life be split into three sections with another mid station at the base of northwoods so that learning skiers and riders get a longer run with not only sourdough but also with flapjack down to nrothwoods. This then could alleviate the lunch rush to two elk as sourdough crowds up, more people could instead access the godola from the base of northwoods. It would be sad to not being able to go to northwoods from 6 in a timely manner. This would also boost utilization of the lift as well. If they do have it going straight to the bowls in the morning, then it would not surprise me if vail expects this lift to increase in capacity.
Then instead of the transmontane to nowhere and instead of building a new restaurant at the top of sun up, why not build the egress lift all the way to northwoods and build a new restaurant there. It already is at certain times of the day, the focus of the frontside of the mountain. Or instead of this plan, have the egress lift go to avanti and rebuild the minnies lift as a high speed 6 to boost what light be one of the most under utilized areas of the mountain. Theres just runs over there but usually empty.
I support vails decision not to upgrade the skyline lift in blue sky because for one, I just dont think the runs can support the increase in skiers, however if the trail pod to petes is expanded and more people choose to lap it throughout the day, then it might make sense to upgrade that lift to a 6 pack or to increase the ability to access lifts 21 and tea cup which for tea cup to turn into a 6 could help to alleviate those who choose not to wait in the lines for skyline. I view those current lines akin to the highway metering on I70. While no one wants to wait in those lines, the terrain and infrastructure just cant handle it and if an upgrade were to happen, It would be best to focus on better trail grading as the lift line is sloped which is the only life line ive ever seen as such and collisions and beginners who dont have a clue on how to stay in the line, fall and it can be a real mess. The proposed grading in marmot valley may imply that snowmaking will be used in the area and grooming to increase the amount of skiers able to lap tea cup bowl. This is the same use of snowmaking as in game creek where its only used at the base to fill in a creek(go figure), but increasing accessibility in that area will help to alleviate the skiers who tend to jam up the catwalk network that gos directly behind orient. If anything the base of 36 and 37 needs to be expanded to allow the crowds and upgrading tea cup will help for that.
The proposed mongolia lift looks to be the most promising of anything in the plan as itll help to utilize more terrain in vails bowls that otherwise isnt at the present time. Sometimes i dont like accessing that terrain because the platter tends to jam up. Building a better lift to increase focus will only help and if the plan goes through, the middle catwalk from grand review/the star in blue sky should meet up with the lower station with maybe an upper catwalk which serves to meet up with the fence from china bowl to siberia where skiers could access shangri la instead of being forced only to take the catwalk at the end.
If the evervail project comes o fruition, then there is no real point to building a gondola just to the base of pride. instead there should be a gondola taking people all the way to the top with a mid station and with a new pride chair as an egress to lap terrain. If the gondolas odown or are having issues or are jammed up, one could still take born free to pride. Theres a big thing at vail too that 26 is usually sacred terrain for the reason that pride almost never has a line and the terrain it services is usually pretty empty. My friends and I will usually lap the terrain in the pride area because theres usually no lines. Theres is no real point in upgrading the cascade lift as its almost never used unless vail plans to cut some black runs in the area and expand its base area to give it a purpose. Like this wasteful project, if trans montane watns to serve as a egress, then itd be a lift not to run everyday which means it should not be a 6 pack. Such a lift should go elsewhere to allow skiers to lap. While giant steps/ lindseys/ 38 trail pod tends to be skimmed uff and icy during mid season, it becomes really fun during the spring and could use a new high speed quad, but not a 6 pack.
LikeLike
Much to discuss here.
Vail has been on the record since the Sun Down and Game Creek projects stating that an Eagle Bahn replacement is top priority. A modern, higher-capacity workhouse similar to Gondola One obviously makes sense here.
Absent West Lionshead/Evervail development, it seems to me that Born Free and Pride do the job they’re assigned. Mechanically they may be aging, but lines are rare (and Born Free’s will dwindle with the Eagle Bahn upgrade) and the alignments make sense. Pride is perfect for early morning empty cruisers.
Orient should be priority 2, after Eagle Bahn. Perhaps with a capacity upgrade, but this one definitely needs more reliable service and bubbles would be a huge bonus due to the exposed stretch near the summit.
Blue Sky and Teacup seem OK to me, but agree with an earlier commenter suggesting more elbow space at the base of 36/37 (unlikely to be permitted by authorities). Earl’s and Pete’s have wide chair spacing and lower capacity; can these be increased without significant mechanical investment? Pete’s can back up from time to time. Earl’s less frequently, but quite annoying when it does.
The Mountaintop 6 pack never had a high enough capacity to manage Gondola 1 riders plus cross mountain travelers from Avanti and Wildwood. I don’t know the solution here but it needs to move more people, and even an incremental upgrade to 8 pack may not resolve this in the medium term. Maybe some combo of an upgraded Wildwood + the proposed Transmontane could encourage visitors to avoid the line (I’m skeptical: most folks in the morning are just looking for the fastest route to Patrol Headquarters); but guessing this will just kick the problem down the line 10 years as skier visits presumably increase with time.
As proposed, the updates to Riva and Transmontane look like solutions in search of a problem to me, but I understand that a master plan is supposed to look far into the future and it’s wise to keep options open.
LikeLike
Exciting to see so many planned upgrades on such a large scale. Some thoughts as a diehard Vail Valley skier…
-Gondola #19 (Eagle Bahn) needs to be the next upgrade at Vail. It is a critical lift with a relatively low capacity and I’m sure very high hours.
-Mongolia will be an exciting lift, but I feel we are decades out with that one. Similar to the Sun Down Lift, which was in the plans for many years before construction.
-Chair #15 (Little Eagle) high speed quad makes a ton of sense to me. Dedicated beginner high speed quads have been a big success lately across other Vail Resorts (Beaver Creek, Breck, Park City). I bet this one happens pretty soon.
-I’ve heard that the West Lionshead Gondola and Chair #20 (Cascade) replacement require the owners of the real estate developments at the bottom to help pay for the new lifts. That will draw out the process. Just look at Sunrise at Park City, which has been in talks for over 10 years now.
-Like many others have said, I don’t think the Trans-Montane lift is ideal. I also think a gondola being the only lift out of Golden Peak is not ideal either with all the lapable terrain in that zone. I would prefer to see Chair #6 (Riva Bahn) replaced with a six pack that stops at the current midstation.
-The dream would be for a new gondola from Vail Village (where Trans-Montane is supposed to load) all the way to Two Elk, with a midstation at the bottom of Chair #11 (Northwoods). This would satisfy the demand for extra capacity out of Vail Village on what I think is a more natural alignment. Would be the Vail version of the new Wild Blue at Steamboat. Imagine a one seat ride from Vail Village to the Back Bowls, it would be absolutely incredible!
Anybody have any thoughts on all of that? I’d love to hear them!
LikeLike
Everybody’s thinking the Mongolia lift is a good idea. I get the feeling they think the snow is going to be the same there as it is now after being accessed by high-speed high capacity lift.
Think again.
This area is the last part of Vail that was the way it used to be 30 and 40 years ago and that is at least something like backcountry skiing. Even with just the platter lift it does get tracked out. The fact that it work to get out there and requires two lift rides is what keeps it so so very special. Put in that high-speed lift and watch it turn to chop and bumps out there.
And the bigger picture, all of the other proposed increases in lift capacity. They just keep packing more lifts in and what does that do to the snow conditions? More grooming making for asphalt hard snow, more people on the trails to collide with, the snow gets scraped off faster, bumps build faster, increased skier traffic ruins the snow conditions.
The beauty of Vail used to be that when there was new snow it would last all day before getting tracked out unlike any other ski area where are all the first tracks are gone in the first hour. That’s not happening anymore, it’s still better than other places but Vail is destroying what made it so special.
I feel fortunate I got to enjoy Vail when it was better than it is now, that would be 30 to 40 years ago.
LikeLike