Aerial Tram – Jackson Hole, WY

IMG_1140
Tower 3 and car 1.
IMG_1355
The top dock in winter.
IMG_9354
Tower 1 and the lift line.
IMG_9363
Moving bottom loading platform.
IMG_9460
Lower terminal building.
IMG_9559
Tower 1 and car 1.
IMG_9580
Uphill side of the bottom terminal.
jackson hole 097
The top tension station.
jackson hole 128
Tower 4 and car 1.
jackson hole 138
Car 1 approaches tower 5.
jackson hole 198
The top dock and lift shack.
jackson hole 200
Top bullwheels.
jackson hole 219
CWA 100-passenger tram cabin number 2.

19 thoughts on “Aerial Tram – Jackson Hole, WY

  1. Duncan N. January 11, 2018 / 12:57 pm

    Why didn’t they just make the bottom terminal full size, instead of having a moving platform like that?

    Like

    • Max Hart January 11, 2018 / 1:53 pm

      Space limitations due to surrounding buildings at the bottom terminal.

      Like

      • Duncan N. January 12, 2018 / 9:00 am

        Thanks! I like to pretend I’m a huge lift nerd, and I am to those around me, but I guess I don’t really know that much in the grand scheme of lift knowledge.

        Like

  2. Duncan N. January 12, 2018 / 9:00 am

    That was an uncalled for reply of mine. Whoops.

    Like

    • Peter Landsman November 12, 2018 / 6:12 pm

      Damaged by ice. Not the first broken windows unfortunately.

      Like

        • snowbasinlocal12894 November 15, 2018 / 3:16 pm

          Reminds me when I was at snowbird with my dad and the windshield on his truck got so cold it was cracked. (There was a good 2 feet of snow on it). Sounds like the top dock needs a roof as well.

          Like

  3. Carson Walker September 17, 2019 / 11:34 am

    The bottom dock has a moving platform due to the adjacent buildings. What I am curious about is how much wider the car spacing is on the top dock. To simplify, I can’t imagine that the north and south haul ropes are parallel. I will be out there this winter and confirm.

    Like

  4. Somebody February 3, 2020 / 8:32 pm

    Does this lift really run 9-4 like the website claims?

    Like

  5. Patrick April 9, 2020 / 5:27 pm

    Why wasn’t the tram replaced with a gondola, seeing how the tram has a third the capacity of the Bridger gondola? I do understand that the extra cost might be worth it to still have a “big red” but, the marketing/historical factor alone can’t explain the choice to give up three times the potential capacity.

    Like

    • Somebody April 10, 2020 / 12:14 am

      Running a normal mono-cable gondola akin to Bridger probably wouldn’t be possible on the tram line. Those cliffs are absolutely enormous. Plus, wind would be terrible. Even if a gondola transported 4x as many skiers as the tram in one hour, it’d transport a similar amount in a season because it would usually be on wind hold.

      The only other option was something like a 3s, which would be similar cost.

      Like

      • Patrick April 10, 2020 / 10:37 am

        The whistler peak to peak 3s can move 4,100 people/hr. Assuming a 3s would be about the same cost as a tram, that is a huge difference in uphill capacity. Does JHMR simply not want to cause over crowding?

        Like

        • skitheeast April 10, 2020 / 7:37 pm

          A 3S can move a lot more than the tram, but overcrowding could always be prevented by ordering fewer cabins. I think the 3S overall cost was also lower. Peter knows best, but I think the tram was ordered purely to preserve aesthetics, marketing, and history.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Chris April 11, 2020 / 2:22 am

          Trams are way, way cheaper than a 3S. Think of the mechanical, moving parts. For one a tram has no detachable grips. It has no turnarounds in the stations, it has no garages for the gondolas.

          Think of it this way: A 3S Gondola combines the rope-side technology of a heavy duty tram, consisting of 2 weight carrying ropes per side plus the running around haul rope with a massively beefed up version of the detachable technology from chair lifts and single cable gondolas. Which means it is expensive as hell, but also has a very high capacity, as well as impressive wind stability. Another big downside of the 3S is station size, Jackson doesn’t exactly have a whole lot of sparse space either at the bottom or the summit.

          Like

Leave a Reply to Max Hart Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s