Heavenly, CA/NV

Click on a lift’s name for pictures. View in fullscreen↗

16 thoughts on “Heavenly, CA/NV

  1. Duncan September 14, 2018 / 11:33 am

    Wait, they’re replacing galaxy? Why was it replaced, also is this why it was closed?


    • Cooper September 14, 2018 / 3:16 pm

      I heard that the lift is unpopular and climate change. They are adding snowmaking along with it too.


    • Thomas Jett September 14, 2018 / 7:47 pm

      It was down due to wear and tear, and it just made more sense to replace it with an up-to-date Doppelmayr than to repair it.


  2. Carson January 24, 2019 / 10:32 pm

    So in skilifts.org you see the yan tram is it still around it was called the ridge gondola


    • Teddy's Lift World January 25, 2019 / 5:09 am

      It got replaced by a funicular. I can imagine that that old Yan tram was very cool, but also really hard to maintain (find parts for).


  3. Carson January 25, 2019 / 8:42 pm

    Oh that sucks it was a itresting lift is there any photos of the top terminal?


  4. skitheeast July 29, 2019 / 9:55 pm

    Sky really needs a backup lift because it’s the only way to get back to Nevada and the Gondola from California. When it goes down, a lot of people are stranded. A lift from the bottom of Sky/Canyon to the top of Dipper would be fantastic. But then again, Heavenly has only received one new lift in the past twelve years and it is a long triple that is useless as an intermediate lift not being a detachable quad.


    • Donald Reif January 19, 2020 / 4:53 pm

      Ridge used to be Sky’s backup lift, but it was for the pod itself and didn’t have access to the Nevada access trail.

      Your idea is practical, a high speed quad from bottom of Sky and Canyon to the top of Dipper. Or maybe have it end at the scenic lookout at the top of Pinnacles.


  5. skiz January 27, 2020 / 10:20 am

    I also think sky should be remade into a 6 maybe bubble with lower towers and wieghted seats for wind. move the old sky to one of these alignments?


    • skitheeast January 27, 2020 / 11:09 am

      1 would only make sense as the second stage of a gondola that replaced the Tram (which is pretty old) for stage one. 2 does not make sense, as the lift could not really be properly lapped and is not well suited to be an out-of-base lift like the aforementioned two-stage gondola with 1. 3 is similar to two, but it is different in that it can be lapped with a single trail, so slightly better but, again, not ideal. 4 is a better idea because it can get people out of the California side and back to both the top of the Gondola and both Nevada bases (unlike 3), so it could be a backup for Sky. 5 is a step back in the wrong direction as it cannot be lapped similarly to 2 and it would be too much of a pain for skiers heading back to Nevada/the Gondola. 6 could work in a similar way as 1, as the second stage of a two-stage gondola, but that line looks like it may be more exposed than 1. 7/8 are super long gondolas that would be similar to the existing Gondola and while they would be super convenient, they would only really be needed is a proper base village was developed at California.

      TL;DR: 1 could be the second stage of a gondola from California Lodge, 2/3/5 do not make sense, 4 could make sense, 6 is a worse version of 1, and 7/8 are not needed.

      I would like to clarify that lifts starting at the base of Powderbowl heading up to Nevada can technically be lapped, but not in reality because Maggie’s is an extremely flat trail and would be required as part of any run.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Skiz January 27, 2020 / 4:45 pm

      I think 3 could work as it would mainly be a shuttle lift bi directional for no catwalk people. Maybe do the sky 6 replacement and then move old sky to 3?


    • Donald Reif January 27, 2020 / 6:59 pm

      Option 4 is the only one of those that would work.


  6. Somebody February 26, 2020 / 7:14 pm

    If they aren’t willing to invest in a chairlift to fix the wind issues on sky, perhaps they should install a surface lift. This one would be ~2500′ long with ~900′ of vertical drop and would cross no existing trails afaik. You’d be able to use it to get from the bottom of sky to the top of the gondola.


    • Donald Reif February 26, 2020 / 8:06 pm

      I think most people would avoid it in favor of waiting for Sky to get off wind hold. For the same reasons I stopped going up Breck’s T-Bar after the Kensho SuperChair was built.


    • skitheeast February 26, 2020 / 9:22 pm

      I agree with @Donald Reif. It would not be used by most skiers unless because chairlifts, even fixed grips, are much more liked than surface lifts.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Donald Reif February 26, 2020 / 11:15 pm

        It’s for that reason that surface lifts are more suitable for beginner learning zones, or for advanced experts-only areas (Alpine T-Bar at Big White comes to mind, or the Horseshoe Bowl T-Bar).


Leave a 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