Jackson Hole new tram - December 2008

[ChrisC]

I would continue to advise skiers to consider Jackson seriously next year with low attendance but continued patrol use of the tram. I would be more skeptical of the ensuing 2 seasons. 2007-08 will have delayed patrol access to the top. 2008-09 will see a spike in attendance, and if it's not a big snow year like 2005-06 everyone will try to use the new tram to get high, which even at 600 people per hour won't handle big crowds that well.

I don't disagree too much with your advice, but I think the Jackson Hole lift network is so awkward that it should be avoided without the tram.

Perhaps the biggest strength of Jackson is the scale of the place. Going into the Backcountry. Skiing the Hobacks. Without the tram, the place breaks into 1200 vert ft. pods. Generally the bowls at Jackson are elongated with a groomed path gown the middle and a few chutes on the sides. Not super terrain. It will take one hour plus to get to the summit.

I would wait until the tram is installed again.

 

[ChrisC]

Rendezvous Bowl will have considerably more skier traffic with a chair up there than it did with the old tram. It will be interesting to see if the chair stays when the new tram goes in. .

I think they willl take it out when the new tram goes in.

They installed a surface lift in Rendezvous when Sublette went in years ago. It was removed only a few years later - primarily over complaints making the bowl too bumpy.

 

[ChrisC]

in advance in 2005-06 but also deferred to 2008-09.

Yes, however I might be wrong here, but that big rush for the last Tram will not be repeated by a big rush for the new Tram. The New Tram will be a novelty for sure and bring back a great top-to-bottom lift (a necessity for JH), but it will be there for many years to come so there won't be the same urgency to go.

An hockey analogy could be made for the last year of the Canadiens at the Montreal Forum (the mecca of hockey)(or Boston Garden, Maple Leaf garden) as being one of the last old arenas left in the NHL. Most big hockey fans across the league wanted to go before hockey would leave this shrine forever. The Molson Centre (new Forum) was the biggest and most modern arena in the NHL, but besides the novelty, it didn't have the history of the old Forum. Well the Tram had the same thing going for it. History, one of the classic lift in North America IMO, which is why the attraction for some of us was greater during the last year, especially people that weren't regular to Wyoming.

The new tram might become a great lift, but it won't have the history behind it.


http://www.jacksonhole.com/JacksonAsset ... us_map.jpg

I totally agree with the above thoughts.

I would Avoid Jackson.

 

[Tony Crocker]

I'm rehashing a bit but:

We now know that the chair will be relocated from Rendezvous to somewhere in the Casper Bowl area when the new tram goes in.

I skied 67K in 3 days at JH last January and used the tram once. The line was usually close to an hour and I would have had less skiing if I had used the tram more. The reason next year could be good at Jackson is that attendance will take a big hit, so there will be shorter lines and the powder may last longer. 2007-08 is a different story. I think there will be substantially delayed openings of terrain after storms with no patrol access by tram. And they won't spend a lot on alternative means of control because they know they will get the tram back the next year.

No question JH has an awkward lift system. But the terrain is spectacular and powder potential very impressive. I'd get tired of that lift system if I were skiing there all the time, but it's an impressive enough area for recurring visits every few years IMHO.

I can see Patrick's logic about 2008-09 not having the big spike in attendance that we saw in 2005-06.

 

[Patrick]

No question JH has an awkward lift system. But the terrain is spectacular and powder potential very impressive. I'd get tired of that lift system if I were skiing there all the time, but it's an impressive enough area for recurring visits every few years IMHO.

Yes, the lift system is somewhat awkward, but the mountain topography also. I haven't been to that many places out West, but the fact that the mountain is traverse top to bottom by many ridge/canyon makes it difficult (not that it's a bad thing).

Yes, I also agree about the recurring visits point.

I skied 67K in 3 days at JH last January and used the tram once..

I didn't realise (or forgot) that you took the Tram only once? During those 4 days, I know I took it once a day. I might have taken it twice in one of those days also, not sure.

 

[Tony Crocker]

the mountain is traverse top to bottom by many ridge/canyon makes it difficult

That's an unusual criticism of Jackson. JH has more long continuous fall lines than most North American ski areas. I think Patrick has been spoiled in this respect by the Alps! From what I saw at Grands-Montets and Verbier there's a similar amount of lift sequences, waiting in line for trams, etc. to get to those long runs. But yes, at the big places in the Alps the runs can be even longer than Jackson's.

Jackson's other claim to fame is the powder, which is much more abundant than anyplace in the Alps. And the inefficient lift system contributes to its preservation. It's hard to find a balance between efficiency and powder preservation. IMHO Snowbird has it about right. You have a choice between hammering vertical (still on challenging terrain) and poking around for off-the-beaten-track stashes. Alta was historically the exemplar of powder preservation as the priority. With the new Collins lift I think Alta is now closer to Snowbird than to Jackson in this regard.

 

[Patrick]

the mountain is traverse top to bottom by many ridge/canyon makes it difficult

That's an unusual criticism of Jackson. JH has more long continuous fall lines than most North American ski areas.

It wasn't a critism, but this topography might explain part of the awkward lift configuration.

When I mentioned traverse top-to-bottom, I haven't talking that the vertical was difficult, but it was more a comment on the possible diffculties in moving from one end to another, especially if there's a canyon separating parts of the mountain.

The ridges and canyons that run down the mountain are definitely alot of fun and it wasn't a critism in my part, just an observation that these might also limit your lifts placement and skier traverses. I don't recall any mountain that is split the way that Jackson is. Cliff traversing the hill i've seen, but I don't think I've seen a place with ridges (I think spines might be a better description) running along the face top-to-bottom.

Again, it isn't a critism, it just make the place different from what i have seen.

 

[Tony Crocker]

Alta and Snowbird both have one prominent ridge that divide the area(s) into 2 major drainages.

I'm not sure I'd want to do a big overhaul of Jackson's lifts. I'd get the new tram in there, then see what the liftline/skier distribution looks like after that. In terms of efficiency a lift from the base to the bottom of Sublette would come to mind, but that has the potential to raise skier density a lot on the lower ungoomed slopes below Sublette. With the bad exposure and low altitude I don't think we really want that.

 

[ChrisC]

I skied 67K in 3 days at JH last January and used the tram once. The line was usually close to an hour and I would have had less skiing if I had used the tram more. The reason next year could be good at Jackson is that attendance will take a big hit, so there will be shorter lines and the powder may last longer. 2007-08 is a different story. I think there will be substantially delayed openings of terrain after storms with no patrol access by tram. And they won't spend a lot on alternative means of control because they know they will get the tram back the next year.

I do think the tram is a key to Jackson Hole. You might not have used it..but I think it leads to the best skiing.

How can you market an entire year as Last Tram without acknowledging the importance?

I skied Jackson Jan 14-18 (Sat-Wed) and the tram was very doable - except on a the deepest powder days. I got between 4 - 12" eveyday. The tram lines were short early morning, lunch and after 2:30pm. Maybe 1-2 cars. I even waited 20-30 min a few times because the vertical and positioning -- comparatively Gondola to Thunder to Sublette is 40-50 mins.

I got out into the Cody Bowl, Hobacks, Sublette Ridge...because of the tram. I think this is Jackson's best terrain. I also like Bird-In-Hand/Bernie Bowl/Cheyenne Bowl...and Tensleep Bowl. Saratoga and Moran faces are good too.

The best terrain is best-served by the tram.

 

[ChrisC]

Jackson's other claim to fame is the powder, which is much more abundant than anyplace in the Alps. And the inefficient lift system contributes to its preservation. It's hard to find a balance between efficiency and powder preservation..

I have skied a bunch of places, and generally powder is skied by noon....but definitely by 4pm. Jackson, Snowbird, Mammoth, Squaw, Telluride. Nothing left.

The only places I have seen preserving powder more than 24 hours: Grand Targhee, Powder Mountain. And a few heavy snow days in the Cascades. I am guessing random places in MT, ID, BC have better powder skiing than the name brands.

Powder in the Alps is a lot more abundant. No, they do not get more snow. But they do not get the traffic. Powder can exist for days in the Alps. People stay on the pistes.

I will take the Alps any day over the Rockies for powder -- esp after February.

These are sloppy seconds almost one week later...but at least 5 days. I have never exerienced this in the States.

Not perfect...but I could see lines with 8-10" easy. And a cheap Euro $40 lift ticket. And a $8-15 lunch that puts any N.A. mountain to shame. What gets me....I flew to Geneva for $380....and I often spend $250-360 for Telluride/Jackson from the same SFO airport. But an extra 1000 extra miles for $20.

 

[Tony Crocker]

I am in agreement with Chris' western comments. At the large areas that are good for powder like Jackson, you still only have 24 hours after the snow stops to get much of it.

My first time at Castle Mt. was the most conspicuous example of widespread powder several days after a storm, though it was obvious that would also be true at Powder Mt.

With regard to the Alps, I've only had one trip there; there was 2-3 inches new at Verbier, otherwise it had not snowed in over a week and there was no powder. Grands-Montets had smooth windbuff like we get at Mammoth and that I also saw at Las Lenas. As at Las Lenas the issue in the Alpine off-piste is not when the snow gets tracked out, but when the powder degrades due to wind or sun. One would have to ski there regularly in order to get a feel for that. And I'm sure it varies by area depending upon accessibility of terrain, how high and well sheltered it is, etc.

FYI I'm the culprit for the Aug. 21 surgery on this thread. My apologies if the splits/merges made it harder instead of easier for any viewers.