Ski Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I know that before SMLLC bought the place they interviewed just about every employee for their thoughts and ideas...but I'm wondering if they got feedback about the lack of intermediate access to the bottom of the mountain. I've talked to a lot of people and noticed how people use the little cut-over trail between Lower Runaway and Lower Fast Track---seems most intermediates have been going down Runaway, then using that little access spot to cut the top third off of the Lower Fast Track headwall. Seems to me that the little flat spots at the bottom of the consecutive headwalls of Lower Runaway are easier for them, but that's what they do. It really does take a pretty fair intermediate skier/boarder to make it down the North Face, as it is, without risk. But I can't imagine the terrain beyond Fast Track as any less steep, unless they cut a trail at least 50 yards out, or so. Probably the number two problem people have with Sno (behind lack of a high-speed) is that it splits up groups and families too much. It's the same problems Belleayre faced, but they fixed them both over the last two seasons with the new quad and the new trails. We'd be really interested to know what the bosses are thinking... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schif Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I kind of like the fact that the North Face is how it is. Its kind of like a private club for experts down there. You very rarely have to deal with people getting in your way, cutting you off or generally not using smart style down there. Its a place that I like to go on really cold nights. I kind of feel like that part of the mountain is giving back to the people who have spent years progressing to the top of their sport. If you can handle some of the gnarliest diamonds in the poconos, you're able to enjoy a special place. To route intermediates down into this area would kind of take some of this away. Not to mention when it does get really cold that one trail is going to be absolutely packed with people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted March 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I totally agree that the current way is the best way for experts. It's just like Mount Snow's North Face area, where you feel like you can take blind headwalls at full speed and if some bunny skier gets his hair parted, he shouldn't have been there in the first place. But if Sno wants to compete as the best in the Poconos, it needs a Nile Mile/Lazy Mile sort of run. Right now, it's a really small mountain for beginners/intermediates. Why not a long rambling blue at the far perimenter that funnels directly to the new quad? The only time you'd deal with newbies is when they come into the other side of the liftline. It might actually pull a lot of he newbies off of Cannonball and Boomer, let alone Lower Fast Track. People get bored up top, then wander down and side slip places they shouldn't be. Just my 2 cents... And I'm really freaking glad to even be having this discussion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riderossi Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I agree with schif, i like it the way it is. You can get on phoebe and almost guarantee that you will have a non-stop ride to the top. If beginners start funneling their way down into the hole that lift will most likely stop much more frequently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted March 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 Yes, but I'm taking for granted that there will be a new lift on the other side of Long Haul (or, at the very least, Long Haul gets an overhaul). The funneling would be into the new lift or Long Haul, which is where the newbies would want to go anyway, since they are the ride back to the top. I think that if Sno opens up the whole mountain on the left side to everyone, the North Face headwalls will still feel separate. Looks like I'm gettin' voted down on this, though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trackbiker Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 ski, I see your point about an easier Top-To-Bottom Trail, but after my last two visits to Sno, I see Schifdawg's and riderossi's point as well. (There's a lot of time to think on those 12min. lift rides! ) The layout of the mountain makes it hard to add an easier TTB Trail and still keep the nubs off the North Face and Lower Runaway & Fast Track. Plus any new trail(s) would be the farthest from the lodge and the easier slopes. The North Face at Mt. Snow is a good example of isolated expert terrain, but doesn't fit the layout of Sno. I looked at the topo map and while the top is relatively flat, the mountain gets steeper as you get near the bottom. An easier trail(s) could still be cut into the mountain on skiers right. It would likely take a lot of dynomite but of course it can be done. The bigger problem than an easier trail, from my observations at other areas, is that HS Lifts attract nubs like flies to sh!t!. If they put in a HS Lift in place of/or parallel to the Long Haul, the nubs would be all over it. And Lower Runaway & Fast Track would be the human slolom at least on weekends. Belleayre is a good example. But like you said, that lift serves varied terrain and the trails get flatter at the bottom, as opposed to Sno where they get steeper. Even I have to remember those drop-offs when I come flying down the easier top parts of Runaway and Fast Track. Maybe the answer is to add 2 HS Lifts? One to replace the Long Haul and another before the drop-offs but still lower on the mountian than Iron Horse? Just trying to think "outside the box". Any ideas? Just a footnote: They didn't run the Long Haul on weekdays, and the last time I was there on a Sunday it only started when the Phoebe broke down. Do you really think that they are going to replace a lift that they hardly ever ran with a new HS Lift? Or would you wait until the lift you had got up to capacity? They haven't ordered a new lift yet and delivery times for next season are getting tight. My guess is that you get an addition to the lodge and new SnowTubing Lodge next year. No new trails and no new lifts. I hope I'm wrong, but that is my best guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted March 21, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I'm going by what they said at the meetings prior to the purchase. One new high speed lift and two new top to bottom trails at the far right of skier's right. They also posted on the website that new lifts and trails were "coming", so they've carried the thought past the initial purchase. Upper Runaway and Upper Fast Track are both just green circles (even though they are rated blue) that drop into black diamonds, which make for pretty strange runs. I like to do a lap on them every day just because they're empty and it's fun to tuck down the tops and fly onto those headwalls. And, yeah, the terrain right next to Lower Fast Track is even steeper than the Fast Track headwall. It's what's further over that might make it possible. But, again, this is conditional upon getting the new lift (or overhauling Long Haul). I'm not suggesting piling newbies into the Phoebe lift line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schif Posted March 21, 2007 Report Share Posted March 21, 2007 I'd like to see a really nice top to bottom diamond run like Cliffy, but thats probobly just me. I'm a little curious on where exactly the new trails will go. Lower fast track is cut into a ridge with a fall line perpendicular to the trail's direction. The past 2 trips to Sno for me have included extensive riding beyond fast track. I guess a trail could be cut into the ridge above fast track, but there isn't a ton of room up there for more unless they routed them behind the ridge (where I was for the most part). Ski's right, the area right next to lower Fast Track is about as gnarly as it gets and there are some huge outcrops of rock up in there. To bring anything other than a diamond down in that area would mean having to swing it out pretty far to skiers right (well beyond the ridge) and bring it back lower on. I wish I had more opportunity to scout out the bottom better, but it was getting late so we decided to hike out (up and over the ridge) before it got dark. It will probobly have to wait for next year, but I would love to go over that ridge again and drop down it's fall line, It really looks like a great run, but the hike out would be pretty rough. (maybe a lift to access this area?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trackbiker Posted March 23, 2007 Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 (edited) I'm going by what they said at the meetings prior to the purchase. One new high speed lift and two new top to bottom trails at the far right of skier's right. They also posted on the website that new lifts and trails were "coming", so they've carried the thought past the initial purchase. ski, you're probably right. As far as I can tell, they've come thru on everything they said they were going to do. The point I'm trying to make is; where to put the new trails and lift, how to layout the new trails to enhance the area for everyone, and why are they replacing a lift that is barely run? Maybe start with the Phoebe? Isn't that the most utilized lift? I don't know the answers. You guys ski there more than me. Upper Runaway and Upper Fast Track are both just green circles (even though they are rated blue) that drop into black diamonds, which make for pretty strange runs. I like to do a lap on them every day just because they're empty and it's fun to tuck down the tops and fly onto those headwalls. And, yeah, the terrain right next to Lower Fast Track is even steeper than the Fast Track headwall. It's what's further over that might make it possible. Good point. They would have to come around the side of the mountain at the bottom to avoid having headwalls. Most ski trails flatten out at the bottom. At Sno they get steeper. If they don't solve that problem I suggest naming the new trail Yardsale, or keeping with the railroad theme, Trainwreck! Coming around the side of the mountain might make it the longest trail in PA. Edited March 23, 2007 by trackbiker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted March 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 At the meetings, they were hyping the fact that they'd be the only place in the region with four mile-long trails. That really would be a great selling point to use in commercials: the most acreage in the Poconos, plus four mile-long trails. The Long Haul didn't run much under county ownership for combined reasons: bad plumbing kept them from making snow on Runaway and Fast Track, and it had constant mechanical problems. I don't know if they've bothered to complelety fix the mechanical issues, but there is rarely enough traffic to run it most days. I've seen it running midweek and thought they were just testing it----then there would be one chair filled out of 100, or so. There just isn't access to the bottom for intermediates to use it. And unless it's running, it's tough for newbies to skate all the way up and around to use Fast Track. And Lower Fast Track has a pretty steep headwall...Right now, the vast majority of newbies ski the upper slopes, then cut over to Iron Horse. Busiest lifts? I'd guess Shuttle gets the most total traffic---Highball and Mainline are pretty filled on weekends. Then Phoebe Snow, followed by Iron Horse. But I'd bet the exact numbers would be really close. It would be nice if the Phoebe ran just a little faster, but I can't see any major changes for it. The only bad mistake they could make would be to somewhere cut a blue square down to the Phoebe. I'm sure it wouldn't happen, though, but since they'll be bringing snowtubing down close to WL, who knows what will fit over there. Aside from that change, anything else will probably be pretty interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Piccoletti Posted March 23, 2007 Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 Ok, i've breezed throught this topic, but i'm just going to say this thinking it has to do with this topic... I belive the northface is to easy... i'm sorry... Not to brag... or anything like that, just saying, I think we could get something in there better... maybe trim whitelightning (steeper) this summer or something... I feel boomer is boaring, smoke the best they have, cannonball never gets old, and for the rest, when i'm on them, which is barely, There ok, great for getting into black diamonds... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ski Posted March 23, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2007 Ok, i've breezed throught this topic, but i'm just going to say this thinking it has to do with this topic... I belive the northface is to easy... i'm sorry... Not to brag... or anything like that, just saying, I think we could get something in there better... maybe trim whitelightning (steeper) this summer or something... I feel boomer is boaring, smoke the best they have, cannonball never gets old, and for the rest, when i'm on them, which is barely, There ok, great for getting into black diamonds... So where in the Poconos do you feel more challenged and not bored? Just curious...CB? Shawnee? Alpine? Tanglwood? "Trim" WL? That's the funniest suggestion so far. If they can cut a top to bottom trail with a better sustained early pitch, then that'd be great---but I can't see it with the given topography. Dude, they can cut trees, grade rollers, and blast outcroppings, but you don't change what a mountain is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.