Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Resort and backcountry skiing and snowboarding in eastern US and Canada, including our famous reader-submitted No-Bull Snow Reports.

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Harvey44 » Wed Aug 05, 2009 5:35 am

I'm wondering though....the lift line is 3000 feet long. The RUN then is less than 3000 right? Isn't the 3000 feet the hypotenuse (?) of the triangle?
NYSkiBlog.com
User avatar
Harvey44
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:37 pm
Location: North River, NY
Location: North River, NY

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 05, 2009 8:06 am

I stand corrected.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] Image
Image

Image
User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10013
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Tony Crocker » Wed Aug 05, 2009 11:42 am

The RUN then is less than 3000 right? Isn't the 3000 feet the hypotenuse (?) of the triangle?

Yes, it's the hypotenuse. But the run is still 2,883 feet.

4-1 length-to-vertical ratio of a lift implies mainstream intermediate pitch if it's consistent. But some of these will have short steep sections combined with long runouts.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Marc_C » Wed Aug 05, 2009 11:44 am

Harvey44 wrote:I'm wondering though....the lift line is 3000 feet long. The RUN then is less than 3000 right? Isn't the 3000 feet the hypotenuse (?) of the triangle?

You're correct. So is Tony. But only one trigonometric approach is practical.

Referring to a triangle, we have the hypotenuse, and, with respect to the angle in question, the opposite side and the adjacent side. These last two are also often referred to as the rise and the run. Thus Tony is correct in that:
Tan angle x = opposite / adjacent

However, when we look at a ski slope, we never know the run length (ie length of the adjacent side) as it cannot be easily directly measured. Sure, you can spend time monkeying around with some really detailed topo or survey maps, but there's an easier way, since we do know the rise and the hypotenuse, as these figures are often published by the ski area. The actual trigonometric function we need to use to determine the angle of the ski slope given the hypotenuse and the rise is the cosecant:

csc angle x = hypotenuse / opposite (ie: rise)

The cosecant is the reciprocal of the sine function.
-marc
User avatar
Marc_C
 
Posts: 3217
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 10:32 am
Location: A Sandy place south of a Great Lake

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:00 pm

No wonder I dropped out of an engineering curriculum. :roll: :lol:
Image

Image
User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10013
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby jamesdeluxe » Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:43 pm

Reminds me of that scene from the Coppola film "Peggy Sue Got Married," when Kathleen Turner hands in a blank test and tells the annoyed teacher, "Mr Snelgrove, I happen to know that in the future, I will not have the slightest use for algebra, and I speak from experience."

Not that it's algebra, but... same idea.
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Tony Crocker » Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:43 pm

You don't need to know trig or algebra to make use of trail map info. Length/vertical ratio of 4 to 1 is likely intermediate, 5 or more to 1 fairly easy, 3 to 1 is advanced intermediate if consistently pitched but most 3 to 1 lifts will have steep sections. Marte is 2 to 1. That means its average pitch is 30 degrees over its 2,700 vertical. The lift ratios will give you a much better idea of an area you haven't skied than the green/blue/black trail markings, which are usually defined by marketing people to approximate a 25/50/25 proportion.

This is how I recommend estimating ski area size by using acreage but adjusting for those areas whose lift ratios deviate from the typical 4 to 1.
http://bestsnow.net
Ski Records
Season length: 21 months, Nov. 29, 2010 - July 2, 2012
Days in one year: 80 from Nov. 29, 2010 - Nov. 17, 2011
Season vertical: 1,610K in 2016-17
Season powder: 291K in 2011-12
User avatar
Tony Crocker
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2004 10:37 am
Location: Avatar: Charlotte Bay, Antarctica 2011
Location: Glendale, California

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby jamesdeluxe » Wed Aug 05, 2009 7:35 pm

Tony Crocker wrote: Many eastern ski areas like to quote percent grade instead of slope angle.

Harvey, to give you a visual reference, this is considered to be 50-degree slope angle at a western ski area:
little chute.jpg
little chute.jpg (38.35 KiB) Viewed 5044 times
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Admin » Wed Aug 05, 2009 8:13 pm

jamesdeluxe wrote:
Tony Crocker wrote:Harvey, to give you a visual reference, this is considered to be 50-degree slope angle at a western ski area:
little chute.jpg


:lol: :lol: :lol:
Image

Image
User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10013
Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2004 9:32 am
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby kcyanks1 » Thu Aug 20, 2009 7:33 am

J.Spin wrote:
jamesdeluxe wrote:I don't think the discussion here and in the other "drive/fly" thread is so much about whether Gore is a good mountain or not. Tony is beating his drum again about how people living downstate would be better served by flying west instead of driving north.

I haven't looked into that other thread recently, but the bulk of the discussion in this thread seems to be comparing drive times (Gore, Northern Vermont, Southern Vermont, etc.) vs., quality of skiing, with very little emphasis on air travel. For those that have potential lodging/notably shorter drives to Gore vs. Northern Vermont, I was trying to get a sense of whether there is even much of a difference in the skiing to make the extra driving worth it. Gore looks like a great mountain from what I see here, so I'm wondering why people are putting such emphasis on other options.


I grew up skiing at Gore. To me, the extra drive to, say, Sugarbush is absolutely worth it. Gore has improved a lot over the years as far as opening up more glades and cutting new trails, but the terrain and snow is just better in northern VT, IMO. Also, while Gore does have some nice expert runs, their trails are just so short. The 2000' vertical is very misleading as far as what you do in any given run. The Straight Brook quad probably serves the best pod of expert terrain, and is probably something like 700' vertical, if I remember correctly. And then the better runs don't even go for that entire vertical.

Also, they just don't get nearly the amount of snow that the VT areas get, and also seem to be less willing to open trails/glades in marginal conditions.

Gore has some nice terrain, and I'd rather go to Gore than to Okemo. But Sugarbush/Stowe/MRG vs. Gore? It's a no brainer for me, even with the extra drive.
-Kenny
kcyanks1
 
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 3:20 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Harvey44 » Fri Aug 21, 2009 2:39 pm

kcyanks1 wrote:I grew up skiing at Gore. To me, the extra drive to, say, Sugarbush is absolutely worth it. Gore has improved a lot over the years as far as opening up more glades and cutting new trails, but the terrain and snow is just better in northern VT, IMO. Also, while Gore does have some nice expert runs, their trails are just so short. The 2000' vertical is very misleading as far as what you do in any given run. The Straight Brook quad probably serves the best pod of expert terrain, and is probably something like 700' vertical, if I remember correctly. And then the better runs don't even go for that entire vertical.

Also, they just don't get nearly the amount of snow that the VT areas get, and also seem to be less willing to open trails/glades in marginal conditions.

Gore has some nice terrain, and I'd rather go to Gore than to Okemo. But Sugarbush/Stowe/MRG vs. Gore? It's a no brainer for me, even with the extra drive.


KC is right. Gore is most improved over the last 10 years. Tons more tree skiing, way better snow making, more total terrain. Still the only advantage that Gore has over any of the three VT resorts mentioned (outside of drive distance) is that Gore may have a longer season than MRG, due to snowmaking.

No question in my mind that Sugarbush, Stowe and MRG are better places to ski. I'm saying that and I've never skied Sugarbush or Mad River. It's not hard to figure out the positive impact of an additional 100-150 inches per year, more elevation and a more northern latitude. The drive is certainly worth it if you are going for a week. If you are leaving every Fri night and coming back every Sunday night, especially with a family - the math changes. At least for me.
NYSkiBlog.com
User avatar
Harvey44
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:37 pm
Location: North River, NY
Location: North River, NY

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Mike Bernstein » Fri Sep 11, 2009 12:52 am

Harvey44 wrote:
kcyanks1 wrote:I grew up skiing at Gore. To me, the extra drive to, say, Sugarbush is absolutely worth it. Gore has improved a lot over the years as far as opening up more glades and cutting new trails, but the terrain and snow is just better in northern VT, IMO. Also, while Gore does have some nice expert runs, their trails are just so short. The 2000' vertical is very misleading as far as what you do in any given run. The Straight Brook quad probably serves the best pod of expert terrain, and is probably something like 700' vertical, if I remember correctly. And then the better runs don't even go for that entire vertical.

Also, they just don't get nearly the amount of snow that the VT areas get, and also seem to be less willing to open trails/glades in marginal conditions.

Gore has some nice terrain, and I'd rather go to Gore than to Okemo. But Sugarbush/Stowe/MRG vs. Gore? It's a no brainer for me, even with the extra drive.


KC is right. Gore is most improved over the last 10 years. Tons more tree skiing, way better snow making, more total terrain. Still the only advantage that Gore has over any of the three VT resorts mentioned (outside of drive distance) is that Gore may have a longer season than MRG, due to snowmaking.

No question in my mind that Sugarbush, Stowe and MRG are better places to ski. I'm saying that and I've never skied Sugarbush or Mad River. It's not hard to figure out the positive impact of an additional 100-150 inches per year, more elevation and a more northern latitude. The drive is certainly worth it if you are going for a week. If you are leaving every Fri night and coming back every Sunday night, especially with a family - the math changes. At least for me.


Better aspect at those three VT resorts as well. Though there are some notable exceptions (Castelrock, North Lynx, Inverness, Gate House, Spruce Peak, MRG Double), most of the terrain there faces north or northeast. There is comparatively little of such terrain at Gore, and it is generally in the 2000-3000' range - not ideal from many perspectives. Even the areas with potential aspect issues at those three tend to get a lot of blow in from the NW - Castlerock and areas around the Gondi at Stowe routinely have the most snow on the mountain.
Mike Bernstein
 
Posts: 262
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 5:23 pm
Location: The City of Studios

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Harvey44 » Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:27 pm

NYSkiBlog.com
User avatar
Harvey44
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:37 pm
Location: North River, NY
Location: North River, NY

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby Harvey44 » Thu Sep 24, 2009 6:59 am

New trail map was posted on Facebook yesterday. It's low res and I'm assuming the high res version will be on the site shortly. You can also see it on my blog while still fuzzy it's a little bigger.

http://harvey44.blogspot.com/2009/09/new-gore-map.html
NYSkiBlog.com
User avatar
Harvey44
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:37 pm
Location: North River, NY
Location: North River, NY

Re: Get ready for a Gore/North Creek interconnect

Postby jamesdeluxe » Thu Sep 24, 2009 7:31 am

I'm sure it's mentioned somewhere in this thread, but what's new for this season?
User avatar
jamesdeluxe
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 3:19 pm
Location: South Orange, NJ

PreviousNext

Return to Eastern North America

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


All content herein copyright © 1999-2017 First Tracks!! Online Media

Forums Terms & Conditions of Use