Cannon Mountain Tram replacement in the news
- Thread starter peakbagger
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
sierra
Well-known member
This is an interesting debate. I can see the benefits of both options to be honest. While the Tram is a fine tradition, the gondola seems more practical to me. I tend to not see eye to eye with Sununu on much lately, but his point about the amount of people in a tram is a legitimate one, not to mention the cost difference. While it's nice to hold on to traditions, sometimes moving on to a better model just makes sense.
More hourly uphill capacity equates to more people skiing on the slope. Which is not a benefit to the skiing experience itself. A tram with two cars spreads people out. More is not necessarily better.
nartreb
Well-known member
In manufacturing, communications, and many other kinds of operations, dividing a flow (of skiers in this case) into infrequently-processed, large batches is usually the worst way to go about it. You get lines waiting for the tram, crowds at the top as everybody puts on their skis, and everybody starting downhill at the same time.
A gondola (or, compromise, a funitel) with more smaller cars is just a smoother experience all round. Throughput will go up, but it won't feel as crowded. The line doesn't actually stand still while you're waiting, you don't have that feeling of being herded in with 80 other people, and when you reach the top anybody who was more than 10 places ahead of you in line is already halfway down the mountain and well out of your way.
Trams don't spread people out, they cause clumping.
I see your points. But seems a bit over generalized. There are so many other variables involved. Like weather on a given day, how many skiers are actually using the lift, and how many other trails are open. Even at full capacity 80 skiers disperse quite quickly in my experience at Cannon. Your points comparing a ski lift to a manufacturing line seem relevant but skiers in flow do not reach a final destination like some sort of a part in a box at the end of the production line. They still have to ski and do so at different speeds and styles. Which IMO would be hard to quantify. With a tram you are still only putting 80 people on the hill. More uphill capacity per hour still means more people on the hill. So arguably the possibility of the clumping is greater on the entire hill not just the top and bottom. The clump at the top and the bottom is easily avoidable at Cannon using the proper strategy. Either stomp on it and stay at the front of the line or lag back and let the clump go or a combination thereof. Also there is the variable that The Tram is not the only lift on the mountain. It can also be used in combination with other lifts to mix it up and disperse. IMO the clumping is minimal and I actually enjoy the so-called herding as there is a major social aspect to that experience. There is also an aesthetic value to the Tram over any Gondola would provide which is hard to quantify. Would be interesting if some sort of traffic study could be done.
Last edited:
As a lifelong Cannon skier, I loved the Tram, past tense, because I now ski Cannon only on weekdays to avoid the crowded slopes and the Tram no longer runs on weekdays, other than an occasional Monday and the past few weeks while the Zoomer triple chair has been shut down in need of repairs.
Like Skiguy noted, we always boarded the Tram cars last so that we could be first off at the top and get ahead of the pack on the way down. Our other goal was to catch the same car for each trip up, which meant we skied top-to-bottom runs nonstop so that we could grab a couple minutes to sit on the benches at the base between runs. Back in our youth, we routinely got in the maximum number of Tram rides per day, which was typically 23 on weekdays, so about 48k verts.
Over the past few winters, I have adapted by skiing yo-yo runs up the Peabody and Cannoball quad chairs to the top (actually about 20 ft higher than the Tram), then top-to-bottom runs to the Zoomer chair, and then a lazy run back to the Peabody base for a total of 3000 ft verts. These yo-yo’s usually take me about 28 minutes, so if I were able still ski a full day, I would be close to 45k verts, almost like the old days skiing the Tram. These yo-yo runs also avoid the long flat run back to the Tram base and the removal of skis, so as a skier I do not care whether there is a Tram or a replacement gondola, as I will not be using either going forward.
Like Skiguy noted, we always boarded the Tram cars last so that we could be first off at the top and get ahead of the pack on the way down. Our other goal was to catch the same car for each trip up, which meant we skied top-to-bottom runs nonstop so that we could grab a couple minutes to sit on the benches at the base between runs. Back in our youth, we routinely got in the maximum number of Tram rides per day, which was typically 23 on weekdays, so about 48k verts.
Over the past few winters, I have adapted by skiing yo-yo runs up the Peabody and Cannoball quad chairs to the top (actually about 20 ft higher than the Tram), then top-to-bottom runs to the Zoomer chair, and then a lazy run back to the Peabody base for a total of 3000 ft verts. These yo-yo’s usually take me about 28 minutes, so if I were able still ski a full day, I would be close to 45k verts, almost like the old days skiing the Tram. These yo-yo runs also avoid the long flat run back to the Tram base and the removal of skis, so as a skier I do not care whether there is a Tram or a replacement gondola, as I will not be using either going forward.
Been there.....and then there were the days when you had to do the stairs!As a lifelong Cannon skier, I loved the Tram, past tense, because I now ski Cannon only on weekdays to avoid the crowded slopes and the Tram no longer runs on weekdays, other than an occasional Monday and the past few weeks while the Zoomer triple chair has been shut down in need of repairs.
Like Skiguy noted, we always boarded the Tram cars last so that we could be first off at the top and get ahead of the pack on the way down. Our other goal was to catch the same car for each trip up, which meant we skied top-to-bottom runs nonstop so that we could grab a couple minutes to sit on the benches at the base between runs. Back in our youth, we routinely got in the maximum number of Tram rides per day, which was typically 23 on weekdays, so about 48k verts.
Over the past few winters, I have adapted by skiing yo-yo runs up the Peabody and Cannoball quad chairs to the top (actually about 20 ft higher than the Tram), then top-to-bottom runs to the Zoomer chair, and then a lazy run back to the Peabody base for a total of 3000 ft verts. These yo-yo’s usually take me about 28 minutes, so if I were able still ski a full day, I would be close to 45k verts, almost like the old days skiing the Tram. These yo-yo runs also avoid the long flat run back to the Tram base and the removal of skis, so as a skier I do not care whether there is a Tram or a replacement gondola, as I will not be using either going forward.
Last edited:
This is a manufactured crisis.
Just over two years ago, Cannon's GM was going on the record that the tramway was only halfway through it's engineered lifespan and "only" needed $3 million of upgrades in the next half decade. Now suddenly taxpayers need to spend $25 million for a new lift. Remember when Cannon claimed to be self-funded?
I don't see how any politician who votes for this boondoggle can run as a "fiscal conservative."
Just over two years ago, Cannon's GM was going on the record that the tramway was only halfway through it's engineered lifespan and "only" needed $3 million of upgrades in the next half decade. Now suddenly taxpayers need to spend $25 million for a new lift. Remember when Cannon claimed to be self-funded?
I don't see how any politician who votes for this boondoggle can run as a "fiscal conservative."
I don't ski or live in NH, so it matters not at all to me. However, if it is true that only upgrades are needed halfway thru its "engineered lifespan", what is the State's reasoning for replacing it? I'm just curious as a retired engineer.
Well, if they bag it for the gondola, they can move the tram to Whittier…. Or perhaps to the Balsams - go big or go home, right?
peakbagger
In Rembrance , July 2024
Balsams claims the gondolas are already on order
https://www.cooscountynh.us/sites/g/files/vyhlif4291/f/pages/18b._appendix_b_-_gondola_cabins_0.pdf
https://www.cooscountynh.us/sites/g...endix_b_-_typical_galvanized_lift_tower_0.pdf
https://www.cooscountynh.us/sites/g/files/vyhlif4291/f/pages/18b._appendix_b_-_gondola_cabins_0.pdf
https://www.cooscountynh.us/sites/g...endix_b_-_typical_galvanized_lift_tower_0.pdf
Andrew
Active member
I had a little headspin myself with this in the news recently, as I had thought all the politicians had already proclaimed in the news within the past couple of years, that they had already saved the Tram? I guess were still close to Groundhog Day.
I was a little disturbed by this statement by Jeb Bradley as quoted in a Caledonia Record story on 2/7/23:
“They are all supposed to be self-funded, but let’s face it, it’s Franconia and Hampton that provide the bulk of the funding,” said Bradley.
He is right that the bulk of revenue beyond the operating costs for those locations is much of the essential revenue for the parks that can't generate enough revenue to support themselves. But the actual law enabling the State Park Fund in NH Law Title XIX, Section 216-A:3-g says:
I. Fees for the use of park areas shall be designed to recover a reasonable portion of budget expenses consistent with the purposes of RSA 216-A:1 and 216-A:3. The general court does not intend that all park facilities be self-supporting.
The former Parks Director constantly commented a similar remark much to the irritation of my former supervisor in NH State Parks. Him and I worked hard largely performing uncompensated service to create significant revenue flow out of a number of stagnant parks in the north region, but had to hear constantly it was never good enough. My supervisor died tragically last October due to onset of terminal illness; and you know a Former Bureau Chief of the NH Division of Parks at this honorable mans service, was compelled enough to mention (eulogize) how much this attitude and pressure expressed by state park leadership really affected his (and others) spirit.
Large sums were being dangled from the COVID American Rescue Plan Act, so some folks figured it made sense to build a new tramway (even though the tramway was closed at the time due to COVID concerns).
Since then, it appears politicians are tripping over themselves to appropriate a large sum of money to replace a lift that would otherwise last the rest of my lifetime. $25 million for a photo opportunity just in time for the 2024 election?
Thank you for that explanation
peakbagger
In Rembrance , July 2024
Why do I think they will come to conclusion to replace it all.
https://www.saminfo.com/news/sam-he...pproves-18-million-for-cannon-tramway-project
https://www.saminfo.com/news/sam-he...pproves-18-million-for-cannon-tramway-project
Similar threads
