 Poster: A snowHead
|
I'm puzzled as to why the Americans describe their resorts in ski acres as opposed to skiable kms? How do ski acres translate ? To say to me that there are 1500 skiable acres doesn't sound very much, when we have 300 acres of our own. Are US resorts quite small then? 
Erica
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
erica2004, your garden's bigger than my garden!
I understand American ski resorts are smaller than European ones, but that there is not such a strong distinction between on and off piste...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
But how many lifts do you have and how many are T-bars?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
You know, David@traxvax, it has crossed my mind to lay a little plastic. But we couldn't hope for much more than a feeble green run.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Both make sense in context. Europe tends to be piste based, each piste is marked and patrolled and a reasonable safe place. Elsewhere is off-piste, it is unmarked, unpatrolled and has no claims to being safe.
By contrast. America has ski areas with bounded areas. Everything in-bounds is patrolled and fairly safe. Out-of-bounds areas are just that, out of bounds. I have read that in some places you can be arrested or have various other penalties imposed for skiing out-of-bounds. Within the in-bound areas there are marked trails, but these are just suggested routes that are often groomed. Broadly speaking, if you can easily ski to it without crossing a boundary fence or a closure fence you are allowed to ski there.
Hence Europe has a patroled area comprised of paths for which length is a comfortable measure. America has big areas for which acreage is more useful. But it does make it more difficult to compare resort sizes in the different continents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Adrian, have to disagree with you slightly. I don't believe that it would be possible to effectively patrol all the in bounds areas in quite a few American resorts (of the ones I know personally Alta, Snowbird, and Heavenly spring to mind). For most piste skiers the most useful measure is the length of piste otherwise how could you compare a resort like Killington, relatively small area with lots of pistes going through fairly dense woodland, with a resort like Brighton, again a smallish area but with very few pistes.
The differences between American resorts and European don't seem that great to me as at both the areas between the pistes soon get skied out. The big difference is the concept of 'out of bounds' in the USA, but there is a big difference between skiing off the back of most European resorts, where you know you will get back to some form of civilisation fairly soon, and going out of bounds in the USA where you stand a good chance of never being seen again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm with Adrian.
A typical Rockies resort has one or more large bowls - huge, usually treeless areas where you choose your own way down - and the concept of piste kilometers is completely meaningless in this kind of terrain. If you were to regard a bowl as one very wide piste and just measure its length, you would hopelessly understate its value to experienced skiers.
For reasons that I don't fully understand (terrain? tree cover? altitude? historic?) bowls are much less common in europe - although, in saying this, I'm inviting dozens of relies drawing my attention to some wonderful Alpine bowl skiing - and if you're measuring conventional trails then piste km is a much more meaningful measure than acres.
But the answer to erica2004's final question is that, yes, most US resorts are quite small compared with the European mega-resorts. I find it helpful to compare the number of lifts to get a crude comparison. But, again, you need to be careful. Some resorts have a much higher proportion of long, high capacity lifts, or use one lift to serve a vast area of terrain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the concensus is that Vail complete with Bowls would fit into one of the 3 valleys. And Breckenridge is even smaller. The vertical in the US mostly will not make make 1000m which is the norm in the Alpes. Only a very few will get to 1500M, Whistler, for example
All this is very confusing for people who are not used to comparing feet with metres. The other thing that is typical of US resorts is that they will have very modern lift up the centre of the hill and then cut 5 or 6 trails down it so it can be difficult to see any real difference between the trails.
I thought out of bounds carried penalties.
The Laub is a wonderful bowl, as is the Grand Montet, Mont Vallon etc. But basically Europe is a go anywhere you please area and the risk is down to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| John Scott wrote: |
{snip} I don't believe that it would be possible to effectively patrol all the in bounds areas in quite a few American resorts {snip}. For most piste skiers the most useful measure is the length of piste otherwise how could you compare a resort like Killington, relatively small area with lots of pistes going through fairly dense woodland, with a resort like Brighton, again a smallish area but with very few pistes.
{snip} |
You may be correct about being too big to be fully patrolled but I stand by what I said. Further, I agree with you saying "the most useful measure is the length of piste" but the originally posted question was about why areas are measured in America whereas lengths are measured in Europe.
I have just checked on www.skiclub.co.uk and found:
Brighton: area 850 acres; piste (trail) length not stated.
Killington: neither area nor length stated.
Val d'Isere: area not stated; length 800km (in Espace Killy).
La Plagne; area; length 225km.
Digging into www.killington.com finds: skiable area 1209 acres; length of trails 90miles (139km).
Digging into www.skibrighton.com finds: skiable area 1050 acres; could not find a length.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| John Scott wrote: |
| The big difference is the concept of 'out of bounds' in the USA, but there is a big difference between skiing off the back of most European resorts, where you know you will get back to some form of civilisation fairly soon, and going out of bounds in the USA where you stand a good chance of never being seen again. |
Where in Europe are thinking of there? Milton Keynes, Tamworth or Castleford?
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
I think I read somewhere that the Trois Vallees was calculated at about 30,000 acres of skiable terrain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
rob@rar.org.uk I think you'll find the 3vallees could have more than that, the Espace San Bernardo with 150 kms of piste is quoted as having 3,000 hectares of skiable domain which I think equates to 30,000 acres. There's probably a snowhead surveyor out there who'll tell me I'm wrong but we've either got a massive amount of off-piste, my opinion, or there isn't as much as people think in the 3 vallees.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David@traxvax, 1 hectare = 2.47 acres, so 3,000 hectares is a bit less than 7,500 acres.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
David@traxvax, I did try to find that reference but couldn't track it down, so take what I said with a pinch of salt. Howeverlaundryman seems to have explained the difference between the two domains.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
eEvans, thanks for that link. Good to know that Paradiski is bigger than 3V when you look at total ski area.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
In this case size isn't everything. The most important things for me are beds vs lift capacity and the type of terrain that is lift served. So if conditions allow the cresta d'arp is a very good lift as you have 3 routes off the back, for example. The Alpes are full of these type of routes.
The Horseshoe at Breckenridge is great fun but a bit short. The Laub and Grant Montet are around a 1000m and if you want to get to the valley the latter is over 2000m and as such require a more serious undertaking IMO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
