Ski Club 2.0 Home
Snow Reports
FAQFAQ

Mail for help.Help!!

Log in to snowHeads to make it MUCH better! Registration's totally free, of course, and makes snowHeads easier to use and to understand, gives better searching, filtering etc. as well as access to 'members only' forums, discounts and deals that U don't even know exist as a 'guest' user. (btw. 50,000+ snowHeads already know all this, making snowHeads the biggest, most active community of snow-heads in the UK, so you'll be in good company)..... When you register, you get our free weekly(-ish) snow report by email. It's rather good and not made up by tourist offices (or people that love the tourist office and want to marry it either)... We don't share your email address with anyone and we never send out any of those cheesy 'message from our partners' emails either. Anyway, snowHeads really is MUCH better when you're logged in - not least because you get to post your own messages complaining about things that annoy you like perhaps this banner which, incidentally, disappears when you log in :-)
Username:-
 Password:
Remember me:
👁 durr, I forgot...
Or: Register
(to be a proper snow-head, all official-like!)

Cairngorm Funicular to be Repaired

 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Just abandon the funicular if it costs too much to demolish. Spend a bit reinstating good ski lifts.
My two visits skiing after the funicular was built I never used it if I could avoid it, using other lifts. On a summer visit I once went up not realising I couldn't get out. Went straight down again and walked up.
snow conditions
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
@snowball, they can't simply abandon the funicular and walk away. Part of the contract is to reinstate the environment if the funicular is no longer to be used, so it has to be either kept and maintained, or removed entirely. There is no middle ground, and I'm not sure future generations would thank us for leaving rusting track and disintegrating concrete on the site for the next 200 years. It has always been an eyesore, but would be more so once a few of the sections have collapsed and twisted...
ski holidays
 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?
@ousekjarr, ^+1

Possibly another reason why if they were going to build a funicular at all it would have been better to go with the original design intent of a steel supporting structure. Not only would it possibly have avoided the subsequent structural problems that occurred with the concrete supporting structure, but the steelwork would have been easier to remove and would at least have had some scrap value....
snow report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
ousekjarr wrote:
@snowball, they can't simply abandon the funicular and walk away. Part of the contract is to reinstate the environment if the funicular is no longer to be used, so it has to be either kept and maintained, or removed entirely. There is no middle ground, and I'm not sure future generations would thank us for leaving rusting track and disintegrating concrete on the site for the next 200 years. It has always been an eyesore, but would be more so once a few of the sections have collapsed and twisted...


Agree. The amount the HIE are suing for is approx the same as the cost of removal - IIRC £15m, although that figure has always looked obscene (actually ALL the numbers being quoted look obscene). So, if it were me, I'd drop the legal case in return for total removal and restoration of the mountainside. Then I'd get working on a major tidy up of other eyesores like the Ciste debris. Last time I was there I thought the whole facility was a disgrace on a par with a teenagers bedroom. Meanwhile I'd be looking at the viability of all the uplift, including the Ciste, and replacing with a gondola and a selection of chairs. It doesn't have to be spark new - major resorts are forever swapping out perfectly serviceable lifts - it just has to be easy to maintain and reliable in the wind and workable from a cost benefit analysis perspective - this is Cairngorm, not Vail.
snow conditions
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Quote:

it just has to be easy to maintain and reliable in the wind


And there you have the reason for the funicular in the first place - the wind on Cairngorm would cause a gondola to be out of action for much of the time. Aonach Mor has lower wind speeds which make the (unconfirmed) 50mph wind limit workable - compare https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/cairngorm_summit to https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/aonach_mor and you’ll see that they straddle the limit…
latest report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
@ousekjarr, although the modern 3S gondola systems can operate in pretty high wind conditions, this article says the Whistler - Blackcomb one can operate up to 80km/h wind speeds.
latest report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
ousekjarr wrote:
Quote:

it just has to be easy to maintain and reliable in the wind


And there you have the reason for the funicular in the first place - the wind on Cairngorm would cause a gondola to be out of action for much of the time. Aonach Mor has lower wind speeds which make the (unconfirmed) 50mph wind limit workable - compare https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/cairngorm_summit to https://www.windfinder.com/windstatistics/aonach_mor and you’ll see that they straddle the limit…


The gondola at Aonach Mor is an access lift and goes from sea level -> 2000ft (hence lower wind speed).
The funicular at Cairngorm goes from 2000ft to 3600ft.

The biggest difference is altitude rather than location.

FWIW : The Cairngorm funicular was always the wrong lift in the wrong place. A condition of the original EU funding means that visitors (rightly) can't exit the top station in summer. The sub-arctic Cairngorm plateau is a very fragile environment, unique to UK, that couldn't cope with thousands of visitors boots. These environmental rules means the funicular inherently cant attract repeat custom in summer - its always going to be of limited use to bikers, hikers <etc> and hence a financial basket case no matter who is in charge. Once you have done it once and eaten a cake at the top then there is no reason to go back! Plus in winter the funicular was never popular with skiers (its slow, limited capacity and need to take your skis off).

Contrast to Aonach Mor where the access-gondola can be used in summer to host world cup bike events <etc>.
A much better lift at Cairngorm would been an equivalent Glenmore gondola on the lower mountain.

Sadly HIE refuse to admit error of their ways and the funicular obsession (... at cost of all else) continues....
Removing the funicular would the right thing to do - especially now its costing the same again to fix the original design flaws.
However that would require HIE eating humble pie.
ski holidays
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Thinking of the limitation on exposure to wind, would it be feasible to double the number of pylons but half their height in order to keep the cabins as low to the ground as possible to reduce wind exposure?

Would being closer to the ground make any significant difference at Cairngorm, say between the forest edge and a top station at the Sheiling or the Ciste?

I assume that the cabins only need to be high enough off the ground to safety clear it in the event of maximum rope stretch?

Doubling the number of pylons would greatly increase cost, friction, maintenance and environmental impact but would it make any worthwhile improvement in wind resistance ?

I’m guessing not because presumably it would already have been modelled by now or tested somewhere ?
snow report
 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.
Peter S wrote:
Thinking of the limitation on exposure to wind, would it be feasible to double the number of pylons but half their height in order to keep the cabins as low to the ground as possible to reduce wind exposure?
Would being closer to the ground make any significant difference at Cairngorm, say between the forest edge and a top station at the Sheiling or the Ciste?
I assume that the cabins only need to be high enough off the ground to safety clear it in the event of maximum rope stretch?
Doubling the number of pylons would greatly increase cost, friction, maintenance and environmental impact but would it make any worthwhile improvement in wind resistance ?
I’m guessing not because presumably it would already have been modelled by now or tested somewhere ?


To be fair - the funicular (was) successful at running in high wind during winter.
The problem is that for 8 months of the year it cant make money because of the VMP preventing customers exiting the top station.
A gondola from car park to top station would have identical problems.
snow conditions
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
Having learned to ski there a youngster, living close by, I can only say the skiing there is usually pretty rubbish, and the access road nonsense doesn't help. I stopped going after they built the funiclular, much prefer touring.
snow conditions
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Haggis_Trap wrote:

To be fair - the funicular (was) successful at running in high wind during winter.


It might be more accurate to say the funicular was successful at running in high winds out with the ski season or when there was little snow about.

The staff resources tied up in trying to open the funicular in winter frequently meant other uplift didn’t get opened. The problems are greatest when snow cover is most extensive and thus when snowsports and winter sight seeing demand was highest.

There’s enough of a mess made now and most founds are dug out to the formation level that demolishing and removing would not cause much further disturbance.

Remove the funicular and build a fit for purpose ski area that respects its location and is both economically and ecologically sustainable, if not remove the funicular and close CairnGorm (plus scarp HIE). Enough is enough.
latest report
 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.
I had some of the best of my formative skiing and snowboarding at Cairngorm but haven't been since the funicular was buit and the Cas chair removed. Maybe it would run better as a intro to touring resort with a basher to do its best at making decent up routes and a preserving snow for a couple of down routes. People would pay a tenner for access to that surely?
latest report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Haggis, I was thinking about wind exposure between the forest and Corrie Cas.

If the funicular could be connected to Glenmore by say a modern 10 person gondola then that might save Cairngorm as a destination that visitors might want to pay to visit. It doesn’t solve the restriction on access from the top of the funicular but that might not seem too bad if you are starting your journey down in the forest and can get out at Corrie Cas before using the funicular.

It would not add anything to the skiing infrastructure but with the ski road closed it should at least enable a year round revenue to access the northern Corries.

Ignoring the key question ‘Where would the additional money come from?’ you would still need to overcome very high wind speeds above the forest edge, hence the question about lowering the cabin height.
snow report
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Dave of the Marmottes wrote:
I had some of the best of my formative skiing and snowboarding at Cairngorm but haven't been since the funicular was buit and the Cas chair removed. Maybe it would run better as a intro to touring resort with a basher to do its best at making decent up routes and a preserving snow for a couple of down routes. People would pay a tenner for access to that surely?


Cairngorm could be a successful ski resort (like Glencoe, Nevis Range, Glenshee, Lecht).
Of all the Scottish resorts it has the longest season, best intermediate terrain and proximity to local accommodation.
The problem is that HIE focused on summer diversification, at cost of else, using a funicular from which no one can exit the top station rolling eyes
An absolute tragedy where public funding has literally destroyed the ski-area it was trying to support.

Peter S wrote:
If the funicular could be connected to Glenmore by say a modern 10 person gondola then that might save Cairngorm as a destination


Probably wouldn't cost much more than fixing the train (especially if you consider that it might be financially viable and wouldn't require future subsidy).

In ideal world I would go one step further : close the road from Aviemore to Glenmore completely.
Electrify and extend the steam train track from Aviemore to Coire Cas.
Train could be used by hikers, bikers and skiers all year round - create a unique car free national park.
However that would require some serious joined up thinking.
snow report
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Peter S wrote:
Haggis, I was thinking about wind exposure between the forest and Corrie Cas.

If the funicular could be connected to Glenmore by say a modern 10 person gondola then that might save Cairngorm as a destination that visitors might want to pay to visit. It doesn’t solve the restriction on access from the top of the funicular but that might not seem too bad if you are starting your journey down in the forest and can get out at Corrie Cas before using the funicular.

It would not add anything to the skiing infrastructure but with the ski road closed it should at least enable a year round revenue to access the northern Corries.

Ignoring the key question ‘Where would the additional money come from?’ you would still need to overcome very high wind speeds above the forest edge, hence the question about lowering the cabin height.


Going into Coire Cas with a gondola from Glenmore might very well require a 2 stage lift to optimise the alignment and though an intermediate station around the Sugar Bowl sort of area/elevation could be desirable for such a lift to maximise the potential year round use, that would come at a significant uplift in construction costs if two drive stations were required. Regardless of the alignment the approach into Coire Cas is going to be more exposed and windier than the approach into Coire na Ciste - it's unavoidable from the exposure to the prevailing wind direction on the windward side of the Windy Ridge and also due to the way Katabatic winds come off the Plateau.

The closed system is indeed a problem for commercial viability in the summer, but it is a problem that is made worse by the fact that on average during the summer season the Ptarmigan Restaurant is inside a cloud around a third of the time. The Ptarmigan Restaurant is too far up the mountain for reliable sight seeing, the closed system annihilates return custom, the funicular is inefficient and dysfunctional as a winter uplift and is most likely to be shut due to track burial when it is needed the most / demand is highest.

The road problem is also a big obstacle to commercial success, when the storm abates, Nevis and Glencoe can open quickly, CairnGorm may take a day or more to dig out the road even with the best will in the world. Closed road means no income at all, it is not just wild and stormy days, the road can remain blocked with £0 in the till on days that commercially would be mega ££££s if able to open.

The funicular full business case (!!) requires ongoing subsidy for CMSL through its six year timeframe. If you total up the total potential costs that are in the public domain to date, expenditure could be £46m between 2018 and the end of the business case period 5 years after reopening.

£46million should from some of the figures put about wrt the SE Group report and recent lifts built elsewhere pay for a gondola between Glenmore and the current Ciste Carpark, new base facilities at Glenmore, a Daylodge at the top of the Gondola looking over Loch Morlich, Glenmore and Ryvoan, 2 detachable chairlifts up Coire na Ciste, substantial snow making system, cafe at the top of the new West Wall Chairlift and to be at least thinking about your next express lift up the White Lady to replace the funicular and M1 Poma.

Instead what will we have at the end of the decade and that £46million? The same commercially unviable failed status quo that went bust in 2008 and 2018, but the old uplift will be 10 years older, and HIE will still be telling us how wonderful they area! Mad
snow report
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Alastair Pink wrote:
@ousekjarr, although the modern 3S gondola systems can operate in pretty high wind conditions, this article says the Whistler - Blackcomb one can operate up to 80km/h wind speeds.


That's the problem that Ousekjarr mentioned above. The 80km/h (50mph) max would be exceeded at Cairngorm. Sad
ski holidays
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Bergmeister wrote:
Alastair Pink wrote:
@ousekjarr, although the modern 3S gondola systems can operate in pretty high wind conditions, this article says the Whistler - Blackcomb one can operate up to 80km/h wind speeds.


That's the problem that Ousekjarr mentioned above. The 80km/h (50mph) max would be exceeded at Cairngorm. Sad


The funicular if it does actually become operational again will not return to its 70knot (80mph) uplift wind limit. It was 38mph before it was closed in autumn 2018, all HIE will say is it will be higher than that but lower than when it opened.

This is worth a read: http://parkswatchscotland.co.uk/2021/07/06/cairn-gorm-the-construction-site-at-the-heart-of-the-national-park-2/
snow conditions
 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?
Quote:
The funicular if it does actually become operational again will not return to its 70knot (80mph) uplift wind limit. It was 38mph before it was closed in autumn 2018, all HIE will say is it will be higher than that but lower than when it opened.
Seems reasonable. In my experience of ski touring at Cairngorm - particularly when hoping for the best with strong winds forecast rolling eyes - I have found that:
- Winds of up to 30mph can be challenging but are copeable.
- Anything above that is rather more difficult.
- Gusts of 50mph can be rather scary and can blow you over.
snow conditions
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
@mountainaddict, in which case the 50mph max windspeed limit for a 3S gondola would probably be acceptable, especially if the repaired funicular is going to have a comparable limit which is what haggishunter's post implies.
latest report
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Maybe there’s no single solution that fits all needs.

With high wind speeds so common it would seem prudent to use ground-based lifts such as Pomas and buttons in winter so they can keep running when all else has stopped.

These would be of no use to summer walkers for whom a fair weather only chair lift would seem more appropriate.
snow conditions
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
If money was no object, the ideal solution is probably a combi-lift where they would run chairs in the winter (lower drag) with gondolas added only short-term for supply uplift if that's even a requirement, and then in the summer when the wind is less of an issue, run only gondolas for the comfort of tourists.

But summer tourists still can't walk around the fragile summit, so actually the idea solution is to build a ski facility in a different location which is more suited to year-round operations.
latest report
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
ousekjarr wrote:

But summer tourists still can't walk around the fragile summit, so actually the idea solution is to build a ski facility in a different location which is more suited to year-round operations.


In terms of snow holding / terrain the ski area is in correct location.

What is required is a lift that can make money and attract repeat custom year round so resort not primarily dependent on vageries of Scottish winter. As I see it that needs to be access lift from Glenmore to Coire Cas to replace the road. Hikers, bikers and tourist would happily pay £10-15 a ride : and it would be free from VMP restrictions on uplift to summit level.
ski holidays
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
@Haggis_Trap, my suggestion was to choose a different mountain wink The plateau will not suddenly become more tolerant of visitors tramping over it in summer just because they used an access lift rather than the funicular, and I'd expect any new development to have the same environmental constraints. Both skiers and summer tourists still want to get to the summit, and once there, they want to get outside. That's the fundamental problem for summer visitors.
latest report
 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.
^ the 600m vert from coire cas car park to summit does good job of limiting numbers at present. No one is forbidden from access to summit plateau (Scotland has right to roam) : you just can't use the funk-ular to access it
latest report
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination. Regardless of Funicular/gondola/horseback/magic carpet - if you can’t get out and enjoy the mountains when you reach the summit, the transportation method to it is irrelevant

The funicular needs removing, a new lift system installing, and guided paths for summer tourists needs installing to allow people to actually want to visit in the summer.

I’ve quite frankly never heard of such a farce.

Sort it out Cairngorm
latest report
 snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


It's not.
snow report
 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.
Erm the only thing that has failed is the split retail emporium with a gimmick mode of transport joining the 2 parts, and maybe some of the other lift infrastructure.
Cairngorm has not failed. And from what I have seen around there, nor has Aviemore, Glenmore, Rothiemurcus. Always been thriving with people doing all kinds of outdoor activities when I've been there.
Hopefully my favourite places in Aviemore haven't failed due to what's been happening recently.
CairnGorm is one of the most accessible mountains in Scotland all the way to the top (unless the weather is dire), completely independent of the funicular and inaccessible top half of the retail bit (although the road and carpark are pretty handy). Sure it's a bit of altitude gain and will get the heart pumping walking up, but it's all easy track and path, and no need for a lift. Get to observe the wildlife more closely when walking up too. Plenty of other hills in the vicinity too.
snow report
 So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


The Cairngorm plateau is sub arctic tundra, a fragile environment unique to UK. The VMP preventing visitors using funicular to access it in summer (when not snow covered) is not ridiculous in itself. However it does mean the funicular is wrong lift in wrong place.
latest report
 You know it makes sense.
You know it makes sense.
Haggis_Trap wrote:
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


The Cairngorm plateau is sub arctic tundra, a fragile environment unique to UK. The VMP preventing visitors using funicular to access it in summer (when not snow covered) is not ridiculous in itself. However it does mean the funicular is wrong lift in wrong place.


And poorly constructed! So a double fail?
snow report
 Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Yes maintaining the original chair or replacing it with a conventional detachable quad and just accepting that it would often be closed, would have been a far better decision in retrospect. The many fewer people travelling to the top would mean access still being possible from there. By now they could have worked out a gondola system from Glenmore and closed the road.
snow report
 Poster: A snowHead
Poster: A snowHead
Haggis_Trap wrote:
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


The Cairngorm plateau is sub arctic tundra, a fragile environment unique to UK. The VMP preventing visitors using funicular to access it in summer (when not snow covered) is not ridiculous in itself. However it does mean the funicular is wrong lift in wrong place.


Whilst that may well be the PC line, I strongly suspect the real reason is to stop flip-flop shod halfwits wandering off into an area the size of Luxembourg.
latest report
 Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
haggishunter wrote:
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


It's not.


Um, it is. Trains, funiculars, cable cars , whatever are transit systems to a destination. At destinations passengers expect to get out.
snow report
 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?
achilles wrote:
haggishunter wrote:
Ricklovesthepowder wrote:
The ridiculous decision not to allow people out at the top of the mountain is the single reason that Cairngorm has failed as a destination.


It's not.


Um, it is. Trains, funiculars, cable cars , whatever are transit systems to a destination. At destinations passengers expect to get out.


You can get out. You can exit on foot onto the rest of the ski lifts, you can also get out onto the viewing balcony to enjoy the views. You can enjoy the cafe and the gift shop. For many visitors that IS the destination, not the opportunity to bag a munro the easy way.
snow report
 You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
As a _summer_ destination, yes. As a winter destination, no. That's failing because of uplift problems, access road problems, wind, snow reliability, and an exceptionally poor history of very bad management.
snow conditions
 Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Roguevfr wrote:

Whilst that may well be the PC line, I strongly suspect the real reason is to stop flip-flop shod halfwits wandering off into an area the size of Luxembourg.


Again that is not the case, in fact its pretty much the opposite of that - the system is only closed outwith the snowsports season. During the snowsports season anyone can exit the Top Station and while non skiers are by ticket condition of carriage supposed to stay within the ski patrol area - the ski patrol boundary includes the summit path and the Marquis Well area above the Ptarmigan Tow.
snow report
 You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
Quote:
During the snowsports season anyone can exit the Top Station and while non skiers are by ticket condition of carriage supposed to stay within the ski patrol area - the ski patrol boundary includes the summit path and the Marquis Well area above the Ptarmigan Tow.
Aren't skiers using the funi also meant to remain only in the ski area? Fairly sure I've heard that (for example) people with touring kit have been denied access to the train... Puzzled
ski holidays
 Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
Then you can post your own questions or snow reports...
mountainaddict wrote:
Aren't skiers using the funi also meant to remain only in the ski area? Fairly sure I've heard that (for example) people with touring kit have been denied access to the train... Puzzled


Correct. However you can buy a ski touring only ticket for M1 poma + ptarmigan. You can leave ski area so long as last uplift wasn't the purple-skip
ski holidays
 After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
After all it is free Go on u know u want to!
Wow, I didn't know that. My skis have touring bindings and I've always carried a backpack the last 40 years, so am I just lucky I managed to get on the train the few times I tried?
ski holidays
 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.
Haggis_Trap wrote:
mountainaddict wrote:
Aren't skiers using the funi also meant to remain only in the ski area? Fairly sure I've heard that (for example) people with touring kit have been denied access to the train... Puzzled


Correct. However you can buy a ski touring only ticket for M1 poma + ptarmigan. You can leave ski area so long as last uplift wasn't the purple-skip


The VMP that implements the section 50 is more complicated than that, the rule laid down is that the carriage of sports equipment unrelated to piste skiing is prohibited from carriage on the funicular - lots of people regularly carry ski touring kit on the funicular and there is often plenty of potential to use skins within the official ski patrol area.

The contractual obligation on skiing ticket holders was that the Funicular should not be used to directly access the EU protected sites and that activity within said sites should be undertaken with regard to the integrity of the designated sites. Thus it was within the letter of the rules to leave the Top Station, take the Ptarmigan Tow further up the mountain and go anywhere in the designated areas of the Plateau and the Northern Corries West of Coire Cas. Because skiers could exit the ski area from other uplift, snowsports customers are not obliged to remain within the ski patrol boundary, whereas sightseers using the Funicular only were obliged to remain in the ski patrol area.
snow conditions
 Ski the Net with snowHeads
Ski the Net with snowHeads
haggishunter wrote:

The contractual obligation on skiing ticket holders was that the
..
Thus it was within the letter of the rules to leave the Top Station, take the Ptarmigan Tow further up the mountain and go anywhere in the designated areas of the Plateau and the Northern Corries West of Coire Cas.


True, however that not how rules have been interpreted and touring ticket (when available) needs to be any two lifts except funicular.

My biggest objection to funicular is that its construction was justified as being year round attraction (so resort not dependent on well known vageries of Scottish snow). Actually the opposite is true and snowsport the only part of buisness that generates profit / repeat custom! Basically snowsports subsidy the train rolling eyes
snow report



Terms and conditions  Privacy Policy