The 2020-2021 Ski season thread

[PowderBeard]

I find it funny that Killington and Pico both report 250". If one of them averaged 250" it would definitely be Pico. 

[LaGrangewx]

2 minutes ago, MRVexpat said:

215" seems much more reasonable for a long term average

It's interesting. Their data goes back to the 80s and the best 10 year average during that period seems to be around 260. 10 years is probably not enough data for a true long term average. I know another post above mentioned how it would be surprising if the r/s line in an event was between (Stratton+Mt Snow) and Killington but it does happen. I remember the mid-march storm of 2014 dropped 2 feet on Killington but it was a mixed mess in southern Vermont. Probably does not happen too frequently but it can. Killington is more centrally located on the crest of the spine than Stratton and Mt. Snow which probably helps them a bit as well. Long term I'd guess they probably average somewhere in that 200-250 range but they seem to have had a really tough go of it the past 10+ years. They haven't had a winter above their claimed 250 since 2010 and consecutive above average winters since the mid 2000s. Southern Vermont had a big 2018 thanks to March and even Whiteface had had a huge winter recently with the monster 2017 storm where they got like 50". Killington can't seem to catch a break someone alluded to it earlier but recently they've been sandwiched between patterns it seems.   

[J.Spin]

52 minutes ago, radarman said:

If some objective truth were available I'd be shocked if KMart gets 100 more inches than Mt Snow.

I’m right there with you; I’m shocked every time I look at the reported snowfall averages up and down the spine, especially with so many people having the perception that the Southern Vermont Ski Areas get the most snowfall in the state.  Does the annual snowfall really fall off nearly 100” over the southern half of the state?  I guess it’s not inconceivable, since it appears to fall off roughly that much over the northern half of the state, but it would seem like there would need to be a “floor” for annual snowfall numbers at some point.

I almost feel like I’ve previously seen (I’m not sure how many years ago) Killington/Pico with snowfall averages around 225”, which kind of fits nicely in the annual snowfall gradient from north to south.  But, that’s clearly my memory trying to smooth things out, because I just checked back in the SkiVT-L archives from 1997, and even then, Killington is listed as having an annual snowfall of 250”, and that was referencing the big Powder Magazine ski area snowfall article from 1995:

https://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9703&L=SKIVT-L&P=359221

A few things to note on the 250” number though:

1) Remember that Killington does have roughly 700’ of vertical over Mount Snow in terms of summit elevation, so if both resorts are reporting summit area snowfall numbers, that’s a pretty substantial disparity.  That’s more vertical than some of the SNE ski areas that people were recently talking about in one of the threads.

2) You know when you’re seeing super-round numbers for averages , such as “250 inches”, they are very likely heavily rounding whatever the average is.  So they could easily have average snowfall of something like 235” and be rounding to the nearest 50”.

3) Continuity – see below

The fact that the Killington annual snowfall average was listed as 250” 25 years ago is worthy of consideration here.  I’m pretty sure they have been owned by various companies during that time, and there has to have been substantial turnover in management, snow reporters, and other positions.  Is there really some systematic conspiracy in place to have everyone consistently over-report snowfall numbers so that they can get to approximately 250” every season?  It’s really hard to imagine that over all that time, there’s not one person who’s going to stand up and refuse to fudge numbers?  Or somehow, despite what must have been plenty of managerial and mountain ops turnover, some sort of sacred edict to inflate snowfall numbers to 250” has been handed from manager to manager, observer to observer, etc.?

And here’s a related argument that seems even harder to punch holes in.  Mount Snow reports that mid-150” snowfall average, and I’m pretty sure they’ve been reporting that number for a similar time to Killington’s 250” number.  The same argument goes for how in the world are they going to get by low-balling their snowfall numbers for all those years?  As an example to reinforce that, one that always blows my mind as well, is the annual snowfall average for Sunday River.  They report an annual snowfall average similar to Mount Snow (I’m seeing current numbers out there ranging from 155” to 167”).  Think about that, Sunday River has plenty of latitude – they’re at essentially the same latitude as Stowe.  How in the world does a place like that get such little snowfall?  Are they low-balling their snowfall numbers as well?  What resort in their right mind though is going to constantly low ball their snowfall numbers?  Even if “snowmaking” is your thing, and you’re not really concerned about natural snowfall, what’s the point in doing that?

The conclusion I keep coming to, year after year as I think about this, is that those 150”-ish numbers are the real annual snowfall numbers for places like that.  Think about it, Sunday River has plenty of latitude, and they’re positioned ridiculously well for getting hit by typical “coastal” storms.  How do they only get 150-ish inches of snow a season?  I think part of it is what I was saying in that big “coastal” storms (or even with the Atlantic as a primary moisture source as you nicely put it) just don’t contribute a ton of extra snowfall on a seasonal basis.  I think it really comes down to that theory that PF has – there’s sort of this “floor” of synoptic snow around the Northeastern U.S., that doesn’t change a ton with respect to an area’s geographic position.  There are of course the usual elevation effects on that, but that’s pretty much canceled out comparing mountain sites that are all in the 3,000’ to 4,000’ range.  I think if mountains don’t get in on some sort of “extra” moisture/snow, such as upslope, lake-effect, or whatever, then those low numbers are what you’re going to see.  The increases above that base annual snowfall are what really set them apart, and that increases dramatically as you head north up the spine of the Greens.

[HoarfrostHubb]

1 hour ago, PhineasC said:

Hope we see more widespread openings by the end of the month. I know most of you are hardcore skiers dropping out of helicopters and the like, but my younger kids are just starting out and they need some beginner terrain for low-speed learning. LOL

Meanwhile in the foothills of central Mass, my son has been working the lifts at WaWa for a couple of weeks now.  Great snowmaking weather since the storm

[LaGrangewx]

37 minutes ago, J.Spin said:

I’m right there with you; I’m shocked every time I look at the reported snowfall averages up and down the spine, especially with so many people having the perception that the Southern Vermont Ski Areas get the most snowfall in the state.  Does the annual snowfall really fall off nearly 100” over the southern half of the state?  I guess it’s not inconceivable, since it appears to fall off roughly that much over the northern half of the state, but it would seem like there would need to be a “floor” for annual snowfall numbers at some point.

I almost feel like I’ve previously seen (I’m not sure how many years ago) Killington/Pico with snowfall averages around 225”, which kind of fits nicely in the annual snowfall gradient from north to south.  But, that’s clearly my memory trying to smooth things out, because I just checked back in the SkiVT-L archives from 1997, and even then, Killington is listed as having an annual snowfall of 250”, and that was referencing the big Powder Magazine ski area snowfall article from 1995:

https://list.uvm.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9703&L=SKIVT-L&P=359221

A few things to note on the 250” number though:

1) Remember that Killington does have roughly 700’ of vertical over Mount Snow in terms of summit elevation, so if both resorts are reporting summit area snowfall numbers, that’s a pretty substantial disparity.  That’s more vertical than some of the SNE ski areas that people were recently talking about in one of the threads.

2) You know when you’re seeing super-round numbers for averages , such as “250 inches”, they are very likely heavily rounding whatever the average is.  So they could easily have average snowfall of something like 235” and be rounding to the nearest 50”.

3) Continuity – see below

The fact that the Killington annual snowfall average was listed as 250” 25 years ago is worthy of consideration here.  I’m pretty sure they have been owned by various companies during that time, and there has to have been substantial turnover in management, snow reporters, and other positions.  Is there really some systematic conspiracy in place to have everyone consistently over-report snowfall numbers so that they can get to approximately 250” every season?  It’s really hard to imagine that over all that time, there’s not one person who’s going to stand up and refuse to fudge numbers?  Or somehow, despite what must have been plenty of managerial and mountain ops turnover, some sort of sacred edict to inflate snowfall numbers to 250” has been handed from manager to manager, observer to observer, etc.?

And here’s a related argument that seems even harder to punch holes in.  Mount Snow reports that mid-150” snowfall average, and I’m pretty sure they’ve been reporting that number for a similar time to Killington’s 250” number.  The same argument goes for how in the world are they going to get by low-balling their snowfall numbers for all those years?  As an example to reinforce that, one that always blows my mind as well, is the annual snowfall average for Sunday River.  They report an annual snowfall average similar to Mount Snow (I’m seeing current numbers out there ranging from 155” to 167”).  Think about that, Sunday River has plenty of latitude – they’re at essentially the same latitude as Stowe.  How in the world does a place like that get such little snowfall?  Are they low-balling their snowfall numbers as well?  What resort in their right mind though is going to constantly low ball their snowfall numbers?  Even if “snowmaking” is your thing, and you’re not really concerned about natural snowfall, what’s the point in doing that?

The conclusion I keep coming to, year after year as I think about this, is that those 150”-ish numbers are the real annual snowfall numbers for places like that.  Think about it, Sunday River has plenty of latitude, and they’re positioned ridiculously well for getting hit by typical “coastal” storms.  How do they only get 150-ish inches of snow a season?  I think part of it is what I was saying in that big “coastal” storms (or even with the Atlantic as a primary moisture source as you nicely put it) just don’t contribute a ton of extra snowfall on a seasonal basis.  I think it really comes down to that theory that PF has – there’s sort of this “floor” of synoptic snow around the Northeastern U.S., that doesn’t change a ton with respect to an area’s geographic position.  There are of course the usual elevation effects on that, but that’s pretty much canceled out comparing mountain sites that are all in the 3,000’ to 4,000’ range.  I think if mountains don’t get in on some sort of “extra” moisture/snow, such as upslope, lake-effect, or whatever, then those low numbers are what you’re going to see.  The increases above that base annual snowfall are what really set them apart, and that increases dramatically as you head north up the spine of the Greens.

Really thorough analysis. 150" at Sunday River probably goes a long way with their retention, especially if it is from a majority of synoptic snow. I think somewhere like Mt. Snow obviously does not market their snowfall the same way Jay Peak or even Stowe does. Mt. Snow doesn't rely on snow to draw crowds, as their insane Terrain park, location, and amount of consistently groomed cruisers does the job. I think somewhere like Jay has to make it known loud and clear that they get that kind of snow, to draw people up to their more remote location. Its for that reason that a place like Mt Snow in my opinion does not track snowfall quite as diligently and make sure they report as many inches as truthfully possible from the snowiest place on the hill. They also don't get anywhere near the nickel and dime type snow that the Northern Vermont resorts get. As someone said earlier it is literally 10% of it and almost all their snow is synoptic whereas Killington can definitely get some more orographic benefit snows. I also believe Mt. Snow and Stratton are east of the best orographic snows in Southern Vermont that actually occur over the center of the plateau near Woodford and up to Glastenbury Mountain. Its amazing to see the difference in snow depths at times in the Mt. Snow base area vs Route 9 crest in Woodford when I've driven through there. I think you're on to something saying that 150" could be a number for eastern ski areas at 3000' in good locations for coastal storms that don't benefit from orographic snows. 

[J.Spin]

42 minutes ago, LaGrangewx said:

150" at Sunday River probably goes a long way with their retention, especially if it is from a majority of synoptic snow.

I totally agree, and with the numbers that keep staring me in the face, that’s got to be the case.  Combine 150”+ of reasonably dense synoptic snowfall with the excellent retention of a place like Sunday River, and things will generally work out fine.  You’re even going to have some nice powder skiing on the days with fresh snow, you’re just not going to get, on average, the supply of powder that you’re going to get in places like the Northern Greens with an additional 150”+ of champagne on top of that.

I think Sugarloaf falls right in line with that theory as well.  In that 1995 Powder Magazine article, their annual snowfall average was reported as 164”, although I’ve now also seen numbers out there like 189”, and it looks like they’ve got a “very round” 200” on their website.  They’ve probably got bit more elevation, perhaps a bit of help from their great latitude, and then they might get in on a bit of upslope, to boost them over Sunday River.  With the incredible snow retention at Sugarloaf, things work out quite well with the annual snowfall they get.

[MRVexpat]

1 hour ago, J.Spin said:

I’m right there with you; I’m shocked every time I look at the reported snowfall averages up and down the spine, especially with so many people having the perception that the Southern Vermont Ski Areas get the most snowfall in the state. 

Sweet breakdown! Super interesting. The quoted got my attention though. Have you really heard repeated sentiment from the general public that the ski areas in so. VT get the most snow in the state?? I think that even as a kid I understood that further north = bigger/colder mountains and more snow for whatever reason. Skier's instinct maybe!

[backedgeapproaching]

1 hour ago, LaGrangewx said:

Really thorough analysis. 150" at Sunday River probably goes a long way with their retention, especially if it is from a majority of synoptic snow. I think somewhere like Mt. Snow obviously does not market their snowfall the same way Jay Peak or even Stowe does. Mt. Snow doesn't rely on snow to draw crowds, as their insane Terrain park, location, and amount of consistently groomed cruisers does the job. I think somewhere like Jay has to make it known loud and clear that they get that kind of snow, to draw people up to their more remote location. Its for that reason that a place like Mt Snow in my opinion does not track snowfall quite as diligently and make sure they report as many inches as truthfully possible from the snowiest place on the hill. They also don't get anywhere near the nickel and dime type snow that the Northern Vermont resorts get. As someone said earlier it is literally 10% of it and almost all their snow is synoptic whereas Killington can definitely get some more orographic benefit snows. I also believe Mt. Snow and Stratton are east of the best orographic snows in Southern Vermont that actually occur over the center of the plateau near Woodford and up to Glastenbury Mountain. Its amazing to see the difference in snow depths at times in the Mt. Snow base area vs Route 9 crest in Woodford when I've driven through there. I think you're on to something saying that 150" could be a number for eastern ski areas at 3000' in good locations for coastal storms that don't benefit from orographic snows. 

I think without question the snowiest spot in SVT is the area north of Woodford towards Glastenbury like you mentioned. That area is always lit up on radar on any type of NW uplsope flow--much more than any SVT ski area or any area in general.  It's like a Woodford on steroids as it upslopes in almost any direction and there are spots 3k to almost 4k in elevation there.

Problem is there is literally nothing there--no roads, houses, nothing..lol. So who knows how much really falls.

 

[alex]

3 hours ago, PhineasC said:

Hope we see more widespread openings by the end of the month. I know most of you are hardcore skiers dropping out of helicopters and the like, but my younger kids are just starting out and they need some beginner terrain for low-speed learning. LOL

Bretton Woods is perfect for that. Can’t think of a better place for kids. They’ve been making snowing like crazy and they’ve already opened up a couple of all natural trails, won’t be long till they open a lot more

[J.Spin]

40 minutes ago, MRVexpat said:

Sweet breakdown! Super interesting. The quoted got my attention though. Have you really heard repeated sentiment from the general public that the ski areas in so. VT get the most snow in the state?? I think that even as a kid I understood that further north = bigger/colder mountains and more snow for whatever reason. Skier's instinct maybe!

Yeah, there are definitely people out there with this perception, but from what I’ve seen we’re talking very casual skiers here – folks that would be at a level where if you asked them what the typical annual snowfall was for a ski resort, they’d have no idea.  Similarly, they also have to be folks that don’t follow weather very closely, and the times they do pay attention to it a bit would be when a big coastal snowstorm is making headlines.  So if it’s a storm that is positioned correctly such that it’s making headlines because it’s affecting the big coastal cities, the NNE resorts are typically getting fringed, and it’s going to be resorts in SVT and similar areas that are getting walloped.  So I assume this is where this population of casual skiers/casual weather observers gets that impression – they watch the news/weather during these big storms, and see the big totals highlighted at SVT resorts.  That’s all they know, and they assume this is the normal snowfall routine; they have no idea that big storms like that are maybe a once or twice a season thing.  They’re not following snow reports at other times of the season, so they’re oblivious to what’s typically going on, and they’re also not the type to go looking into ski resort websites to look up annual snowfall numbers.

PF interacts with visitors a lot at Stowe, so I wonder if he’s ever experienced this phenomenon.  The thing is, his visitors are already up at Stowe, so they may already be far more aware of the differences from down south vs. folks who only ever visit the Southern Vermont Ski Areas.

[PhineasC]

1 hour ago, alex said:

Bretton Woods is perfect for that. Can’t think of a better place for kids. They’ve been making snowing like crazy and they’ve already opened up a couple of all natural trails, won’t be long till they open a lot more

Yep, we have season passes there. Expect by the time we get back on the 21st it'll be pretty good.

[bwt3650]

Wow; my sarcastic jay measuring comment stirred some awesome data dialog.  Being up there I can definitely say Jay cleans up.  I’m not knowledgeable enough to back this up, but it just seems like that mountain position does a better job of wringing out the moisture.  The snow just seems to linger forever and add up.  As far as their reporting, they seem to be much more broad with their numbers and use ranges like “half a foot of powder landed” and even 6-8, as opposed to Killington who puts out 8”.  If they use the higher number always for their running total, I could see it being skewed high, but honestly, it’s probably close and if they really took accurate measurements up on that ridge, they get every bit of it.  That glade off the tram gets crazy deep.  I’m obviously biased, but jay is just a different animal.  You can’t compare the powder in their woods to anywhere.  North glade and andres will hold it for days.  
 

 It’s funny, I saw the Killington number the other day and was surprised, but didn’t see any of the cams or put together how off it was.  Numbers really don’t tell the story for each mountain tho.  I can find something I like best about each of them.  I don’t go to mt. Snow for powder; but I still love the north face.  And castle rock at sb just reminds me of exactly what you picture New England skiing as.  And Stowe, well, it doesn’t get much better than lapping the four runner on a powder day.  I can find something unique I love at most of them from south to north.  I just think day in and day out for consistency tho, the northern greens are going to give you the most reliable conditions in the heart of winter.

[bwt3650]

13 hours ago, MRVexpat said:

Haha I personally think Killington's marketing takes the cake when it comes to over-inflating #s. In terms of Jay Peak, when you look at South to North #s in VT, it isn't that far fetched that Jay Peak might avg 350" a year when Sugarbush > Bolton > Stowe axis is 250" > 300" > 314" respectively. Sure Jay has a reputation of over-reporting but I don't think its all that egregious, as that area does without a doubt get the most snow of any resort in New England. Killington on the other hand does claim the same 250" average as Sugarbush while being 40+ miles south as the crow flies. Do they avg more synoptic snow? Maybe, but that has to be a wash over the long term and they likely only get 50 and 25% of the upslope that Sugarbush and Stowe get respectively. 

In my four years working at Sugarbush (maybe I'm biased? lol) and three since, I've noticed that they tend to report a bunch of snow early in the year and then we've caught up and surpassed them in the later months. For example they are already reporting 46" inches on the season while areas south are in the teens and single digits while Sugarbush/MRG is in the 20s and only Stowe and Jay are 40"+. I wouldn't be surprised if their marketing angle is to hype up the SNE and NY/NJ crowd with higher snowfall totals in order to tap into that early season demand. That, or their snowmaking system is so powerful that they aren't able to discern between what is falling from the sky vs. what they are generating themselves haha. 

 

Quick question..As a sugarbush alumni, have you ever witnessed a day where upper FIS was not the iciest trail in New England?  Had some of my scariest moments on skis on that trail.  Love sugarbush tho.

[LaGrangewx]

2 hours ago, backedgeapproaching said:

I think without question the snowiest spot in SVT is the area north of Woodford towards Glastenbury like you mentioned. That area is always lit up on radar on any type of NW uplsope flow--much more than any SVT ski area or any area in general.  It's like a Woodford on steroids as it upslopes in almost any direction and there are spots 3k to almost 4k in elevation there.

Problem is there is literally nothing there--no roads, houses, nothing..lol. So who knows how much really falls.

 

Yup you highlighted it perfectly. Just check that area out on any high-res model and its always the bulls-eye in southern Vermont for almost all systems. I think the Woodford Snobusters Snowmobile Club goes back in there but I could be wrong. I bet they see some ridiculous depths for southern Vermont if thats the case. 

[LaGrangewx]

2 hours ago, J.Spin said:

I totally agree, and with the numbers that keep staring me in the face, that’s got to be the case.  Combine 150”+ of reasonably dense synoptic snowfall with the excellent retention of a place like Sunday River, and things will generally work out fine.  You’re even going to have some nice powder skiing on the days with fresh snow, you’re just not going to get, on average, the supply of powder that you’re going to get in places like the Northern Greens with an additional 150”+ of champagne on top of that.

I think Sugarloaf falls right in line with that theory as well.  In that 1995 Powder Magazine article, their annual snowfall average was reported as 164”, although I’ve now also seen numbers out there like 189”, and it looks like they’ve got a “very round” 200” on their website.  They’ve probably got bit more elevation, perhaps a bit of help from their great latitude, and then they might get in on a bit of upslope, to boost them over Sunday River.  With the incredible snow retention at Sugarloaf, things work out quite well with the annual snowfall they get.

Sugarloaf and Wildcat both have a solid amount of substantially higher terrain up to 4k+ instead of 3k and probably benefit a bit more from orographic enhancement which gets them to that 200 range like you said. 

[mreaves]

7 hours ago, LaGrangewx said:

Yup you highlighted it perfectly. Just check that area out on any high-res model and its always the bulls-eye in southern Vermont for almost all systems. I think the Woodford Snobusters Snowmobile Club goes back in there but I could be wrong. I bet they see some ridiculous depths for southern Vermont if thats the case. 

There are a couple of clubs that groom the National Forest roads that skirt that area but I think a large portion of the area you circled is part of the Glastenbury Wilderness tract of the Green Mt. National Forest

[PowderBeard]

12 hours ago, J.Spin said:

 

1) Remember that Killington does have roughly 700’ of vertical over Mount Snow in terms of summit elevation, so if both resorts are reporting summit area snowfall numbers, that’s a pretty substantial disparity.  That’s more vertical than some of the SNE ski areas that people were recently talking about in one of the threads.

 

Guess I never thought of "base" elevation too, If Killington was measuring at K1 for a period of time, that is 1000-1500' higher than the base areas of Sugarbush, Smuggs, etc. and like measuring mid-mountain at many areas. I have only been really skiing and paying attention to snow the past 10 years, and from that my mindset is Killington is more similar in snowfall to Okemo than it is to Sugarbush.

In regards to Jay do they over report, sure. But the wind definitely distributes things around and makes it hard to measure. There have been times I have hit Staircase/Everglade area and there is a 3-4' base meanwhile you are hitting stumps and root systems in Canyonland or Deliverance. 

Check out Killington's report and the webcams this morning. Penny and nickel to 250!

[MRVexpat]

9 hours ago, bwt3650 said:

That glade off the tram gets crazy deep.  I’m obviously biased, but jay is just a different animal.  You can’t compare the powder in their woods to anywhere.  North glade and andres will hold it for days.  
 

Can't help but agree with this. My first true (and to this day 2nd best) day of powder skiing was on a high school ski trip in March 06. I convinced my parents to let me demo a pair of Head Monster 88s from the Alpine Haus in Wethersfield CT as I heard Jay would be getting snow. Side note: funny how those were considered powder skis at the time!

Anyways, they got 18" or so of absolute blower powder overnight and the flyer was closed for wind so all morning all I did was take the Bonny, hike the 5 minutes up the ridge and go straight to beaver pond/andre's. I quickly understood the "snorkel" joke haha and learned to ski with my mouth closed so as to not choke. Thats when the addiction truly took hold! 

[MRVexpat]

9 hours ago, bwt3650 said:

Quick question..As a sugarbush alumni, have you ever witnessed a day where upper FIS was not the iciest trail in New England?  Had some of my scariest moments on skis on that trail.  Love sugarbush tho.

Haha yeah that trail is so exposed to the wind and gets a good amount of snowmaking so lots of times its a bit umm...firm. Yes I've had good runs on it but you can guarantee that if FIS is skiing well, black diamond or the trees are skiing better. Where it shines is when it gets blasted with cold early season gunpowder or on a nice warm spring day. 

[radarman]

Sparse trees on either side of Upper FIS are usually good to great.  Not many turns in there, but they hold it.  Cut over through the woods from the top of black diamond and it opens up.

[MRVexpat]

3 minutes ago, radarman said:

Sparse trees on either side of Upper FIS are usually good to great.  Not many turns in there, but they hold it.  Cut over through the woods from the top of black diamond and it opens up.

SHHHHH!!!  but yes, that whole ridge from MRG to Lincoln Peak holds so many goodies when the pack is deep, and some even when it isn't!

[radarman]

As for on the actual trail, 12/1/18 was the best I've ever seen it.  90" in November and very little wind...  a pure west coast style powder puff.   Skinner's reward.

 

[PhineasC]

Walking up a ski slope and then skiing down sounds downright exhausting, not gonna lie.

[ORH_wxman]

15 hours ago, radarman said:

Well, even here we get a pretty substantial percentage of our snow nickel and diming from northern stream shortwaves and on the front side of cutters/SWFEs... ie. not pure coastals.    I'd be inclined to suppose that Killington incrementally scores with the CAD events based on latitude, but we know also that the west side of the mountains are prone to torching and they're tickling that edge pretty good, whereas Mt Snow has some buffer.   At any rate, I don't entirely mean big nor'easter type events, which as you say likely don't contribute hugely on a percentage basis, but also your standard fare March clipper that blows up under LI, quick hitter anafrontal waves, waves on cold fronts hung up offshore, etc.  Basically everything synoptic with the Atlantic as the primary moisture source.

Yep, there's a lot of events that are not coastals that will hit our area and maybe not V NT or NH/ ME....things like clippers that track S of LI or even overrunning events that struggle to get warning snows north of central VT/NH. Also the occasional IVT that dumps a few inches.

The Killington number definitely looks inflated unless maybe they were measuring near the 4k summit and perhaps it's only mildly inflated. But then it wouldn't be apples to apples comparison to other ski resorts since you shouldn't measure at the summit.

[PowderBeard]

General Sugarbush rule, find a shack/building, look for rabbit hole behind it lol. My most memorable day there involved this and I stumbled upon John Atkinson et al. doing a photoshoot after a 20" upslope deal. Photo credit to him on this one.

8 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Walking up a ski slope and then skiing down sounds downright exhausting, not gonna lie.

Dawn patrols with fresh snow are always worth it. You can see the real power of some storms at elevation too if you venture out in the midst of one. Scary the first couple times because you think every tree is about to come down then you realize why they grow short and fat. Skinning at night during upslope is pretty amazing, I have had a couple trips where it seems like there is not a cloud in the sky and you can see stars but snow is accumulating on your jacket and all around.

[radarman]

2 minutes ago, MRVexpat said:

SHHHHH!!!  but yes, that whole ridge from MRG to Lincoln Peak holds so many goodies when the pack is deep, and some even when it isn't!

The woods skiers left of Black diamond holds literally like 1-2 lines, but it's frickin chest deep in there...  And the other side ain't bad either

Nothing whatsoever against LP, but I have a special fondness for the Ellen summit.  I think it's overlooked sometimes.

[PhineasC]

Just now, PowderBeard said:

General Sugarbush rule, find a shack/building, look for rabbit hole behind it lol. 

Dawn patrols with fresh snow are always worth it. You can see the real power of some storms at elevation too if you venture out in the midst of one. Scary the first couple times because you think every tree is about to come down then you realize why they grow short and fat. Skinning at night during upslope is pretty amazing, I have had a couple trips where it seems like there is not a cloud in the sky and you can see stars but snow is accumulating on your jacket and all around.

It definitely sounds fun, just a major cardio workout is all.  

 

[radarman]

7 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Walking up a ski slope and then skiing down sounds downright exhausting, not gonna lie.

yeah and tack on a 3 hr drive on either end.  But once home and showered, you feel amazing.

[PowderBeard]

14 minutes ago, radarman said:

The woods skiers left of Black diamond holds literally like 1-2 lines, but it's frickin chest deep in there...  And the other side ain't bad either

Nothing whatsoever against LP, but I have a special fondness for the Ellen summit.  I think it's overlooked sometimes.

I have not done enough exploring at Ellen. My impulsive side gets the best of me and I find it hard to resist checking out "The Church" and rabbit holes around Castlerock each time I am there. It can be "interesting" to see people try to carve into the Church wall when below it only to find it is a rock face with a white blanket over it.

[HoarfrostHubb]

19 minutes ago, PhineasC said:

Walking up a ski slope and then skiing down sounds downright exhausting, not gonna lie.

It is brutal.   Definately something you need to be in good shape for... I ain't in good shape now...lol