Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Alpine & Snow' started by Lady Penelope, Jun 23, 2016.
and next week might just make it a few ...
Sadly, you may be right
Looks like 2m base is possible
Doubt it. I reckon it'll peak at 160cm, no more. I may be pessimistic but rain has been a big presence this season.
IMO theres still a lot of weather to come yet. The snow pack has done most of its settlement and with some cold nights and last weeks rain its turning into a block of ice.. I think with only 2 or 3 moe dumps we may see the 2m depth beaten.
I am figuring anything close to the pink line on the gergometer is a win. We have to get used to that.
Sad but true.
Below average june.
Above average july.
August is still below average but still filling in.
I will sit with 182cm and use the gerg error parameters of +/- 43. Really cant get it wrong that way considering nearly all seasons fit into that range. Then again max snow depth doesnt really bother me as my Aussie season finishes on 6th September and I reckon any day I can spend on snow is a win. Enjoyed every day so far and will continue to enjoy every day for the rest of my Aussie season. Glass is always full.
Yep I am updating too.
235 +/- 80 CM.
202 cm - on 26th august (+/- 200cm......)
Anyone know when we are going to get the latest depth reading?
If they measure today after all rhat rain last night I predict 105cm. I also predict (guess) that the season has peaked.
We got a depth reading yet?
That suggests rain had little affect as its now a solid pack or SC had a fair bit of snow compared to resorts around them. It has been very cold most of the week since the last reading. I still think over the 2m is possible, but just don't see it at NSW resorts.
when peak SC depth is occurring..it's getting earlier , we may well have already had it.
if we have
Disturbing news this gradual (or maybe steady) diminishing snow depth & 'snow days'.
Be interested to see what Vic readings are saying - our hydro guys don't seem as interested or maybe organised?
Have said many times before, using SCk readings might be appropriate for CP & OK (~mid mountain for PB) but for Thredbo it's a crock except perhaps the upper half of the mountain. On the Supertrail ~ 80% of the vertical (~ 470m) is below 1830m making the stat useless.
I note NZ resorts have the fortitude and openness to publish upper and lower Mtn depths!
Much fairer - ESP for poor seasons/depths or resorts with big verbs.
Bring back the old measures! IMO!!
Can you honestly see Thredbo reporting a 'lower' mountain snow depth of 5-15cm?
Rather than CMs of depth, they could just go with shades of brown, really brown (summer), brown (snowmaking and rain), sort off brown (snowmaking), Light Brown (as good as it gets).
To put SC snow depths in context for Thredbo I used my trusty GIS to calculate Thredbo's area between 1600-2050m i.e. to be representative of Perisher and Charlotte altitudes and then calculated the area below 1600m. 350ha of Thredbo's terrain is above 1600m and 50ha is below. The problem is those top to bottom groomers which make up virtually all of the <1600m terrain are a relatively small proportion of Thredbo's terrain but get more than the lions share of attention in defining Thredbo's ski experience. Still the big groomers are a big part of the picture for many who visit Thredbo so a fair representation of snow conditions on the lower mtn is needed (cams, weather and comments in Thredbo's snow reports is more than enough for those paying attention). As for the other 350ha SC is as good a measure for Thredbo as it is for Perisher or Charlottes.
That kind of sensible analysis has no place in a “my resort is better” discussion
Fair enough BH: I take your point about % of area - ( here's my additional two cents)
As a case in point, here in Vic Buller's problem (especially) is while it looks high-ish for Victoria, only a small bump is much above 1700m, with much of the acclaimed steeper areas or longer runs, such as Tyrol, Shaky knees, Little Buller, Federation, Bull Run and Chamois descending to a 'Lake Mountain-esque' 1400m or so. Much of it also faces north or round up top (Baldy) so struggles to retain snow. And based on historical photos, early Buller skiers cleared too many trees from the Village /Bourke Street area - again making it harder to increase depth. But I digress.
Given that Australian ski areas are leased by the respective state governments under a set of conditions (environmental/ consumer affairs etc...), I think it's only fair that resort ops go to reasonable lengths to provide accurate reports of conditions - especially snow depth, condition and weather conditions (& not 'wind Nw' when it's a 100kmh blizzard. Anything else is what I call deceptive advertising. And shouldn't be state sanctioned via the leasing system (well that's my layman' view of the resorts!)
As for Thredbo. I love Thredbo in good conditions but often prefer to tour up high where the snow is often much better than on piste and certainly much better than Vic. (Yet to ski Bogong sad to say!).
Thredbo desperately needs to look after its customers by installing a lift on the upper 2/3 of the Supertrail. (Think Cruiser). From late August the ST too often reminds me of Vic's lower runs (slushy & or icy - early). But then who'd ski to the Valley Terimnal? Except at day's end??
Food for thought!
Spencers will be 125ish +/- 10, done Wed or Thursday every week, next week , because when I ski, It snows!! * & I like the look of the sat picture south west of Perth
If you believed the thredbo marketing (longest runs in Aus) everyone who skis thredbo only ever skis top to bottom. All the rest of the resort is for the Perisher skiers (no vertical) hehehe
IMO 1.5 +/- .1 is the new norm ... is 1.75 the new 2.0 ?
Totally agree with this. Thredbo has plenty of width to take advantage of >1600m but much of the lift system funnels you into using the full vert and in doing so putting up with the rubbish lower down - it's no wonder many end up wondering what relevance SC has for Thredbo.
If you ski Thredbo you should look at not only SC but DC and TMD to get an overview of where the snow line is relative to the different elevations
SC gives a good indication of General depth at that elevation in the nearby area, that generally encompasses the major NSW resorts
Where else are you going to get similar, seasonally consistent, data from?
That's an easy one Cin. Leave Snowy Hydro to do their long running Obs thing, while resorts do the 'decent' thing and most relevant and measure on piste. It's hardly an expensive exercise - is it? Compared with grooming & snowmaking?
....and let's face it, if SHydro only took readings at lower elevations, NSW resorts would never use them.
I understand the point you are making, which is valid. However, your choice of 1600m is not really appropriate to be rpresentative of perisher and charlottes, especially for Charlottes.
The base at Charlottes is at 1750m
With regards to perisher, without doing a formal calculation, I would guesstimate that it would be much less than 10% at less than 1700m. Perisher village is 1720m, smiggs 1680. Guthega base is 1640, but that is really only an access trail to the carpark. The ridge chair is the largest significant area at <1700, with the chair base at 1605.
Really to put it in context with the spencers reading the best measure would be percentage of skiiable area above and below the spencers creek level. I have no idea, but my guesstimate for Charlottes would be 50/50, less so for perisher, and significantly less for thredbo.
However, spencers cannot be used as a measurement for resorts. It is what it is, an independent scientifically obtained measurement, done in a repeatable and standardised way, that gives an indication of the snowpack at that level.
Not sure if this has been covered in this thread or not but does anyone know what is the reason for the NSW resorts using the Spencer's Creek reading on their snow reports instead of using readings contained within 'their' resort areas?
It's been discussed ad naseum on the forums.
For better or for worse it's consistent and dependable and independent. If, after a few season's skiing or boarding, you can't match the general base level at Spencer's with the likely depth or conditions at your resort of choice, you should apply yourself more. Combine SC and snow report and snow cams and that's pretty much all one needs.
Easier, lack of perceived bias
I had the same thoughts and measured again for terrain over 1800m. Thredbo has about 200ha and Perisher 350ha, however most of Thredbo's >1800m terrain still requires runs out to much lower elevations. Personally I think the resorts should do their own measurements of snow depth using some standardised approach as well. Spencers Creek is useful if you know how to interpret it, but if you need regular in depth interwebs discussions to interpret it for the ski resorts than it's not of much use to the average punter!
Do the resorts also need to disclose what is under the ground at each location. Say flat summer groomed grass (over which 10cm or 100cm or 200cm still skis the same) compared to fields of granite boulders (which are only skiable when there is 150cm+ of cover).
FFS i can't believe that you guys are frequent skiers and still don't get Spencers Creek and correlations in the resort areas.
What about non-resort areas getting some unbiased reports. I mean, one can still go and ski a 2km long run on the range over when Spencers Creek is at 0cm.
We have discussed - every Thursday some needs to ask or complain.
If the resorts did release data - they would get slammed for over/under reporting. Not taking it at the right spot. Blah blah. Spencer's creek is good enough for me. Tells me enough to give an idea if areas are covered or not.
What I do prefer is actual reports from the great members of this site. What is the quality of said snow. How does it feel under ur board.
Regular visitors to our great mountains know that fresh snow is what we chase. Weather this 20cm or 200cm. All We want is fresh! Lots of regular little top ups like last year.
A good deep cover of spring corn is also appreciated...
In the snowy mountains the wind directions and wind blow is just as important as measurements at Spencers.
This year has been dominated by NW winds, with only one dump with S winds.
Which means some places were very good at 7100 ft (Top Secret,) Sunday to Tuesday, and very average (Mt Tate).
Any teading yet? I suspect it to be just over the metre, cause of the recent hairdryer weather and warm nights.
135.0. Wish there was a ski resort at SC
Surprisingly generous - perhaps they're drilling into the pack ice.
Not much loss amazingly. This weekend's snow and the snow that is progged for next week will probably take the peak depth for the season. Which also happens to be exactly when I predicted earlier this year
That's a solid number and concors with what is across much of MtP. The southern slopes are well covered - just not frozen hard.
As long as Friday is not an ark level event - again - we'll muddle through 2016 a few more weeks yet.
There is and I will be skiing it on Saturday. or Sun day after the storm and the next 40, 200 may be seen this year
A very nice surprise. it must be a block of ice out there. if what's predicted over the next week or so happens 2m will be broken.
...Meanwhile in the 'deep south' - Baw Baw & Lake Mtn might actually get into double figures and become skiable again.
I find that number very hard to believe. The resort slopes say something very different.
Stating the obvious, but, resort slopes have been skied on repeatedly, probably groomed nearly every night some have snow making. There is no way Snowy Hydro measurements from SC or anywhere in the back country will resemble resort measurements, except by fluke.
These measurements are not taken for resorts use. Resorts state them as an indication of back country natural snowpack and at that elevation.