Ruins of Snoqualmie
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
I got a bunch of pictures at Snoqualmie with old ruins I thought would be interesting.
1. Old tower near Triple 60 now used for a light tower, might be part of the single.
2. This was near the first tower.
This post has been edited by Snoqualmie guy: 02 September 2007 - 11:47 AM
1. Old tower near Triple 60 now used for a light tower, might be part of the single.
2. This was near the first tower.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_006.jpg (945.2K)
Number of downloads: 54 -
West_Central_005.jpg (1.23MB)
Number of downloads: 41
This post has been edited by Snoqualmie guy: 02 September 2007 - 11:47 AM
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Sorry all my files for some reason are too big, I'll try to fix this. Anyway this is the counter waight of the old single not sure though.
This post has been edited by Snoqualmie guy: 02 September 2007 - 11:46 AM
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_007.jpg (1.75MB)
Number of downloads: 28
This post has been edited by Snoqualmie guy: 02 September 2007 - 11:46 AM
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Old foundation near bottom of Triple 60. Looks like a rope tow or something of that sort.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_022.jpg (2.13MB)
Number of downloads: 14
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Foundation of old single chair.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_023.jpg (1.86MB)
Number of downloads: 17
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Standing on the foundation of the single looking up at what used to be the lift line.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_024.jpg (1.17MB)
Number of downloads: 31
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Ruins found in the Park HQ area in weeds.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_025.jpg (1.54MB)
Number of downloads: 49
JustJeepIt
02 Sep 2007
Grrrrr! I hate seeing old lifts rot! Those lazy dorks! Is it a dead ski area? Got any more history of the place?
Snoqualmie guy
02 Sep 2007
Old tower parts in the weeds, could it be from the old Bonanza lift? Also Looking up the old Bonanza liftline, tower is the only one left of the lift.
Attached File(s)
-
West_Central_027.jpg (983.14K)
Number of downloads: 71 -
West_Central_026.jpg (1.52MB)
Number of downloads: 67
Snoqualmie guy
03 Sep 2007
No this is the Summit at Snoqualmie. It is still in operation and the pictures are mostly of the single chair they used to have. It was installed in '48 (?) and has been gone for while. As for the old lift in the weeds, they will most likely be used for Central park as rails, boxes, etc...
liftmech
04 Sep 2007
Snoqualmie and Ski Acres pulled lifts down and left them where they lay. The re-used several lift towers as light standards, especially if they already had lights on them.
Limelight
04 Sep 2007
Are there any parts from the Alpine double laying around? I operated that lift for a year.
Peter
04 Sep 2007
Here is the liftline with a few towers...
Attached File(s)
-
IMG_3997.JPG (2.91MB)
Number of downloads: 52
EagleAce
05 Sep 2007

Snoqualmie guy
05 Sep 2007
One or two towers of Alpine still has the sheaves on it. I've looked for the foundation, but have never found it.
Limelight
05 Sep 2007
Yeah I used to operate both the Alpine and Bonanza lift. Would love to find an old sheave or something. Does anyone have some old pics of those lifts???
andyh1962
05 Sep 2007
Skier, on Sep 4 2007, 11:54 PM, said:
Here is the liftline with a few towers...
Note to people uploading files biger than 750K bytes, I use dial up to see this site. I don't even bother opening your files because your big files hang my computer (when I try to open the file, the down load time takes so long, it seems the computer is hung, and I have a fast modern computer.) Besides you are being inconsiderate of the people who pay for the hosting of this site by needlessly filling up disk space with 3 meg files when the same file could be created at a lower resolution. HINT: take the picture with your camera set to the lowest resolution possible. What you do with big pictures on disk space YOU PAY FOr, is your business. Most of us are interested in seeing your pictures, so if you want us to see, enjoy and comment, please set your camera to lowest resolution possible, before taking the pictures.
there now, I have vented. thanks for your continuing contributions. I do not represent "Management" on this site.

This post has been edited by andyh1962: 05 September 2007 - 11:55 AM
skier2
05 Sep 2007
andyh1962, on Sep 5 2007, 12:51 PM, said:
Note to people uploading files biger than 750K bytes, I use dial up to see this site. I don't even bother opening your files because your big files hang my computer (when I try to open the file, the down load time takes so long, it seems the computer is hung, and I have a fast modern computer.) Besides you are being inconsiderate of the people who pay for the hosting of this site by needlessly filling up disk space with 3 meg files when the same file could be created at a lower resolution. HINT: take the picture with your camera set to the lowest resolution possible. What you do with big pictures on disk space YOU PAY FOr, is your business. Most of us are interested in seeing your pictures, so if you want us to see, enjoy and comment, please set your camera to lowest resolution possible, before taking the pictures.
there now, I have vented. thanks for your continuing contributions. I do not represent "Management" on this site.
there now, I have vented. thanks for your continuing contributions. I do not represent "Management" on this site.

That's why things get archived and deleted over time. Dial up is not common anymore. If it takes too much time for your files to load, its not others being inconsiderate--actually, those people are being considerate of the people who would like to see full size images. Anyway, this is off topic so...
hyak.net
05 Sep 2007
skier2, on Sep 5 2007, 02:02 PM, said:
That's why things get archived and deleted over time. Dial up is not common anymore. If it takes too much time for your files to load, its not others being inconsiderate--actually, those people are being considerate of the people who would like to see full size images. Anyway, this is off topic so...
If you go through the weekly photo's on my site from 1998/99 I have some Bonanza/Alpine chair removal and quad install pics. This was the first year I began the weekly pic thing so the photo's are not of the best quality, and my camera was a 640-480. Here is a shot I took just before they started the removal (you can see some digging for the new quad inbetween.
http://hyak.net/cam9899/acreshsq.gif
EagleAce
05 Sep 2007
andyh1962, on Sep 5 2007, 12:51 PM, said:
Note to people uploading files biger than 750K bytes, I use dial up to see this site. I don't even bother opening your files because your big files hang my computer (when I try to open the file, the down load time takes so long, it seems the computer is hung, and I have a fast modern computer.) Besides you are being inconsiderate of the people who pay for the hosting of this site by needlessly filling up disk space with 3 meg files when the same file could be created at a lower resolution. HINT: take the picture with your camera set to the lowest resolution possible. What you do with big pictures on disk space YOU PAY FOr, is your business. Most of us are interested in seeing your pictures, so if you want us to see, enjoy and comment, please set your camera to lowest resolution possible, before taking the pictures.
there now, I have vented. thanks for your continuing contributions. I do not represent "Management" on this site.
there now, I have vented. thanks for your continuing contributions. I do not represent "Management" on this site.

yet it says max file size allowed is 300k when I upload something. I don't understand why some people can upload big files while some can't

This post has been edited by EagleAce: 05 September 2007 - 04:00 PM
liftmech
05 Sep 2007
Perhaps we need to start a new topic on this somewhere, but for now- I also use dial-up. I shrink my photos to 900x600 when I post them- you don't need Photoshop, most computers with Windows 98 or later have a basic digital photo editor on them. Considering that most monitors are still in the 1200x950 range or so- I don't think it's necessary to post large-format photos. We're not Flickr, and I don't think we need such resolution.
Now let's get back on topic.
Now let's get back on topic.