What would you change about park design?

el_jefe_campbell

el_jefe_campbell

New member
I just posted a news article about a research project focusing on Terrain Park Safety that I'm involved in at the U of Washington

https://www.newschoolers.com/membernewsread/43199/Park-Design-Research---What-would-you-change-about-park-design-

We are heavily focused on measuring how riders jump but I also would love input into what everyone FEELS should be changed or how it could be improved?

Sound off here. Would love to hear it all.

Also, we are currently fundraising to help us stay funded through next winter. PLEASE donate any amount you can here:

https://www.microryza.com/projects/can-we-keep-skiers-and-snowboarders-from-landing-on-their-heads

642540.jpeg

Cheers!
 
First post and already asking for donations? Come on.

Inverted rails, where are you?
 
More features. More rails, more jumps, more tranny, more everything. Everyone knows that feeling when you see all the unused features just sitting out in some parking lot. Mtns need staff that is really motivated. The most fun parks I've been to have transitions cut into the sides of all the jumps and rail pads. The features are close enough and well orientated that you can zig zag and weave everywhere creating unlimited options.

Also I think people greatly underestimate how much fun random mounds of snow can be. whether they're solo and you're just buttering over them or you have a couple near each other and you can gap and redirect them. I'm not talking about building mini jumps. I'm saying just random steep piles of snow that can be ridden.

I want to show up to a park for the first time and have to sit there for a minute just trying to figure out where to start and how to hit everything.
 
Rider involved building ie more of what we want to see idea wise being utilised. The park is for us therefore should be helped shaped by us. Personally i would love to have a part in helping shape a park and helping to set up features. Going up with the park crew with a group of riders with a wide range of ideas and spontaneity to build an enjoyable, but progressive park.
 
A good park designer should essentially be both an artist and an engineer - that is someone who takes pride in their work in designing a park that people will enjoy to ski. Too many mountains treat park design as just another job that must be done, whereas it could be much more than that.

This scientific study is a great idea for improving the safety and skiability of park features. However, to make the most of it, resorts need to realize that there is more to park design than just throwing a couple rails onto a run. I know that some hills are trying to do something innovative with their parks, but it seems that most places are focusing less and less on the actual skiing operations of their mountain and putting more emphasis on the "resort" part of "ski resort" instead of the "ski". This needs to change.

 
More trannies. like rail to wall or rail to snow trannies. i would also like to see more unique lines rather than a bunch of rails in a straight line. like saga said, features setup so that you can hit them in different ways every lap
 
Longer, steeper landings. I would invest snow in a few sizeable great features than a bunch of smaller features.
 
Step ups, step overs and true tables everywhere, they are more fun, and hurt less when you crash. No step downs unless they have long ass landings. Elbow rails are a lot of fun, and so are long fat flat or down tubes, actually, make most rails tubes or handrails.
 
Good "drop in knolls" before jumps, consistent speed makes all the difference, long transitions before jumps, wide jumps (for carving), "smooth" steep landings so you don't have to compress so much when you land.

As for rails, just put more of them out! Every oak I've been to has tons of features just laid out in the snow not being used, preferably laid out in lanes, and alongside the jumps for maximum creativity/usage.
 
Any thoughts on how to keep speed consistent for features that aren't lined up, like Saga mentioned? I love that idea but keeping speed consistent across all features would be tricky.
 
This just takes knowledge of the area. Think about when people build concrete skateparks. They have to figure out if there is enough speed for features and that is permanent. Granted concrete speed doesn't change like snow does but for the most part if you work one patch of land for a park you know where speed can be gained or lost. Never under estimate the value of pump bumps.

On another note I am really surprised no one has created a mini park cat. I know there are huge park cats good for making big features. But with the push into smaller creative features why hasn't anyone made a mini cat that can push small trannies and what not.
 
There needs to be more variation in how we build parks. Mogul skiing, and aerials are both going downhill because how regulated the courses are. No terrain park should be the same.
 
Skateboard is a little different because skater's can always just kick to get speed. But I see where you are coming from and what you are trying to get at.

Honestly, before this post I had never thought of like a mini park cat. What do you think of when you picture this mini park cat? Are we talking like the size of like an ATV or like Snow machine? Or bigger?
 
On street type features, yes. But I think he's more talking about bowl type skateparks where you really have to pump and know the speed to hit the features effectively.
 
Well, with rails and tranny-based features it's not as much of an issue. You can pump things if need be, like Saga mentioned, but with smaller stuff I'd say there's a decent range of speed that you can hit stuff with.
 
I dont know how parks look in the US (except from edits) but I feel like there is way too much hard/complicated stuff in parks nowadays. I mean thats great and everything, but regarding the fact that there is a lot of people starting this sport, I would love to see more stuff like simple (and not too long) down or straightrails for these people to get started. I remember having quite the hard time to find a rail I felt comfortable trying out for my first rail. I mean its cool to have all these awesome obstacles with combined rails that are 50 feet long or have 4 kinks, but noone can really start hitting rails on something like that. Other than that, I would love to see more rollers. (all this based on my experience in parks in the alps though)
 
You all need to hit up sugarbush parks. There are so many suggestions in this thread that sugarbush does so well (ie. lots of close feature that can be hit in a number of different ways, new layout every month or so, etc)
 
Is that really the experience you get in the Alps? I feel completely the opposite, and I have prob been to 30+ parks across the Alps, and I always found loads of beginner stuff, but not much really technical stuff.

In the Alps, or at least Tirol and Graubünden, we need more creative parks. Most parks stick to the idea of lines way too rigidly. I know this also depends on the area designated for the park, but it is never the less true. I work for a company building parks, and they are obsessed with the idea of everything being lined up. Now that can be great and all, but what I would like to see then, is 2 lines next to eachother with lots of side trannies so that you can weave them together. Essentially what Saga said. In the ideal park, every feature should have multiple options of hitting it, not just your normal take off and landing at the beginning and end of each feature.

To be honest, from what I can tell from videos and photos, we have two parks that already lead the way in building parks this way, namely Bear and Park City. I would love to see the Alps follow suit, and places like Laax already are. I am definitely going to try and influence my company in this way, as I feel like they definitely have a way too rigid way of looking at park setups, which mainly stems from wanting to keep costs relatively low and concerns for safety. I'm pumped for building some creative stuff this winter!
 
What about using a skidsteer with a widened stance and a set of tracks. You could get work done with that. If it has a setting to prevent on the spot turning (normally used to protect tearing up lawns) then you probably wouldn't hurt the surrounding snow in the park.
 
This this this. If mountains would keep a whale tail or two, it would be wicked fun for a few days. They would eventually get really hard / icy, but they can be groomed out at that point. But I agree that piles of snow are wicked fun. Tranny finding all over.
 
this so much, i would not mind one bit if i never had to hit another step down in my life

and rail wise, sugarbush is leading the way now along with pc, brighton and keystone all seem to have creative stuff set up all the time. i think tranny off the side of everything has seen its glory days though, at least like wallrides and such next to rails, snow tranny is still good. honestly have no clue what the next trend will be though, id like to see more flowy lines like made to hit 3 or 4 features in a row, real close together so you need to land everything good to maintain speed, with stall features and such in between.

also, kinda the exact opposite of my previous idea, randomly placed features on the run down to the park like they do at bear, or in the actual park just build it with no set flow whatsoever and everyone has to fine their own line.

less wooden features and wide bar rails or wide boxes, always mucho stickyo

but if i could choose one thing itd be death to all step downs
 
in reference to the mini park cat, something like this?

106762d1216678788-new-old-cushman-trackster-craigslist-dsc01092.jpg


(not mine)

My dad bought one in the late 70's for grooming XC ski trails, and it's been sitting in our garage for a 15 years awaiting a new fuel tank.

My dad was planning to use it for hauling wood when he fixed it, but this thread gave me new ideas (i.e amazing backyard setup). Ours doesn't have a blade on the front but I'm sure I could rig something even if it is stationary.
 
Maybe more street-inspired features, fat tubes, pole jam to mini wall ride features, knolls at the beginning of jump lines, down-flat rails that don't feel like slamming against a wall, and bigger, longer rails or boxes, even rails or boxes with various kinks.
 
I think parks need the basics before getting fancy. I've seen small parks with no flat rail try to set up some fucked up shit.
 
I was wondering if you could elaborate on exactly what it is that you're trying to do? In your initial description, which is not very detailed, I fail to see what you want to find out that an engineer doesn't already know? There is an element of basic physics involved, but the main thing is that this is something that you simply have to know. Park designers do this on a daily basis, and if the jumps cause accidents to the point where it is the jump and not the riders fault, then the person who build it is not a good park designer, or he wasn't paying attention when he build it.

My point is that most major parks already build and maintain jumps and other features that are as safe as possible, simply because they learned by trial and error, have a knowledge of basic physics, or most likely a combination of both. As for myself, I can always tell if something is going to work or not, as I test it and have my co workers test it as we are building and perfecting it. We would never open something that isn't safe to the public. This is what being a park designer and a shaper means, working together to build challenging and safe features. I just don't see a need for what I think it is that you are offering (again, your description is vague). Sure there are tons of parks out there with super dangerous features, but that has to do with the training of the staff, their experience, the attitude of the resort and so on. Most park designers that know what they are doing would never open something unsafe to the public, and already know how to build safe features.

That got a bit long winded, in short I have one question: What is it that you are trying to develop/offer, and is there a need for it?
 
Yeah something like this. From working park crew I know parks are limited on how close together they can put features sometimes because they want to be able to get a cat between them.

Maybe this idea has already been thought of and tried by some of the bigger park crews and it doesn't work for one reason or another. But if it hasn't I think it could be very beneficial to smaller parks, i.e. midwest, that don't need to push around giant mounds of snow. It will allow them to really utilize all their space and snow.
 
If anybody remembers this, early this season at Keystone, there was a period of like, 5 or 6 days where they had made snow on this one run, and opened it, but did not push the snow piles. The entire run was hip jump after hip jump, so much freaking fun. People started carving it out, and then the mounds actually had take off ruts and landings. Probably one of my favorite non pow days of the season was just lapping that and boosting stuff.
 
I feel like space isn't used very well especially where I ski at sugarloaf. It would also be nice to have some medium sized jump lines that run smooth.
 
you do realize that a Pisten Bully 100 is still much larger than even the biggest, strongest snowmobile out there
 
more giant tubes that are on the ground, STEP OVERS/UPS, anything but all step downs. Random mounds of snow like saga said and just stuff to jump off/ on to/ over!
 
haha, over here on the east coast they almost never close trails before pushing, it's always so much fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top