Occitanie, France, 1400m
Choose a winter and compare observed snow against the long-run November-April climatology.
Observed snow depth is shown for lower and upper slopes, with temperature as context. The long-run reference comes from the historical weekly climate model and is deliberately kept separate from individual reporting seasons.
How the selected winter compares with the historical baseline.
The comparison uses only matching winter weeks, so an incomplete season is not treated as a full winter.
Altitude dependence, retention and temperature context.
Upper and lower-slope depth are interpreted together; the gap between them indicates how strongly snow cover depends on elevation.
Coverage and stability of the historical comparison.
This is an observational snow-depth archive, not a snowfall climatology. Confidence reflects reporting coverage and the number of comparable seasons.
Weekly snow depth and temperature through the selected winter.
Compare lower and upper-slope snowpack development through the active part of the season.
The preceding winter as a direct reference season.
Use this card to see whether the selected season accumulated and retained snow earlier or later than the winter before it.
Typical weekly mountain/valley depth and temperature from the long-run climate series.
This chart uses the indexed historical climatology behind Snow reliability. It is stable planning context, not an average of the currently selected reporting seasons and not a forecast.
What the historical profile says about snow reliability.
The archive is interpreted by timing, depth, lower-versus-upper spread and late-winter retention.
Upper-slope snow depth across the five most recent available winters.
The same week positions are aligned across winters, making year-to-year variability visible without duplicating week labels.
How much recent winters differ from each other.
Season means are calculated from comparable upper-slope weeks so missing observations do not automatically make a winter look weak.
Historical snow pages near Ax les Thermes.
Compare nearby resorts to distinguish a local snow signal from broader regional conditions.
Ski areas with a similar December–March long-run reliability score.
Use these resorts as a broader benchmark, then open Snow reliability for month-by-month and season-span comparisons.
strongest in strong regional window
Insufficient · 14% evidence confidenceAx les Thermes Bonascre is best understood as a family progression base: easier terrain, moderate gradients and usable access make progression the strongest structural story.
Progression-focused trips where easier and moderate terrain form a large part of the usable mountain.
Advanced skiers seeking a strongly technical profile may find the terrain mix less distinctive.
Supportive current weather.
Useful comparisons: Alpe Lusia — Similar altitude, terrain mix, scale and reliability. · Alpe Lusia — Same dominant resort personality with a comparable personality signature and mountain structure. · Les Monts dOlmes — Structurally related mountain with materially different current conditions.
Family progression base. Strong weather support with low current risk; 13°C upper mountain, 5 mm /48h precipitation.
A related mountain is experiencing a similar current weather setup.
Current evidence stays separate from structural relationships; this sequence connects the signal to a practical comparison or next step.
Supportive current weather.
Les Angles · Nearby alternative
Structurally similar ski areas from the Resort Intelligence Graph.
Comparable long-run snow reliability and upper-mountain altitude.
Comparable long-run snow reliability and upper-mountain altitude.
Comparable long-run snow reliability and upper-mountain altitude.
Terrain, snow and weather for Ax les Thermes.